Search

Research projects involving science shops and citizen science in their promotion of participatory approaches are flourishing globally. However, an instrument evaluating the impacts of such approaches at different stages of a participatory research processes has yet to be validated. The InSPIRES H2020 project developed an impact evaluation tool for just this purpose, consisting of 64 items that reflect upon the dimensions of "knowledge democracy," "citizen-led research," "participatory dynamics," "transformative change," and "integrity." In this article, we seek to test the content validity of this tool and to provide recommendations that can ensure its validity. A panel of nine experts was created to evaluate each item as regards the following three criteria: representativeness, relevance, and clarity. The Aiken's V and Wilson Score methods were used to assess the tool's content validity based on the experts' ratings. Experts' written comments were also reviewed. At the panel level, 75% of the items were considered satisfactory in relation to each of the three validity criteria. However, at the population level, 72% of the items suggested that parts of the tool were not valid and required revision. The main suggestions from the experts pointed to the need to reformulate items in which the separation between science and society appeared reinforced and to develop more items about the gender perspective of a research project. The revised version of the tool should serve as a well-founded, comprehensive evaluation instrument for on-going and future projects whose goal is to self-reflect and compare participatory research processes.

Background: Community engagement is recognized as a vital component of health-related research and programs, particularly during infectious disease outbreaks and epidemics. Despite the importance of engaging communities in the response to COVID-19, relatively little research has examined how this was (or was not) achieved, and even less in low- and middle-income countries. This article describes the community engagement that accompanied efforts to strengthen COVID-19 diagnosis and treatment as part of the ECO Project in Cochabamba, Bolivia and highlights lessons for future pandemic response. Methods: Community engagement involved formative assessment, co-creation to develop a health information campaign, ongoing community listening and evaluation. Qualitative data were collected during workshops, project meetings and focus groups. Questionnaire-based surveys were conducted to assess COVID-19-related attitudes, knowledge and practices. Results: The collected data highlighted the value of working closely with well-established community health committees and involving community members with social media skills in the design of COVID-19-related messages to address on- and offline misinformation. Co-creation sessions enabled the adjustment of the information campaign in terms of content and approach based on the needs and preferences of community members and health staff. The continuous listening with community and health personnel facilitated the ongoing adaptation of project activities. Conclusion: Through a stepped and multi-pronged approach, incorporating co-creation and community listening, the engagement could respond to emerging local challenges during the pandemic. The project created spaces for dialogue and opportunities for collaboration that strengthened links between the community and the health services. Paper context: Main findings: Key elements of community engagement to improve COVID-19 diagnosis and treatment in Cochabamba, Bolivia, included working closely with well-established community health committees, involving community members with social media skills in the co-design of COVID-19-related messages, and continuous listening with community and health personnel facilitated the ongoing adaptation of project activities. Added knowledge: With little research on community engagement for COVID-19 diagnosis and treatment in Latin America, this study reports the results of mixed methods research on the impact of a comprehensive approach to engagement that highlights lessons for future health emergencies. Global health impact for policy and action: Lessons for engagement in health emergencies include the need for a multi-pronged approach, incorporating co-creation and community listening, to respond to emerging local challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One-fifth of the Bolivian population lives abroad, and transnational behaviour strongly links their villages with destination communities. In this article we address whether the increasing difficulty of return migration (owing to legal and geographic barriers) results in diminished social and economic remittances to the country of origin. Results from a questionnaire survey of 417 households in the Valle Alto area of Cochabamba Department in 2007 reveal that monetary remittances account for one-half of the income of active migrant families (and one-quarter of income overall), and that transnational cultural ties remain strong. However, after ten years of cumulated time abroad the intention to return to Bolivia drops markedly along with economic and some social remittances. Closer analysis reveals that time abroad reduces these ties through the mediating forces of family members abroad, legal status, and home ownership abroad. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Trypanosoma cruzi , the causative agent of Chagas disease, is divided into six Discrete Typing Units (DTUs): TcI–TcVI. We aimed to identify T. cruzi DTUs in Latin-American migrants in the Barcelona area (Spain) and to assess different molecular typing approaches for the characterization of T. cruzi genotypes. Seventy-five peripheral blood samples were analyzed by two real-time PCR methods (qPCR) based on satellite DNA (SatDNA) and kinetoplastid DNA (kDNA). The 20 samples testing positive in both methods, all belonging to Bolivian individuals, were submitted to DTU characterization using two PCR-based flowcharts: multiplex qPCR using TaqMan probes (MTq-PCR), and conventional PCR. These samples were also studied by sequencing the SatDNA and classified as type I (TcI/III), type II (TcII/IV) and type I/II hybrid (TcV/VI). Ten out of the 20 samples gave positive results in the flowcharts: TcV (5 samples), TcII/V/VI (3) and mixed infections by TcV plus TcII (1) and TcV plus TcII/VI (1). By SatDNA sequencing, we classified the 20 samples, 19 as type I/II and one as type I. The most frequent DTU identified by both flowcharts, and suggested by SatDNA sequencing in the remaining samples with low parasitic loads, TcV, is common in Bolivia and predominant in peripheral blood. The mixed infection by TcV–TcII was detected for the first time simultaneously in Bolivian migrants. PCR-based flowcharts are very useful to characterize DTUs during acute infection. SatDNA sequence analysis cannot discriminate T. cruzi populations at the level of a single DTU but it enabled us to increase the number of characterized cases in chronically infected patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The need for the public to take an active role in scientific research is becoming increasingly important, particularly in health-related research. However, the coexistence and alignment of scientific and citizen interests, needs, knowledge and timing is not straightforward, especially when involving migrant populations. To conduct impactful research, it becomes also essential to consider the perspectives of policymakers, thereby adding a layer of complexity to the processes.In this article we address the experience of a living lab created in a research institution and supported by the city council and a local foundation, in which we developed three experiences of patient and public involvement (PPI): (1) accessing to comprehensive care for people at risk of Chagas disease; (2) strategies towards improving access and quality of mental healthcare services in migrants; (3) promoting healthy and safe school environments in vulnerable urban settings.These three challenges provided an opportunity to delve into diverse strategies for involving key stakeholders, including migrant populations, expert researchers and political actors in health research. This article offers insights into the successes, challenges, and valuable lessons learnt from these endeavours, providing a vision that can be beneficial for future initiatives. Each living lab experience crafted its unique governance system and agenda tailored to specific challenge scenarios, giving rise to diverse methods and study designs.We have found that the management of the cocreation of the research question and the institutional support are key to building robust PPI processes with migrant groups., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Considering the growing genitourinary (GU) cancer population undergoing systemic treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we planned a clinical audit in 24 Italian institutions treating GU malignancies., Objective: The primary objective was investigating the clinical impact of COVID-19 in GU cancer patients undergoing ICI-based therapy during the first outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 contagion in Italy., Design Setting and Participants: The included centers were 24 Oncology Departments. Two online forms were completed by the responsible Oncology Consultants, respectively, for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) patients receiving at least one administration of ICIs between 31 January 2020 and 30 June 2020., Results and Limitation: In total, 287 mRCC patients and 130 mUC patients were included. The COVID-19 incidence was, respectively, 3.5%, with mortality 1%, in mRCC patients and 7.7%, with mortality 3.1%, in mUC patients. In both groups, 40% of patients developing COVID-19 permanently discontinued anticancer treatment. The pre-test SARS-CoV-2 probability in the subgroup of patients who underwent nasal/pharyngeal swab ranged from 14% in mRCC to 26% in mUC. The main limitation of the work was its nature of audit: data were not recorded at the single-patient level., Conclusion: GU cancer patients undergoing active treatment with ICIs have meaningful risk factors for developing severe events from COVID-19 and permanent discontinuation of therapy after the infection. Treatment delays due to organizational issues during the pandemic were unlikely to affect the treatment outcome in this population., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest for the present article, except those reported herein: Melissa Bersanelli received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events by Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Novartis, AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, and Pfizer, and as a consultant for advisory role by Novartis, BMS, IPSEN, and Pfizer; she also received fees for copyright transfer by Sciclone Pharmaceuticals and research funding by Roche S.p.A., Seqirus UK, Pfizer, Novartis, BMS, AstraZeneca, and Sanofi Genzyme. Sebastiano Buti received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events and advisory role by BMS, Pfizer, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Ipsen, Roche, Eli-Lilly, AstraZeneca, and Novartis; he also received research funding from Novartis. Alessio Cortellini received consulting/advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, MSD, Roche, and BMS; and speakers’ fee from Novartis, Astellas, MSD, and AstraZeneca. Orazio Caffo received honoraria as a speaker by Astellas, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Pfizer, and Sanofi, and a consultant for advisory role by Astellas, Janssen, and MSD. Paolo Andrea Zucali reports outside the submitted work personal fees for advisory role, speaker engagements, and travel and accommodation expenses from MSD, Astellas, Janssen, Sanofi, Ipsen, Pfizer, Novartis, BMS, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Roche, and Bayer. Camillo Porta received honoraria as a Consultant or Speaker for Angelini, AstraZeneca, BMS, Eisai, EUSA, General Electric, Ipsen, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer; acted as an Expert Testimony for EUSA and Pfizer; and was a Protocol Steering Committee Member of BMS, Eisai, and EUSA Pharma. Finally, he did receive travel support from Roche. All other authors have no conflict of interest to declare., (© The Author(s), 2021.)

Aim: INVIDIa was a retrospective, multicenter study, exploring the clinical efficacy of influenza vaccine in 300 cancer patients undergoing immunotherapy. Overall survival (OS) was immature at the initial report. Methods: We reported the final OS analysis from the original study population and within subgroups. Results: Both at the univariate and multivariate analysis, the occurrence of influenza syndrome (IS) was significantly related to better OS in the overall population (OR: 0.53 [95% CI: 0.32-0.88]; p = 0.01). In the lung cancer subgroup, receiving flu vaccine and/or developing IS was related to better OS (p = 0.04). Within elderly patients, the flu vaccine was the main variable for the relative OS advantage (p = 0.05). Conclusion: Receiving the flu vaccine and/or developing IS was related to better OS within the INVIDIa population.

Italy is a low-incidence country for tuberculosis (TB). We describe a TB outbreak in a primary school in north-eastern Italy, involving 10 cases of active pulmonary disease and 42 cases of latent infection. The index case was detected in March 2019, while the primary case, an Italian-born schoolteacher, was likely infectious since January 2018. Administration of a pre-employment health questionnaire to school staff with sustained contact with children should be considered in low-incidence countries.

Aim: Considering the unmet need for the counseling of cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (CKI) about influenza vaccination, an explorative study was planned to assess flu vaccine efficacy in this population., Methods: INVIDIa was a retrospective, multicenter study, enrolling consecutive advanced cancer outpatients receiving CKI during the influenza season 2016-2017., Results: Of 300 patients, 79 received flu vaccine. The incidence of influenza syndrome was 24.1% among vaccinated, versus 11.8% of controls; odds ratio: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.23-4.59; p = 0.009. The clinical ineffectiveness of vaccine was more pronounced among elderly: 37.8% among vaccinated patients, versus 6.1% of unvaccinated, odds ratio: 9.28; 95% CI: 2.77-31.14; p < 0.0001., Conclusion: Although influenza vaccine may be clinically ineffective in advanced cancer patients receiving CKI, it seems not to negatively impact the efficacy of anticancer therapy.

Background: The availability of new agents (NAs) active in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) progressing after docetaxel treatment (abiraterone acetate, cabazitaxel, and enzalutamide) has led to the possibility of using them sequentially to obtain a cumulative survival benefit., Objective: To provide clinical outcome data relating to a large cohort of mCRPC patients who received a third-line NA after the failure of docetaxel and another NA., Design, Setting, and Participants: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of patients who had received at least two successive NAs after the failure of docetaxel., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The independent prognostic value of a series of pretreatment covariates on the primary outcome measure of overall survival was assessed using Cox regression analysis., Results and Limitations: We assessed 260 patients who received one third-line NA between January 2012 and December 2013, including 38 who received a further NA as fourth-line therapy. The median progression-free and overall survival from the start of third-line therapy was, respectively, 4 mo and 11 mo, with no significant differences between the NAs. Performance status, and haemoglobin and alkaline phosphatase levels were the only independent prognostic factors. The limitations of the study are mainly due its retrospective nature and the small number of patients treated with some of the sequences., Conclusions: We were unable to demonstrate a difference in the clinical outcomes of third-line NAs regardless of previous NA therapy., Patient Summary: It is debated which sequence of treatments to adopt after docetaxel. Our data do not support the superiority of any of the three new agents in third-line treatment, regardless of the previously administered new agent., (Copyright © 2014 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)