Search

Uncertainty assessment is a cornerstone in model-based health economic evaluations (HEEs) that inform reimbursement decisions. No comprehensive overview of available uncertainty assessment methods currently exists. We aimed to review methods for uncertainty assessment for use in model-based HEEs, by conducting a snowballing review. We categorised all methods according to their stage of use relating to uncertainty assessment (identification, analysis, communication). Additionally, we classified identification methods according to sources of uncertainty, and subdivided analysis and communication methods according to their purpose. The review identified a total of 80 uncertainty methods: 30 identification, 28 analysis, and 22 communication methods. Uncertainty identification methods exist to address uncertainty from different sources. Most identification methods were developed with the objective to assess related concepts such as validity, model quality, and relevance. Almost all uncertainty analysis and communication methods required uncertainty to be quantified and inclusion of uncertainties in probabilistic analysis. Our review can help analysts and decision makers in selecting uncertainty assessment methods according to their aim and purpose of the assessment. We noted a need for further clarification of terminology and guidance on the use of (combinations of) methods to identify uncertainty and related concepts such as validity and quality. A key finding is that uncertainty assessment relies heavily on quantification, which may necessitate increased use of expert elicitation and/or the development of methods to assess unquantified uncertainty.

Purpose In hospital settings, patients, visitors, and staff engage in many interactions outside formal clinical encounters. Whilst many of these may be inconsequential, others contribute significantly to how patients and their carers experience cancer and its treatment. This article aims to explore the experiences and significance of interactions that occur outside formal clinical encounters in hospital cancer treatment settings. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with cancer patients, carers, and staff recruited from two hospital sites and cancer support groups. Hermeneutic phenomenology informed lines of questioning and data analysis. Results Thirty-one people participated in the study: 18 cancer patients, four carers, and nine staff members. The experiences of informal interactions were grouped into three themes: connecting, making sense, and enacting care. The participants described how these encounters allowed connection with others in the hospital spaces, facilitating a sense of belonging, normality, and self-worth. Through these interactions, individuals participated in making sense of their experiences, to better anticipate the decisions and challenges that might lie ahead. By connecting with other individuals, they cared for others and felt cared for themselves, and were able to learn from, teach, and support each other. Conclusions Outside the confines of the clinical discourses participants negotiate terms of engagement, sharing of information, expertise, and their own personal stories that they may employ to contribute to the individuals around them. These interactions occur within a loose and evolving framework of social interactions, an ‘informal community’, in which cancer patients, carers, and staff members play active and meaningful roles.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Digital respiratory monitoring interventions (e.g. smart inhalers and digital spirometers) can improve clinical outcomes and/or organizational efficiency, and the focus is shifting to sustainable implementation as an approach to delivering respiratory care. This review considers key aspects of the technology infrastructure, discusses the regulatory, financial and policy context that influence implementation, and highlights the over-arching societal themes of equity, trust and communication.RECENT FINDINGS: Technological requirements include developing interoperable and connected systems; establishing stable, wide internet coverage; addressing data accuracy and monitoring adherence; realising the potential of artificial intelligence; and avoiding clinician data overload. Policy challenges include concerns about quality assurance and increasingly complex regulatory systems. Financial barriers include lack of clarity over cost-effectiveness, budget impact and reimbursement. Societal concerns focus on the potential to increase inequities because of poor e-health literacy, deprivation or lack of available infrastructure, the need to understand the implications for patient/professional interactions of shifting care to remote delivery and ensuring confidentiality of personal data.SUMMARY: Understanding and addressing the implementation challenges posed by gaps in policy, regulatory, financial, and technical infrastructure is essential to support delivery of equitable respiratory care that is acceptable to patients and professionals.

Dynamic communication within adipose tissue depends on highly vascularized structural characteristics to maintain systemic metabolic homoeostasis. Recently, it has been noted that adipose endothelial cells (AdECs) act as essential bridges for biological information transmission between adipose-resident cells. Hence, paracrine regulators that mediate crosstalk between AdECs and adipose stromal cells were summarized. We also highlight the importance of AdECs to maintain adipocytes metabolic homoeostasis by regulating insulin sensitivity, lipid turnover and plasticity. The differential regulation of AdECs in adipose plasticity often depends on vascular density and metabolic states. Although choosing pro-angiogenic or anti-angiogenic therapies for obesity is still a matter of debate in clinical settings, the growing numbers of drugs have been confirmed to play an anti-obesity effect by affecting vascularization. Pharmacologic angiogenesis intervention has great potential as therapeutic strategies for obesity., Graphical abstract

Contains fulltext : 287786.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: In the management of epidemics, like COVID-19, trade-offs have to be made between reducing mortality and morbidity and minimizing socioeconomic and political consequences. Traditionally, epidemic management (EM) has been guided and executed attentively by experts and policymakers. It can, however, still be controversial in the public sphere. In the last decades, public engagement (PE) has been successfully applied in various aspects of healthcare. This leads to the question if PE could be implemented in EM decision-making. METHODS: From June to October 2020, seven deliberative discussion focus groups were executed with 35 Dutch citizens between 19 and 84 years old. Their views on PE in COVID-19 management were explored. The deliberative approach allows for the education of participants on the topic before the discussion. The benefits, barriers, timing and possible forms of PE in EM were discussed. RESULTS: Almost all participants supported PE in EM, as they thought that integrating their experiences and ideas would benefit the quality of EM, and increase awareness and acceptance of measures. A fitting mode for PE was consultation, as it was deemed important to provide the public with possibilities to share ideas and feedback; however, final authority remained with experts. The publics could particularly provide input about communication campaigns and control measures. PE could be executed after the first acute phase of the epidemic and during evaluations. CONCLUSIONS: This paper describes the construction of an empirically informed framework about the values and conditions for PE in EM from the perspective of the public. Participants expressed support to engage certain population groups and considered it valuable for the quality and effectiveness of EM; however, they expressed doubts about the feasibility of PE and the capabilities of citizens. In future studies, these results should be confirmed by a broader audience. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patients or members of the public were involved in the construction and execution of this study. This study was very exploratory, to gain a first insight into the views of the public in the Netherlands, and will be used to develop engagement practices accordingly. At this stage, the involvement of the public was not yet appropriate.

Purpose Having advanced cancer presents many challenges for patients and family caregivers. The FOCUS program is a psychoeducational nurse-led intervention, developed in the USA, to support dyads of patients with cancer and their family caregivers to live with the illness. The program includes a conversation manual and information resources for dyads. We aimed to develop a version of the program for dyads facing advanced cancer in six European countries. Method The Participatory and Iterative Process Framework for Language Adaptation (PIPFLA) was used to guide the translation of the program to the local contexts of Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, and the UK. In several rounds, potential program users (e.g., nurses, clinicians, patients, family caregivers) and researchers from all six countries reviewed program materials and advised on adaptations. Results The PIPFLA process resulted in one European version of the program in different languages (FOCUS +). The FOCUS + conversation manual is uniform across all countries. The main adaptations included additional attention to both family caregiver and patient needs; more emphasis on self-management, advance care planning, and shared responsibilities; discussing the dyad’s outlook rather than optimism; addressing the role of nurses as educational rather than therapeutic; and more suggestions to refer dyads to health care professionals for specific care needs. The information resources for dyads were adapted to fit with local contexts. Conclusion The PIPFLA methodology is an efficient and effective framework to thoroughly translate and culturally adapt a complex USA-based program for use in six European countries in collaboration with end users.

Introduction Healthcare professionals (HCPs) are informed about new drug safety issues through Direct Healthcare Professional Communications (DHPCs). The influence of DHPC content on the impact of the communication is unclear. Objectives The aim of this study was to assess the effect of content elements 'frequency of the safety issue', 'seriousness of the safety issue', 'need to take action', 'life span of drug involved' and 'type of evidence supporting the safety issue' on hospital-based HCPs' preferences and responses towards DHPCs. Methods A survey study including a conjoint experiment was performed among hospital-based HCPs in the Netherlands. Hypothetical DHPCs varying on the five content elements were constructed. Each respondent received eight out of 16 hypothetical DHPCs and was asked about (1) importance to be informed (fixed-point scale), (2) preferred communication timing (multiple options) and (3) their stated actions (multiple options). Associations were tested using generalized linear mixed models. Results In total, 178 HCPs participated. DHPCs concerning more frequent or serious safety issues, or requiring action, were associated with a higher perceived importance to be informed and a preference for immediate communication. Periodic communication was preferred for DPHCs concerning less frequent or serious safety issues. The most commonly stated action was to discuss the DHPC with colleagues. Monitoring was common when this was recommended. High frequency and seriousness were associated with more prescribing-related actions. Conclusion Frequency and seriousness of the safety issue and the recommended action are likely to influence the impact of DHPCs. The timing of communication could be tailored depending on the content, where less urgent safety issues might be communicated periodically.

Introduction: Paediatric patients with disorders that involve brain functioning are particularly vulnerable with respect to including them in shared decision-making. Current tools are mostly paper or digital patient information. We lay the groundwork for improving engagement with a concept that we coined ‘the Self-Portrait’. The main goals were to identify (1) obstacles and (2) design parameters that enable patient participation. Methods: A research-through-design approach was utilized in nine patients with brain-related disorders (4–12 years), 15 parents and 15 medical professionals, involving contextual research (interviews and observations) within the paediatric hospital and patients' homes and codesign. Sensitizing materials and early instances of design solutions were deployed as catalysts for communication. Five rounds of enriched interviews and design reviews were thematically analysed to answer the research questions. Results: Obstacles to child involvement were related to children's level of understanding, the time and energy necessary for information processing and lack of perceived relevance of the information. Patients' engagement is supported by design features that extend the time frame of interaction beyond the consultation, transfer information interactively and give control and influence during the consultation. Conclusion: Obstacles were detected that complicate child engagement, which differ between stakeholders. Promising design features were identified that have the potential to play an important role in enabling active child involvement. These findings show that applying principles of human-centred design research and codesign can bring together patients, parents and medical professionals around a tool that provides a shared language and focus, which are prerequisites to increase child engagement. Patient or Public Contribution: Patients, parents and clinicians contributed as design informants during contextual research and design reviews. Clinicians provided feedback on the initial outcomes of thematic analysis. Two researchers assisted in consensus sessions during the thematic analysis.

Medical educators constantly make decisions on when and how to intervene. Current literature provides general suggestions about types of teacher interventions. Our study aims to specify that knowledge by describing in detail the actions teachers do when intervening, the interactional consequences of those actions, and how these relate to teacher roles in group discussions. We collected all first teacher interventions (n = 142) in 41 videorecorded group discussions on experiences from practice at the Dutch postgraduate training for General Practice. We analyzed the interventions using Conversation Analysis. First, we described the timing, manner, actions, and interactional consequences of each intervention. Next, we inductively categorized actions into types of actions. Finally, we analyzed the distribution of these types of actions over the group discussion phases (telling, exploration, discussion, conclusion). First teacher interventions were done at observably critical moments. Actions done by these interventions could be categorized as moderating, expert, and evaluating actions. Moderating actions, commonly done during the telling and exploration phase, are least directive. Expert and evaluator actions, more common in the discussion phase, are normative and thus more directive. The placement and form of the actions done by teachers, as well as their accounts for doing those, may hint at a teacher orientation to intervene as late as possible. Since the interventions are occasioned by prior interaction and responded to in different ways by residents, they are a collaborative interactional accomplishment. Our detailed description of how, when and with what effect teachers intervene provides authentic material for teacher training.

ObjectiveWe investigated how healthcare professionals (HPs) communicate personalized risks of treatment side-effects to patients with localized prostate cancer during consultations, and explored how these patients perceive and use such risks during treatment decision-making.MethodsPatient consultations with nurse practitioners and urologists discussing personalized risks of urinary incontinence after prostatectomy were audiotaped, transcribed, and coded. Patients (n = 27) were then interviewed to explore their perceptions and use of personalized side-effect risks.ResultsHPs explained personalized risks by discussing risk factors, which was appreciated and recalled by patients. Personalized risks were typically communicated both numerically and verbally (70%). When using numbers, HPs always used percentages, but rarely used natural frequencies (14%). Uncertainty was disclosed in only 34% of consultations. One-third of patients used personalized risks in their treatment decision-making by either switching to another treatment or sticking to their initial preference.ConclusionsPatients value and use personalized side-effect risks during treatment decision-making. Clearly explaining the relationship between risk factors and personalized risk estimates may help patients understand and recall those.Practice implicationsHPs should not only give patients specific and precise numerical risk information, but should also put effort in explaining how the personalized side-effect risks are determined.

Aim To explore the perceived quality of collaboration in dehydration care among nursing and medical staff in Dutch nursing homes. Design A cross-sectional study. Methods An online questionnaire was administered to nursing and medical staff in February 2020 to assess the quality of collaboration in dehydration care and its influencing factors. Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests and multinomial logistic regression analysis were used to describe the results and examine differences between groups. Results In total, 695 questionnaires were completed by multiple levels of (specialized) nursing staff and nursing home physicians. The quality of collaboration was assessed as good (23.2%), sufficient (59.4%) and insufficient (17.4%). Predicting factors related to perceiving the quality of collaboration as good were working experience, dehydration training during education and the presence of a dehydration protocol/guideline in the nursing home. Enabling factors related to collaboration in dehydration care were 'availability of sufficient aids to detect dehydration', 'continuity in the care relationship' and 'sufficient background data of the resident in the care record'. Factors that hinder collaboration were 'insufficient knowledge about dehydration among nursing and medical staff', 'the absence of a team meeting in which the topic dehydration is discussed' and 'insufficient staffing level among nursing and medical staff'. Conclusion Collaboration in dehydration care was generally assessed as sufficient. Participants with >10 years of working experience, who received dehydration training during their education and had a dehydration protocol/guideline available in the nursing home, perceived the quality of collaboration more often as good. Experienced barriers and enablers for collaboration in dehydration care varied between professional groups. Therefore, it is important to gain more insight into (informal) caregivers' perceptions on what is expected from each other about dehydration care. Impact Care professionals experience several limiting factors in collaborating in dehydration care. Addressing these factors could optimize dehydration care in Dutch nursing homes.

ObjectiveTo examine trends in end-of-life communication with people with cancer in general practice.MethodsMortality follow-back survey among general practitioners (GPs) in representative epidemiological surveillance networks in Belgium (BE), the Netherlands (NL) and Spain (ES) in 2009–2010 (ES: 2010–2011) and 2013–2014. Using a standardised form, GPs registered all deceased adult patients in their practice and reported for five end-of-life care topics whether they had been discussed with the patient. Non-sudden cancer deaths were included (n=2306; BE: 1233; NL: 729; ES: 344).ResultsA statistically significant increase was found between 2009/2010 and 2014 in the prevalence of communication about diagnosis (from 84% to 94%) and options for end-of-life care (from 73% to 90%) in BE, and in GPs’ awareness of patients’ preferences for medical treatment and a proxy decision-maker in BE (from 41% and 20% up to 53% and 28%) and the NL (from 62% and 32% up to 70% and 52%). Communication about options for end-of-life care and psychosocial problems decreased in the NL (from 88% and 91% down to 73%) and ES (from 76% and 77% down to 26% and 39%).ConclusionConsiderable change in GP–patient communication seems possible in a relatively short time span, but communication cannot be assumed to increase over time. Increasing specialisation of care and task differentiation may lead to new roles in communication for healthcare providers in primary and secondary care. Improved information sharing between GPs and other healthcare providers may be necessary to ensure that patients have the chance to discuss important end-of-life topics.

OBJECTIVES: The integration of shared decision making (SDM) and patient-centered communication (PCC) is needed to actively involve patients in decision making. This study examined the relationship between shared decision making and patient-centered communication.METHODS: In 82 videotaped hospital outpatient consultations by 41 medical specialists from 18 disciplines, we assessed the extent of shared decision making by the OPTION5 score and patient-centered communication by the Four Habits Coding Scheme (4HCS), and analyzed the occurrence of a high versus low degree (above or below median) of SDM and/or PCC, and its relation to patient satisfaction scores.RESULTS: In comparison to earlier studies, we observed comparable 4HCS scores and relatively low OPTION5 scores. The correlation between the two was weak (r = 0.29, p = 0.009). In 38% of consultations, we observed a combination of high SDM and low PCC scores or vice versa. The combination of a high SDM and high PCC, which was observed in 23% of consultations, was associated with significantly higher patient satisfaction scores.CONCLUSION: Shared decision making and patient-centered communication are not synonymous and do not always co-exist.PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The value of integrated training of shared decision making and patient-centered communication should be further explored.

OBJECTIVES: Patients have become more involved in research, policy, and health professions education. They are involved in teaching students competencies required for person-centred care, but patient benefits have not received proper attention. This exploratory study identifies how patient involvement in health professions education help patients to practice self-management and shared decision-making.METHODS: Individual interviews were conducted with patients (hereafter 'experts by experience') (N = 11) who participated in the Patient As a Person Module, organised for students of health professions in The Netherlands. Additionally, one of their healthcare professionals (N = 10) and family members (N = 9) were interviewed. Directed content analysis was used.RESULTS: Participants reported that sharing lived experiences helped experts by experience to reflect on their preferences regarding health and healthcare, accept their changed selves, and obtain a renewed sense of purpose. They reported gaining insight into the perspectives of healthcare professionals, which yielded more equal healthcare professional-patient relationships.CONCLUSIONS: Sharing their lived experiences with health and health care with students could help patients in practising effective self-management and participate in shared decision-making.PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Approaching patient involvement in health professions education from both the perspectives of students and experts by experience, as opposed to students alone, optimises its societal impact.

Introduction: Stakeholder engagement remains scarce in basic brain research. However, it can greatly improve the relevance of investigations and accelerate the translation of study findings to policy. The Lifebrain consortium investigated risk and protective factors influencing brain health using cognition, lifestyle and imaging data from European cohorts. Stakeholder activities of Lifebrain—organized in a separate work package—included organizing stakeholder events, investigating public perceptions of brain health and dissemination. Here, we describe the experiences of researchers and stakeholders regarding stakeholder engagement in the Lifebrain project. Methods: Stakeholder engagement in Lifebrain was evaluated through surveys among researchers and stakeholders and stakeholders' feedback at stakeholder events through evaluation forms. Survey data were analysed using a simple content analysis approach, and results from evaluation forms were summarized after reviewing the frequency of responses. Results: Consortium researchers and stakeholders experienced the engagement activities as meaningful and relevant. Researchers highlighted that it made the research and research processes more visible and contributed to new networks, optimized data collection on brain health perceptions and the production of papers and provided insights into stakeholder views. Stakeholders found research activities conducted in the stakeholder engagement work package to be within their field of interest and research results relevant to their work. Researchers identified barriers to stakeholder engagement, including lack of time, difficulties in identifying relevant stakeholders, and challenges in communicating complex scientific issues in lay language and maintaining relationships with stakeholders over time. Stakeholders identified barriers such as lack of budget, limited resources in their organization, time constraints and insufficient communication between researchers and stakeholders. Conclusion: Stakeholder engagement in basic brain research can greatly benefit researchers and stakeholders alike. Its success is conditional on dedicated human and financial resources, clear communication, transparent mutual expectations and clear roles and responsibilities. Public Contribution: Patient organizations, research networks, policymakers and members of the general public were involved in engagement and research activities throughout the project duration.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) is an important health problem and guidelines recommend multidisciplinary management. The pharmacist is an important member of the multidisciplinary heart failure team, both in the hospital and community setting. This study aims to explore the perceptions of community pharmacists on their role in HF care. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study based on face-to-face semi-structured interviews with 13 Belgian community pharmacists between September 2020 and December 2020. We used the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven (QUAGOL) method as guidance for data analysis until data saturation was reached. We structured interview content into a thematic matrix. RESULTS: We identified two major themes: heart failure management and multidisciplinary management. Pharmacists feel responsible for the pharmacological and non-pharmacological management of heart failure, citing easy access and pharmacological expertise as important assets. Diagnostic uncertainty, lack of knowledge and time, disease complexity and difficulties in communication with patients and informal care providers are barriers to optimal management. General practitioners are the most important partners in multidisciplinary community heart failure management, although pharmacists perceive a lack of appreciation and cooperation and deplore communication difficulties. They feel intrinsically motivated to provide extended pharmaceutical care in HF but cite the lack of financial viability and information sharing structures as important barriers. CONCLUSION: The importance of pharmacist involvement in multidisciplinary heart failure teams is undisputed by Belgian pharmacists, who cite easy access and pharmacological expertise as important assets. They point out several barriers impeding evidence-based pharmacist care for outpatients with heart failure: diagnostic uncertainty and disease complexity, lack of multidisciplinary information technology and insufficient resources. We recommend that future policy should focus on improved medical data exchanges between primary and secondary care electronic health records as well as the reinforcement of interprofessional relationships between locally affiliated pharmacists and general practitioners. ispartof: BMC Health Serv Res vol:23 issue:1 pages:638- ispartof: location:England status: Published online

Background:Randomized controlled trials play a central role in evidence-based practice, but recruitment of participants, and retention of them once in the trial, is challenging. Moreover, there is a dearth of evidence that research teams can use to inform the development of their recruitment and retention strategies. As with other healthcare initiatives, the fairest test of the effectiveness of a recruitment strategy is a trial comparing alternatives, which for recruitment would mean embedding a recruitment trial within an ongoing host trial. Systematic reviews indicate that such studies are rare. Embedded trials are largely delivered in anad hocway, with interventions almost always developed in isolation and tested in the context of a single host trial, limiting their ability to contribute to a body of evidence with regard to a single recruitment intervention and to researchers working in different contexts. Methods/Design:The Systematic Techniques for Assisting Recruitment to Trials (START) program is funded by the United Kingdom Medical Research Council (MRC) Methodology Research Programme to support the routine adoption of embedded trials to test standardized recruitment interventions across ongoing host trials. To achieve this aim, the program involves three interrelated work packages: (1) methodology - to develop guidelines for the design, analysis and reporting of embedded recruitment studies; (2) interventions - to develop effective and useful recruitment interventions; and (3) implementation - to recruit host trials and test interventions through embedded studies. Discussion:Successful completion of the START program will provide a model for a platform for the wider trials community to use to evaluate recruitment interventions or, potentially, other types of intervention linked to trial conduct. It will also increase the evidence base for two types of recruitment intervention. Trial registration:The START protocol covers the methodology for embedded trials. Each embedded trial is registered separately or as a substudy of the host trial.

Background Breaking bad news (BBN; e.g., delivering a cancer diagnosis) is perceived as one of the most demanding communication tasks in the medical field and associated with high levels of stress. Physicians’ increased stress in BBN encounters can negatively impact their communication performance, and in the long term, patient-related health outcomes. Although a growing body of literature acknowledges the stressful nature of BBN, little has been done to address this issue. Therefore, there is a need for appropriate tools to help physicians cope with their stress response, so that they can perform BBN at their best. In the present study, we implement the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat as theoretical framework. According to this model, the balance between perceived situational demands and perceived coping resources determines whether a stressful performance situation, such as BBN, is experienced as challenge (resources > demands) or threat (resources Methods In a randomized controlled trial with a 2 (SAR vs. control) x 2 (WE vs. control) between-subjects design, we will determine the effects of both interventions on stress response and BBN skills performance in N = 200 third-year medical students during a simulated BBN encounter. To identify students’ stress responses, we will assess their perceived coping resources and task demands, record their cardiovascular activity, and measure salivary parameters before, during, and after BBN encounters. Three trained raters will independently score students’ BBN skills performances. Discussion Findings will provide unique insights into the psychophysiology of medical students who are tasked with BBN. Parameters can be understood more comprehensively from the challenge and threat perspective and linked to performance outcomes. If proven effective, the evaluated interventions could be incorporated into the curriculum of medical students and facilitate BBN skills acquisition. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05037318), September 8, 2021.

Background The daily working life of many employees requires the use of modern information and communication technology (ICT) devices such as computers, tablets, and smartphones. The double-edged nature of digital work environments has been increasingly highlighted. Benefits such as increased flexibility come at a personal cost. One of the potential downsides is workplace telepressure, i.e., the experience of urge and preoccupation to quickly reply to work-related messages and demands using ICT. There is initial − mainly survey-based−evidence that workplace telepressure may have negative effects on a variety of wellbeing and health outcomes. Aims and hypotheses Adopting the Effort-Recovery Model and the concept of allostatic load as theoretical frameworks, the present study aims to investigate the hypothesis that workplace telepressure is significantly associated with increased “wear and tear”, in the form of more psychosomatic complaints, worse sleep quality (self-reported and actigraphy-based), worse mood, and biological alterations (lower cardiac vagal tone, lower anabolic balance defined as the ratio of salivary dehydroepiandrosterone to salivary cortisol, and higher salivary alpha-amylase). Additionally, the study aims to investigate the hypothesis that connection to work defined as work-related workload and work-related perseverative cognition plays a significant role in the mediation of these relationships. Methods To test our hypotheses, we will conduct an ambulatory assessment study with a convenience sample of 120 healthy workers regularly using ICTs for job communication. For one week, participants will be asked to complete electronic diaries assessing their level of workplace telepressure, psychosomatic complaints, sleep quality, mood, work-related workload, and work-related perseverative cognition. They will also continuously wear the Bittium Faros 180L ECG monitor, the wrist-worn actigraph MotionWatch 8, and perform saliva sampling five times per day. Discussion This study will be the most comprehensive ambulatory investigation of workplace telepressure and its psychophysiological concomitants to date and constitutes an important step towards understanding how high levels of workplace telepressure may lead in the long term to secondary alterations (e.g., hypertension, chronic inflammation) and disease (e.g., heart disease). The findings of this study are also anticipated to contribute to guiding the development and implementation of interventions, programs, and policies relevant to employees’ digital wellbeing.

Background Informed consent is an accepted ethical and legal prerequisite for trial participation, yet there is no standardised method of assessing patient understanding for informed consent. The Participatory and Informed Consent (PIC) measure was developed for application to recruitment discussions, to evaluate recruiter information provision and evidence of patient understanding. Preliminary evaluation of the PIC indicated the need to improve inter-rater and intra-rater reliability ratings and conduct further psychometric evaluation. This paper describes the assessment, revision and evaluation of the PIC within the context of OPTiMISE, a pragmatic primary care-based trial. Methods This study used multiple methods across two phases. In phase one, one researcher applied the existing PIC measure to 18 audio recorded recruitment discussions from the OPTiMISE study and made detailed observational notes about any uncertainties in application. Appointments were sampled to be maximally diverse for patient gender, study centre, recruiter and before and after an intervention to optimise information provision. Application uncertainties were reviewed by the study team, revisions made, and a coding manual developed and agreed. In phase two, the coding manual was used to develop tailored guidelines for applying the PIC to appointments within the OPTiMISE trial. Two researchers then assessed 27 further appointments, purposively sampled as above, to evaluate inter-rater and intra-rater reliability, content validity and feasibility. Results Application of the PIC to 18 audio recorded OPTiMISE recruitment discussions resulted in harmonisation of the scales rating recruiter information provision and evidence of patient understanding, minor amendments to clarify wording, and the development of detailed generic coding guidelines for applying the measure within any trial. Application of the revised measure using these guidelines to 27 further recruitment discussions showed good feasibility (time to complete), content validity (completion rate) and reliability (inter- and intra-rater) of the measure. Conclusion The PIC provides a means to evaluate the content of information provided by recruiters, patient participation in recruitment discussions and, to some extent, evidence of patient understanding. Future work will use the measure to evaluate recruiter information provision and evidence of patient understanding both across and within trials.

In oncology, research remains unclear as to whether physician empathy is associated with patient outcomes. Our goal was to answer this question and explore potential moderators of the association. In this meta-analysis on adult cancer care, we excluded randomised controlled trials, and studies of survivors without active disease or involving analogue patients. Eight databases were searched, in addition to reference lists of relevant articles and grey literature. Two reviewers independently screened citations, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and graded quality of evidence by using the AXIS tool. Effect size correlations (ESr) were chosen and pooled by using a random effect model. Subgroup analyses were performed, and statistically significant variables were introduced in a meta-regression. Several methods were used to explore heterogeneity and publication biases. We included 55 articles, yielding 55 ESr (n = 12,976 patients). Physician empathy was associated with favourable patient outcomes: ESr = 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.18 to 0.27), z = 9.58, p < 0.001. However, heterogeneity was high, as reflected by a large prediction interval, 95% (-0.07 to 0.49) and I 2 = 94.5%. The meta-regression explained 53% of variance. Prospective designs and physician empathy assessed by researchers, compared with patient-reported empathy, decreased ESr. Bad-news consultations, compared with all other types of clinical encounters, tended to increase ESr. Patient-reported physician empathy is significantly associated with cancer patient outcomes. However, the high heterogeneity warrants further longitudinal studies to disentangle the conditions under which physician empathy can help patients. Recommendations are proposed for future research.

Teaching responsible conduct of research (RCR) to PhD students is crucial for fostering responsible research practice. In this paper, we show how the use of Moral Case Deliberation—a case reflection method used in the Amsterdam UMC RCR PhD course—is particularity valuable to address three goals of RCR education: (1) making students aware of, and internalize, RCR principles and values, (2) supporting reflection on good conduct in personal daily practice, and (3) developing students’ dialogical attitude and skills so that they can deliberate on RCR issues when they arise. What makes this method relevant for RCR education is the focus on values and personal motivations, the structured reflection on real experiences and dilemmas and the cultivation of participants’ dialogical skills. During these structured conversations, students reflect on the personal motives that drive them to adhere to the principles of good science, thereby building connections between those principles and their personal values and motives. Moreover, by exploring personal questions and dilemmas related to RCR, they learn how to address these with colleagues and supervisors. The reflection on personal experiences with RCR issues and questions combined with the study of relevant normative frameworks, support students to act responsibly and to pursue RCR in their day-to-day research practice in spite of difficulties and external constraints.

Objective: To evaluate how the use of a within-encounter SDM tool (compared to usual care in a randomized trial) contributes to care plans that make sense to patients with atrial fibrillation considering anticoagulation. Methods: In a planned subgroup of the trial, 123 patients rated post-encounter how much sense their decided-upon care plan made to them and explained why. We explored how sense ratings related to observed patient involvement (OPTION12), patient's decisional conflict, and adherence to their plan based on pharmacy records. We analyzed patient motives using Burke's pentad. Results: Plan sensibility was similarly high in both arms (Usual care n = 62: mean 9.4/10 (SD 1.0) vs SDM tool n = 61: 9.2/10 (SD 1.5); p = .8), significantly and weakly correlated to decisional conflict (rho = -0.28, p = .002), but not to OPTION12 or adherence. Plans made sense to most patients given their known efficacy, safety and what is involved in implementing them. Conclusion: Adding an effective intervention to promote SDM did not affect how much, or why, care plans made sense to patients receiving usual care, nor patient adherence to them. Practice Implications: Evaluating the extent to which care plans make sense can improve SDM assessments, particularly when SDM extends beyond selecting from a menu of options. (c) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. CC_BY_NC_ND_4.0

This article explores and discusses understandings of citizen science with members of Japanese citizen radiation measuring organizations who began measuring radioactive contamination in food, soil, air, and human bodies after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident. Building on in-depth interviews with organization members and extensive multi-site fieldwork (2018, 2020), the article takes shimin kagaku (citizen science in Japanese) to examine articulations of citizenship and science, while discussing citizen radiation measuring organization activities. Adopting Tsing’s notion of nonscalability, it draws attention to the manifold articulations of citizenship and science, unearthing frictions embedded in Japanese science–society relations. In this way, this article outlines the diversity of notions of citizenship and science, and of citizen participatory practices in science. By bringing nonscalability to bear on an analysis of different articulations of shimin kagaku, this article encourages scientists and public authorities to engage with citizen participatory practices reflexively and responsibly by considering local articulations and knowledges. ispartof: Public Understanding Of Science vol:31 issue:4 pages:507-523 status: published

Purpose Shared decision making calls for clinician communication strategies that aim to foster choice awareness and to present treatment options neutrally, such as by not showing a preference. Evidence for the effectiveness of these communication strategies to enhance patient involvement in treatment decision making is lacking. We tested the effects of 2 strategies in an online randomized video-vignettes experiment. Methods We developed disease-specific video vignettes for rheumatic disease, cancer, and kidney disease showcasing a physician presenting 2 treatment options. We tested the strategies in a 2 (choice awareness communication present/absent) by 2 (physician preference communication present/absent) randomized between-subjects design. We asked patients and disease-naïve participants to view 1 video vignette while imagining being the patient and to report perceived room for involvement (primary outcome), understanding of treatment information, treatment preference, satisfaction with the consultation, and trust in the physician (secondary outcomes). Differences across experimental conditions were assessed using 2-way analyses of variance. Results A total of 324 patients and 360 disease-naïve respondents participated (mean age, 52 ± 14.7 y, 54% female, 56% lower educated, mean health literacy, 12 ± 2.1 on a 3–15 scale). The results showed that choice awareness communication had a positive (Mpresent = 5.2 v. Mabsent = 5.0, P = 0.042, η2partial = 0.006) and physician preference communication had no (Mpresent = 5.0 v. Mabsent = 5.1, P = 0.144, η2partial = 0.003) significant effect on perceived room for involvement in decision making. Physician preference communication steered patients toward preferring that treatment option (Mpresent = 4.7 v. Mabsent = 5.3, P = 0.006, η2partial = 0.011). The strategies had no significant effect on understanding, satisfaction, or trust. Conclusions This is the first experimental evidence for a small effect of fostering choice awareness and no effect of physician preference on perceived room to participate in decision making. Physician preference steered patients toward preferring that option.

Background In the UK, about 14% of community-dwelling adults aged 65 and over are estimated to be at risk of malnutrition. Screening older adults in primary care and treating those at risk may help to reduce malnutrition risk, reduce the resulting need for healthcare use and improve quality of life. Interventions are needed to raise older adults’ risk awareness, offer relevant and meaningful strategies to address risk and support general practices to deliver treatment and support. Methods Using the Person-based Approach and input from Patient and Public Involvement representatives, we developed the ‘Eat well, feel well, stay well’ intervention. The intervention was optimised using qualitative data from think aloud and semi-structured process evaluation interviews with 23 and 18 older adults respectively. Positive and negative comments were extracted to inform rapid iterative modifications to support engagement with the intervention. Data were then analysed thematically and final adjustments made, to optimise the meaningfulness of the intervention for the target population. Results Participants’ comments were generally positive. This paper focuses predominantly on participants’ negative reactions, to illustrate the changes needed to ensure that intervention materials were optimally relevant and meaningful to older adults. Key factors that undermined engagement included: resistance to the recommended nutritional intake among those with reduced appetite or eating difficulties, particularly frequent eating and high energy options; reluctance to gain weight; and a perception that advice did not align with participants’ specific personal preferences and eating difficulties. We addressed these issues by adjusting the communication of eating goals to be more closely aligned with older adults’ beliefs about good nutrition, and acceptable and feasible eating patterns. We also adjusted the suggested tips and strategies to fit better with older adults’ everyday activities, values and beliefs. Conclusions Using iterative qualitative methods facilitated the identification of key behavioural and contextual elements that supported engagement, and issues that undermined older adults’ engagement with intervention content. This informed crucial revisions to the intervention content that enabled us to maximise the meaningfulness, relevance and feasibility of the key messages and suggested strategies to address malnutrition risk, and therefore optimise engagement with the intervention and the behavioural advice it provided.

Introduction People living with asthma require regular reviews to address their concerns and questions, assess control, review medication, and support self-management. However, practical barriers to attending face-to-face consultations might limit routine reviews. Reviewing asthma using asynchronous digital health interventions could be convenient for patients and an efficient way of maintaining communication between patients and healthcare professionals and improving health outcomes. We, therefore, aim to conduct a mixed-methods systematic review to assess the effectiveness of reviewing asthma by asynchronous digital health interventions and explore the views of patients and healthcare professionals about the role of such interventions in delivering asthma care. Methods We will search MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library from 2001 to present without imposing any language restrictions. We are interested in studies of asynchronous digital health interventions used either as a single intervention or contributing to mixed modes of review. Two review authors will independently screen titles and abstracts, and retrieve potentially relevant studies for full assessment against the eligibility criteria and extract data. Disagreements will be resolved by discussion with the review team. We will use ‘Downs and Black’ checklist, ‘Critical Appraisal Skills Programme’, and ‘Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool’ to assess methodological quality of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies respectively. After synthesising quantitative (narrative synthesis) and qualitative (thematic synthesis) data separately, we will integrate them following methods outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Conclusion The findings of this review will provide insights into the role of asynchronous digital health interventions in the routine care of people living with asthma. Trial registration Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022344224.

ObjectivesCallers with myocardial infarction presenting atypical symptoms in telephone consultations when calling out-of-hours medical services risk misrecognition. We investigated characteristics in callers’ interpretation of experienced conditions through communication with call-takers.MethodsRecording of calls resulting in not having an ambulance dispatched for 21 callers who contacted a non-emergency medical helpline, Copenhagen (Denmark), up to one week before they were diagnosed with myocardial infarction. Qualitative content analysis was applied.ResultsAwareness of illness, remedial actions and previous experiences contributed to callers’ interpretation of the experienced condition. Unclear symptoms resulted in callers reacting to their interpretation by being unsure and worried. Negotiation of the interpretation was seen when callers tested the call-taker’s interpretation of the condition and when either caller or call-taker suggested: “wait and see”.ConclusionCallers sought to interpret the experienced conditions but faced challenges when the conditions appeared unclear and did not correspond to the health system’s understanding of symptoms associated with myocardial infarction. It affected the communicative interaction with the call-taker and influenced the call-taker’s choice of response. OBJECTIVES: Callers with myocardial infarction presenting atypical symptoms in telephone consultations when calling out-of-hours medical services risk misrecognition. We investigated characteristics in callers' interpretation of experienced conditions through communication with call-takers. METHODS: Recording of calls resulting in not having an ambulance dispatched for 21 callers who contacted a non-emergency medical helpline, Copenhagen (Denmark), up to one week before they were diagnosed with myocardial infarction. Qualitative content analysis was applied. RESULTS: Awareness of illness, remedial actions and previous experiences contributed to callers' interpretation of the experienced condition. Unclear symptoms resulted in callers reacting to their interpretation by being unsure and worried. Negotiation of the interpretation was seen when callers tested the call-taker's interpretation of the condition and when either caller or call-taker suggested: "wait and see". CONCLUSION: Callers sought to interpret the experienced conditions but faced challenges when the conditions appeared unclear and did not correspond to the health system's understanding of symptoms associated with myocardial infarction. It affected the communicative interaction with the call-taker and influenced the call-taker's choice of response. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Call-takers, as part of the decision-making process, could ask further questions about the caller's insecurity and worry. It might facilitate faster recognition of conditions warranting hospital referral.

PURPOSE: Patient Concerns Inventory (PCI) prompt lists are designed to capture health needs and concerns that matter most to patients. A head and neck cancer (HNC)-specific PCI was initially developed for follow-up after treatment with curative intent (PCI-HNC follow-up). Patients with HNC receiving palliative treatment (PT) may have different symptoms and concerns to discuss with the healthcare professionals. The aim of this study is to establish recommendations for a PCI-HNC-PT prompt list.METHODS: The process leading to the recommendations for the PCI-HNC-PT was a four-step sequential qualitative study. First, semi-structured interviews among patients with HNC receiving treatment with palliative intent were conducted based on the original PCI-HNC follow-up prompt list. Second, a multidisciplinary reviewing panel revised the PCI-HNC follow-up based on the findings from the patient's interviews. Third, a focus group interview (FGI) with specialized oncology nurses was conducted based on the revised PCI-HNC follow-up. Fourth, the results of the patient and FGI interviews were combined and re-assessed by the multidisciplinary reviewing panel leading to a consensus on the selection and recommendation of items for the final PCI-HNC-PT. The think aloud method was used in patient and FGI interviews to establish face and content validity.RESULTS: Ten patients receiving palliative systemic treatment for HNC were included and interviewed. Face validity and content validity for the PCI list were demonstrated. Patients independently expressed that their concerns and needs fluctuate and change over time and welcomed the possibility of being supported by a PCI prompt list. The patients estimated a PCI prompt list to be relevant or very relevant. No items were found to be unacceptable or inappropriate but were revised to be more precise in their description. Additional items were suggested from the need to be actively involved in their treatment and care. The FGI led to the knowledge that the nurses did not have a systematic approach to communicate on symptoms. The nurses highlighted that the PCI prompt list is likely helpful for addressing symptoms, needs, and concerns that the nurses themselves would not immediately inquire about. The multidisciplinary reviewing panel came to a consensus on items and concerns recommended for the PCI-HNC-PT.CONCLUSION: The idea of a PCI prompt list was welcomed by patients with HNC receiving palliative treatment. The original PCI-HNC follow-up was adapted and has led to the recommendations of items and concerns for a PCI-HNC-PT prompt list. The next phase will be to feasibility test the PCI-HNC-PT in the clinical setting. The PCI prompt list has the potential to help facilitate the concerns and needs of the patients during the palliative treatment trajectory and thereby have the potential to strengthen a person-centered approach.

Background Being a general practitioner for residents in many care homes may challenge communication with residents, relatives, and care home staff, and potentially lead to lower quality of care. Several countries have therefore introduced different solutions to reduce the number of general practitioners at each care home. In 2017, the designated general practitioner model was introduced at many Danish care homes. This study aimed to evaluate experiences from the interprofessional team-based collaboration between designated general practitioners and care home staff with regular contact with the designated general practitioners in an urban Danish setting. Methods A qualitative design was applied using semi-structured interviews. Eight interviews (three group interviews and five individual interviews) were conducted with four designated general practitioners and seven care home staff members at four care homes in an urban setting of Central Denmark Region, Denmark. The interviews were transcribed verbatim, and data were analysed using content analysis with inspiration from the theory of relational coordination. The study followed the guidelines addressed in the COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research) framework. Results The initiation of the designated general practitioner model was experienced to contribute to more clear, precise, and timely communication between care homes and the general practitioner. An improved mutual acknowledgement of roles and competencies was experienced between designated general practitioners, care home nurses, and sometimes also social and health care assistants. The more frequent visits by the general practitioners at the care homes, as a result of the designated general practitioner model, resulted in more face-to-face communication between care home staff and designated general practitioners. Professional differences in the interpretation of the patient’s needs were still present, which at times caused a frustrating compromise of own professional competencies. An important reason for the overall perception of improved collaboration was attributed to the more frequent dialogue in which the care homes staff and the designated general practitioners exchanged knowledge that could be applied in future patient encounters. Conclusion The designated general practitioner model implied an improved collaboration between general practitioners and care homes staff. Clear, precise, and timely communication between care homes and the general practitioners, as well as mutual trust and acknowledgement was experienced to be essential for the collaboration. An important reason for the overall perception of an improved collaboration was attributed to the more frequent dialogue (more frequent general practitioner visits at the care homes) in which the care homes staff and the designated general practitioners exchange knowledge which again could be applied in future patient encounters.

Humans are often shown to cooperate with one another. Most of the mechanisms that foster cooperation among humans rely on reputation, which itself relies on the acquisition of information about other people’s behaviors. Gossip has been proposed as a cheap yet efficient tool to acquire information, and it has largely been proved to be an effective means to foster and maintain cooperation. However, empirical studies supporting this claim have ignored two aspects: (1) they often compared gossip to treatments in which no reputation was available, impeding a direct assessment of whether it is gossip that promotes cooperation or rather the introduction of a reputation system; and (2) they focused on pro-social gossip (e.g., gossip aimed at helping the receiver), neglecting the impact of other types of gossip. We show here that, in contrast with the widespread notion that gossip promotes cooperation, gossip mostly depletes cooperation compared to first-hand information. If lying is fruitful for individuals or if a group’s behavior is largely uncooperative, gossip leads to negative reputational information and decreased cooperation.

Policy Points Realist evaluation (RE) is an emerging and promising research approach for evaluating integrated care, addressing what works, how, for whom, and in what circumstances. The rich philosophical foundation of RE, critical realism, can help to systematically unravel an integrated care program's initial theory prior to implementation, as a first step within RE. RE can be considered a robust methodological asset in integrated care research by facilitating a deeper level of insight into program functioning than traditional forms of evaluation do and by shaping a realist-informed monitoring and evaluation process. CONTEXT The complexity of integrated care and the need for transferable evaluation insights ask for a suitable evaluation paradigm. Realist evaluation (RE), underpinned by the philosophy of critical realism, is a theory-driven approach that addresses what works, how, for whom, and in what circumstances. The current study illustrates the process needed for RE's first step: eliciting the initial program theory (IPT). The TARGET program, a Dutch primary care initiative to facilitate more integrated care for chronically ill patients, i.e., care that is efficient, tailored, and holistic, was taken as a real-world case. METHODS An RE approach informed the phased IPT elicitation: (1) identifying an abstract theory framework; (2) formulating the preliminary IPT, building on the abstract theory and informed by previous scientific studies that underpin TARGET; and (3) refining the preliminary IPT, informed by RE expert interviews (n = 7). An RE heuristic tool, specifying the interplay between intervention-context-actors-mechanisms-outcomes (ICAMO) and retroductive reasoning, was applied to synthesize the underlying theory of individual TARGET components into TARGET's IPT. FINDINGS Separate but related IPTs were identified for the two main types of actors involved in TARGET: primary care professionals (PCPs) and patients. For both actors, two sorts of mechanisms are assumed to be activated by TARGET, which-via instrumental outcomes-contribute to long-term quadruple aim targets. The first is confidence to enhance PCPs' person-centered conversational skills and to increase patients' active engagement in TARGET. The second is mutual trust, between PCPs and patients and between PCPs and their network partners. A supportive context is assumed crucial for activating these mechanisms-for example, sufficient resources to invest in integrated care. CONCLUSIONS Although the IPT elicitation process is time intensive and requires a mind shift, it facilitates a deeper insight into program functioning than accommodated by the prevailing experimental designs in integrated care. Furthermore, the design of a realist-informed evaluation process can be informed by the IPT.

Purpose This mixed-methods study delved into the relationship between orthorexia nervosa (ON) and Instagram. Methods Two quantitative data sources were used: content analysis of pictures using #orthorexia (n = 3027), and an online questionnaire investigating the experience of ON and the use of Instagram of people sharing ON-related content on Instagram (n = 185). Following, interviews (n = 9) were conducted with people posting ON-related content on Instagram and self-identifying as having (had) ON. Results People who share ON-related content on Instagram were found to be primarily young women (questionnaire = 95.2% females, mean age 26.2 years; interviews = 100% females, mean age 28.4 years), who were found to be heavy social media users and favor Instagram over other platforms. Questionnaire respondents agreed in defining ON as an obsession with a diet considered healthy, with bio-psycho-social negative consequences, though those who self-identified as having (had) ON were more likely to point out the negative impairments of ON. Interviewees deemed Instagram partially responsible for the development of ON. Instead, they agreed that Instagram encourages problem realization. Content analysis showed that ON is encoded in pictures of ‘food’, ‘people’, ‘text’ and ‘other.’ Interviewees revealed that they started posting to recover, share information, help others, and they felt inspired to post by other accounts. A sense of belonging to the #orthorexia community emerged, where people share values and ideals, and seek validation from others. Conclusion Conversations around #orthorexia on Instagram generate supportive communities aiding recovery. Individuals use Instagram for helping others and themselves recovering from ON. Understanding how people help each other, manage their health, cope with symptoms, and undertake recovery can inform the implementation of therapeutic interventions for ON. Level of evidence Level III, evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case–control analytic studies.

Background Cardiorespiratory arrests are rare in paediatric intensive care units, yet intensive care nurses must be able to initiate resuscitation before medical assistance is available. For resuscitation to be successful, instant decision-making, team communication, and the coordinating role of the first responsible nurse are crucial. In-house resuscitation training for nurses includes technical and nontechnical skills. Objectives The aim of this study was to develop a valid, reliable, and feasible assessment instrument, called the Professional Assessment Tool for Team Improvement, for the first responsible nurse's technical and nontechnical skills. Methods Instrument development followed the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments guidelines and professionals' expertise. To establish content validity, experts reached consensus via group discussions about the content and the operationalisation of this team role. The instrument was tested using two resuscitation assessment scenarios. Inter-rater reliability was established by assessing 71 nurses in live scenario sessions and videotaped sessions, using intraclass correlation coefficients and Cohen's kappa. Internal consistency for the total instrument was established using Cronbach's alpha. Construct validity was assessed by examining the associations between raters' assessments and nurses' self-assessment scores. Results The final instrument included 12 items, divided into four categories: Team role, Teamwork and communication, Technical skills, and Reporting. Intraclass correlation coefficients were good in both live and videotaped sessions (0.78–0.87). Cronbach's alpha was stable around 0.84. Feasibility was approved (assessment time reduced by >30%). Conclusions The Professional Assessment Tool for Team Improvement appears to be a promising valid and reliable instrument to assess both technical and nontechnical skills of the first responsible paediatric intensive care unit nurse. The ability of the instrument to detect change over time (i.e., improvement of skills after training) needs to be established.

Research in various disciplines has highlighted that humans are uniquely able to solve the problem of cooperation through the informal mechanisms of reputation and gossip. Reputation coordinates the evaluative judgments of individuals about one another. Direct observation of actions and communication are the essential routes that are used to establish and update reputations. In large groups, where opportunities for direct observation are limited, gossip becomes an important channel to share individual perceptions and evaluations of others that can be used to condition cooperative action. Although reputation and gossip might consequently support large-scale human cooperation, four puzzles need to be resolved to understand the operation of reputation-based mechanisms. First, we need empirical evidence of the processes and content that form reputations and how this may vary cross-culturally. Second, we lack an understanding of how reputation is determined from the muddle of imperfect, biased inputs people receive. Third, coordination between individuals is only possible if reputation sharing and signaling is to a large extent reliable and valid. Communication, however, is not necessarily honest and reliable, so theoretical and empirical work is needed to understand how gossip and reputation can effectively promote cooperation despite the circulation of dishonest gossip. Fourth, reputation is not constructed in a social vacuum; hence we need a better understanding of the way in which the structure of interactions affects the efficiency of gossip for establishing reputations and fostering cooperation. Funding Agencies|Linkoping University; National Research, Development and Innovation Office - NKFIH (OTKA) grantOrszagos Tudomanyos Kutatasi Alapprogramok (OTKA) [K 132250]; European Research Council (ERC) under the European Unions research and innovation programmeEuropean Research Council (ERC) [648693]

Background The patient–clinician interaction is a site at which defensive practice could occur, when clinicians provide tests, procedures and treatments mainly to reduce perceived legal risks, rather than to advance patient care. Defensive practice is a driver of low‐value care and exposes patients to the risks of unnecessary interventions. To date, patient perspectives on defensive practice and its impacts on them are largely missing from the literature. This exploratory study conducted in Australia aimed to examine the views and experiences of healthcare consumer representatives in this under‐examined area. Methods Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with healthcare consumer representatives involved in healthcare consumer advocacy organisations in Australia. Data were transcribed and analysed thematically. Results Nine healthcare consumer representatives participated. Most had over 20 years of involvement and advocacy in healthcare, including personal experiences as a patient or carer and/or formal service roles on committees or complaint bodies for healthcare organisations. Participants uniformly viewed defensive practice as having a negative impact on the clinician–patient relationship. Themes identified the importance of fostering patient–clinician partnership, effective communication and informed decision‐making. The themes support a shift from the concept of defensive practice to preventive practice in partnership, which focuses on the shared interests of patients and clinicians in achieving safe and high‐value care. Conclusion This Australian study offers healthcare consumers' perspectives on the impacts of defensive practice on patients. The findings highlight the features of clinician–patient partnership that will help to improve communication and decision‐making, and prevent the defensive provision of low‐value care. Patient or Public Contribution Healthcare consumer representatives were involved as participants in this study.

Health-related misinformation, especially in times of a global health crisis, can have severe negative consequences on public health. In the current studies, we investigated the persuasive impact of COVID-19-related misinformation, and whether the valence of the misinformation and recipients' degree of overconfidence affect this impact. In two pre-registered experimental studies, participants (N = 403; N = 437) were exposed to either a positive or a negative news article describing a fictional hospital's high COVID-19 recovery/mortality rates. Half of the participants subsequently received a correction. Attitudes towards the hospital were measured before and after exposure. Results of both studies showed that, as expected, corrections reduced the persuasive impact of misinformation. But whereas some persuasive impact remained for corrected negative misinformation (a continued influence effect), it reversed for corrected positive information, causing people to have more negative attitudes towards the hospital than before exposure to any information (a backfire effect). These results corroborate prior suggestions that continued influence effects are asymmetric: negative misinformation is harder to neutralise than positive misinformation. Participants' overconfidence degrees did not have a moderating role in misinformation effects. Even though corrections decrease the persuasive impact of health-related misinformation, continued influence remains for negative misinformation.

Objective: Tailored communication is necessary to address COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy and increase uptake. We aimed to understand the information needs, perceived benefits and barriers to COVID‐19 vaccination of people prioritised, but hesitant to receive the vaccine. Method: In this qualitative study in Victoria, Australia (February‐May 2021), we purposively sampled hesitant adults who were health or aged/disability care workers (n=20), or adults aged 18‐69 with comorbidities or aged ≥70 years (‘prioritised adults’; n=19). We thematically analysed interviews inductively, then deductively organised themes within the World Health Organization Behavioural and Social Drivers of vaccination model. Two stakeholder workshops (n=12) explored understanding and preferences for communicating risks and benefits. We subsequently formed communication recommendations. Results: Prioritised adults and health and aged care workers had short‐ and long‐term safety concerns specific to personal circumstances, and felt like “guinea pigs”. They saw vaccination as beneficial for individual and community protection and travel. Some health and aged care workers felt insufficiently informed to recommend vaccines, or viewed this as outside their scope of practice. Workshop participants requested interactive materials and transparency from spokespeople about uncertainty. Conclusions and public health implications: Eleven recommendations address communication content, delivery and context to increase uptake and acceptance of COVID‐19 vaccines.

People worldwide use SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) visualizations to make life and death decisions about pandemic risks. Understanding how these visualizations influence risk perceptions to improve pandemic communication is crucial. To examine how COVID-19 visualizations influence risk perception, we conducted two experiments online in October and December of 2020 (N= 2549) where we presented participants with 34 visualization techniques (available at the time of publication on the CDC’s website) of the same COVID-19 mortality data. We found that visualizing data using a cumulative scale consistently led to participants believing that they and others were at more risk than before viewing the visualizations. In contrast, visualizing the same data with a weekly incident scale led to variable changes in risk perceptions. Further, uncertainty forecast visualizations also affected risk perceptions, with visualizations showing six or more models increasing risk estimates more than the others tested. Differences between COVID-19 visualizations of the same data produce different risk perceptions, fundamentally changing viewers’ interpretation of information.