Search

Abstract Background In 2004, a review of pilot studies published in seven major medical journals during 2000-01 recommended that the statistical analysis of such studies should be either mainly descriptive or focus on sample size estimation, while results from hypothesis testing must be interpreted with caution. We revisited these journals to see whether the subsequent recommendations have changed the practice of reporting pilot studies. We also conducted a survey to identify the methodological components in registered research studies which are described as 'pilot' or 'feasibility' studies. We extended this survey to grant-awarding bodies and editors of medical journals to discover their policies regarding the function and reporting of pilot studies. Methods Papers from 2007-08 in seven medical journals were screened to retrieve published pilot studies. Reports of registered and completed studies on the UK Clinical Research Network (UKCRN) Portfolio database were retrieved and scrutinized. Guidance on the conduct and reporting of pilot studies was retrieved from the websites of three grant giving bodies and seven journal editors were canvassed. Results 54 pilot or feasibility studies published in 2007-8 were found, of which 26 (48%) were pilot studies of interventions and the remainder feasibility studies. The majority incorporated hypothesis-testing (81%), a control arm (69%) and a randomization procedure (62%). Most (81%) pointed towards the need for further research. Only 8 out of 90 pilot studies identified by the earlier review led to subsequent main studies. Twelve studies which were interventional pilot/feasibility studies and which included testing of some component of the research process were identified through the UKCRN Portfolio database. There was no clear distinction in use of the terms 'pilot' and 'feasibility'. Five journal editors replied to our entreaty. In general they were loathe to publish studies described as 'pilot'. Conclusion Pilot studies are still poorly reported, with inappropriate emphasis on hypothesis-testing. Authors should be aware of the different requirements of pilot studies, feasibility studies and main studies and report them appropriately. Authors should be explicit as to the purpose of a pilot study. The definitions of feasibility and pilot studies vary and we make proposals here to clarify terminology.

Colorectal cancers (CRC) are highly prevalent cancer all over the world and need appropriate and timely prevention and treatment. Since years it has been argued that antioxidant vitamins have a potential role in the prevention of several neoplasm including colorectal cancer though the answer remained controversial. Most of the observational studies in past have shown that Vitamin E has some protective effect in the primary prevention of colorectal cancer, however its exact role is not yet established. On the other hand recently conducted experimental studies have shown variable results regarding the role of vitamin E in preventing colorectal cancers. Thus this review was conducted to study the role of vitamin E in preventing colorectal neoplasm. This review study was conducted from September 2008 to February 2009. We searched multiple electronic sources including (PUBMED) MEDLINE, Cochrane Database for identifying existing Systematic Reviews, OVID data base and other library sources to identify relevant studies for this review. Data was collected using data extraction form. Meta analysis was performed in Review Manager version 4.3. We identified four trials on vitamin E role for primary prevention of CRC, includes 94069 participants (47029 in vitamin E Vs 47040 in placebo), aged 40 years or above, who were randomized to vitamin E supplement versus placebo. The outcome measure in our review was incidence of colorectal cancer in the follow up period of 7 to 10 years. We found no sufficient evidence of vitamin E role for decreasing risk of CRC incidence (RR: 0.89, CI: 0.76, 1.05; p-value = 0.18). It has been identified in the review that Vitamin E does not have protective role in the prevention of colorectal cancer. Further studies on diverse population are required to determine the role vitamin E for the primary prevention of colorectal cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2004, a review of pilot studies published in seven major medical journals during 2000-01 recommended that the statistical analysis of such studies should be either mainly descriptive or focus on sample size estimation, while results from hypothesis testing must be interpreted with caution. We revisited these journals to see whether the subsequent recommendations have changed the practice of reporting pilot studies. We also conducted a survey to identify the methodological components in registered research studies which are described as 'pilot' or 'feasibility' studies. We extended this survey to grant-awarding bodies and editors of medical journals to discover their policies regarding the function and reporting of pilot studies. Methods: Papers from 2007-08 in seven medical journals were screened to retrieve published pilot studies. Reports of registered and completed studies on the UK Clinical Research Network (UKCRN) Portfolio database were retrieved and scrutinized. Guidance on the conduct and reporting of pilot studies was retrieved from the websites of three grant giving bodies and seven journal editors were canvassed. Results: 54 pilot or feasibility studies published in 2007-8 were found, of which 26 (48%) were pilot studies of interventions and the remainder feasibility studies. The majority incorporated hypothesis-testing (81%), a control arm (69%) and a randomization procedure (62%). Most (81%) pointed towards the need for further research. Only 8 out of 90 pilot studies identified by the earlier review led to subsequent main studies. Twelve studies which were interventional pilot/feasibility studies and which included testing of some component of the research process were identified through the UKCRN Portfolio database. There was no clear distinction in use of the terms 'pilot' and 'feasibility'. Five journal editors replied to our entreaty. In general they were loathe to publish studies described as 'pilot'. Conclusion: Pilot studies are still poorly reported, with inappropriate emphasis on hypothesis-testing. Authors should be aware of the different requirements of pilot studies, feasibility studies and main studies and report them appropriately. Authors should be explicit as to the purpose of a pilot study. The definitions of feasibility and pilot studies vary and we make proposals here to clarify terminology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To address the increasing demands for gastroenterology specialty care and increasing wait times, centralized access and triage (CAT) systems, telephone support, and clinical care pathways were implemented to streamline referrals and support management of low-risk gastrointestinal (GI) conditions in the primary care medical home. This study aimed to understand primary care providers (PCPs) and GI specialists' perceptions of these supports, factors that affect support implementation and identify barriers and facilitators for implementing supports from both PCP and GI specialists' perspectives., Methods: We conducted a mixed method study including surveys and interviews with PCPs and GI specialists. Online surveys and semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted from July 2022 to September 2022. All interviews were transcribed and coded to perform a thematic analysis. Survey data were analyzed in SPSS version 25. Descriptive statistics were employed to summarize and describe the data collected. Inferential statistics were used to identify associations and relationships within the dataset. T -test and chi-square tests were applied at 95% confidence level, with a p value <0.05 (two-sided) considered statistically significant., Results: A total of 36 PCPs responded to the survey. Most respondents were working full-time (73.5%, n  = 25) and were female (73.5%, n  = 25). Overall, 42% used the pathways regularly, 48% ( n  = 16) used them occasionally, and very few (9.1%, n  = 3) said they were aware but had not used pathways. Overall, PCPs were satisfied with CAT processes and the use of primary care pathways, recognizing the importance of fair and equitable access to specialty care. Specific processes in CAT for vulnerable populations and patients using walk-in clinics were recognized as a limitation, given the lack of ease in completing the required testing and follow-up needed when utilizing the care pathway. Of the 112 GI specialists who received the survey, 28 (25%) completed it, with males (50.0%, n  = 14) and females (39.2%, n  = 11), remainder no response. Most participate in CAT (73.9%, n  = 17) and were remunerated by an alternative relationship plan (ARP) (53.6%, n  = 15). Overall, GIs were satisfied with central triaging and primary care pathways, reducing unnecessary time and resource expenditure for referrals. There were statistically significant differences in perceptions among fee for service and alternative relationship plan GI specialists regarding the effectiveness of CAT in improving access and use of health system resources., Conclusion: Overall, PCPs and GI specialists believe utilizing CAT and primary care pathways improves referral quality, reduces resource expenditure, and provides fair and equitable access to GI specialty services. Improvement in CAT processes with improved pathway awareness may reduce unnecessary referrals., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Mubashir Arain et al.)

Objective: To compare carotid Intima media thickness and atherosclerosis burden amongst healthy, diabetic and hypertensive Pakistani patients., Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out at the Department of radiology and family medicine, Aga Khan University Hospital Karachi from April 2014 to July 2015. Bilateral carotid ultrasound was done in 133 healthy adults, 65 hypertensive, 31 type-2 diabetic and 37 hypertensive with type-2 diabetes patients. Normal adults were matched for age and gender. Mean intimal media thickness was measured for common and internal carotid arteries. Presence or absence of atherosclerotic plaque was also identified. Height, weight, ethnicity, socioeconomic status and other risk factors were also assessed. Ultrasound findings were compared between healthy and diseased patients through statistical tests., Results: A total of 266 patients participated (Controls=133, Hypertensive=65, Diabetic=31, and Diabetes with Hypertension=37). There was no significant difference in the baseline characteristics between the four patients' groups for age (p>0.05) and gender (p>0.05). The mean carotid intima media thickenss of right common carotid artery was significantly higher in patients with diabetes along with hypertension as compared to the control group (p=0.03). For (RICA) Right Internal Carotid Artery, (LCCA) Left Common Carotid Artery and (LICA) Left Internal Carotid Artery, there was a significantly higher thickness among patients with hypertension as compared to the control group with p=0.011, p=0.002, and p=0.039 respectively., Conclusions: Increased CIMT is most likely associated with underlying chronic diseases. Ultrasound is a non-invasive, easily available and useful modality for early detection and prevention of vascular atherosclerosis.

Objectives: To identify and quantify chromium and lead as contaminant in water sources of Karachi., Methods: This water assessment survey was conducted from June 2007 to February 2008 in all the 18 towns of Karachi. In total 216 water samples were collected from ground (n=108) and surface water sources (n = 108). Water samples were collected in a liter polyethylene acid resistant bottle with extreme care to prevent contamination and concentrations of heavy metals (chromium and lead). Metallic ion contents were estimated by Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer. Statistical analysis was done by applying T-test and chi-square for continuous and categorical variables respectively at 95% confidence level; Pearson correlation was also determined between chromium and lead concentrations., Results: A total of 187 water samples had lead concentration higher than the maximum acceptable concentration (MAC) in drinking water, established by WHO (10 PPB) and lead contaminated sources were in significantly higher proportion than chromium contaminated water samples (n = 49) [chi2 = 128; P- < 0.001]. Mean chromium concentration in ground water was (micro = 49; SE = 3.8) was significantly higher than mean chromium concentration (micro = 33, SE = 3.5) in surface water (P = 0.003). There was a significant and positive correlation between chromium and lead concentrations in ground water (P = 0.04) however Pearson correlation was not significant for surface water (P = 0.6). Industrial towns (Korangi, Landhi and SITE) had significantly higher concentration of chromium (micro = 82.4; SE = 8.9) in their ground and tap water as compared to the mean chromium concentration (micro = 33; SE = 2.2) in the water samples of rest of the towns of Karachi (P < 0.001)., Conclusion: Chromium and Lead levels are high in almost all ground water sources, however extremely high concentrations were found in industrial areas. Presence of any one of the heavy metal contamination necessitate the need for the estimation of other heavy metals as significant positive correlation was found between chromium and lead concentration, indicating the possibility of similar contamination sources in Karachi.

Objective: To compare the effect of long-term (7 days) versus short-term (2 days) postoperative antibiotics in preventing postoperative infective complications in patients who have undergone open-heart surgeries., Design: Interventional, randomized controlled trial (RCT)., Place and Duration of Study: Department of Cardiac Surgery, Dow University of Health Sciences, from February 2006 to July 2006., Patients and Methods: Cardiac patients (n=42), operated for valvular disease (36%), coronary artery bypass grafting (50%), or septal repair (14%), were included in our study. Patients were prospectively randomized into two groups. Group A (n=21) patients received oral antibiotics for 7 days, whereas group B (n=21) patients were given the same for 2 days postoperative. Pre-operative and intra-operative variables were equal in both groups. Total leukocyte count and temperature were monitored daily until the patients were discharged. The chest and leg wounds were inspected daily for any signs of infection. Sputum and urine cultures were sent for selected patients in case of respiratory tract infection or urinary tract infection, respectively. Each patient was followed until the next routine visit in outpatient department., Results: In group A, 3 patients (14%), developed infection postoperatively, whereas in group B, 13 patients (62%) (p =0.001) had to be started on oral or intravenous antibiotics as a result of developing either wound infection, a positive sputum culture, a positive urine culture or a localized infection elsewhere. Mean ward stay in group A was 4.8 +/- 4.5 days and in group B 6.5 +/- 4.1 days (p =0.011)., Conclusion: In this series, there was a significantly higher frequency of infection and longer hospital stay in patients who received antibiotics for 2 days postoperatively as compared to those who received antibiotics for 7 days.