Search

Abstract: This study aimed to conduct a comprehensive review of the top 50 most influential articles on stroke rehabilitation to investigate characteristics, such as the number of citations, year of publication, study design, and research topic, as well as to assess the evidence level and methodological quality. Moreover, we performed a supplementary assessment of the top 10 articles published within the past 5 yrs in the same domain, aiming to discern potential shifts in trends and methodological quality. Web of Science was used to search for articles on stroke rehabilitation. The data extracted from the articles included title, journal impact factor, year of publication, total number of citations, article topic, study design, and others. The level of evidence and methodological quality were assessed by two reviewers. Noninvasive brain stimulation and robotic rehabilitation were frequently discussed in the top 50 articles. We found that there was no difference in methodology quality between the top 50 articles in all years and the top ten articles in the past 5 yrs. Furthermore, the number of citations and citation density were not associated with the methodological quality. The findings suggest that the number of citations alone may not be a reliable indicator of research quality., Competing Interests: Financial disclosure statements have been obtained, and no conflicts of interest have been reported by the authors or by any individuals in control of the content of this article., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Large language models such as GPT-4 (Generative Pre-trained Transformer 4) are being increasingly used in medicine and medical education. However, these models are prone to "hallucinations" (ie, outputs that seem convincing while being factually incorrect). It is currently unknown how these errors by large language models relate to the different cognitive levels defined in Bloom's taxonomy., Objective: This study aims to explore how GPT-4 performs in terms of Bloom's taxonomy using psychosomatic medicine exam questions., Methods: We used a large data set of psychosomatic medicine multiple-choice questions (N=307) with real-world results derived from medical school exams. GPT-4 answered the multiple-choice questions using 2 distinct prompt versions: detailed and short. The answers were analyzed using a quantitative approach and a qualitative approach. Focusing on incorrectly answered questions, we categorized reasoning errors according to the hierarchical framework of Bloom's taxonomy., Results: GPT-4's performance in answering exam questions yielded a high success rate: 93% (284/307) for the detailed prompt and 91% (278/307) for the short prompt. Questions answered correctly by GPT-4 had a statistically significant higher difficulty than questions answered incorrectly (P=.002 for the detailed prompt and P<.001 for the short prompt). Independent of the prompt, GPT-4's lowest exam performance was 78.9% (15/19), thereby always surpassing the "pass" threshold. Our qualitative analysis of incorrect answers, based on Bloom's taxonomy, showed that errors were primarily in the "remember" (29/68) and "understand" (23/68) cognitive levels; specific issues arose in recalling details, understanding conceptual relationships, and adhering to standardized guidelines., Conclusions: GPT-4 demonstrated a remarkable success rate when confronted with psychosomatic medicine multiple-choice exam questions, aligning with previous findings. When evaluated through Bloom's taxonomy, our data revealed that GPT-4 occasionally ignored specific facts (remember), provided illogical reasoning (understand), or failed to apply concepts to a new situation (apply). These errors, which were confidently presented, could be attributed to inherent model biases and the tendency to generate outputs that maximize likelihood., (©Anne Herrmann-Werner, Teresa Festl-Wietek, Friederike Holderried, Lea Herschbach, Jan Griewatz, Ken Masters, Stephan Zipfel, Moritz Mahling. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 23.01.2024.)

Growing interest in precision medicine, gene-environment interactions, health equity, expanding diversity in research, and the generalizability results, requires researchers to evaluate how the effects of treatments or exposures differ across numerous subgroups. Evaluating combination complexity, in the form of effect measure modification and interaction, is therefore a common study aim in the biomedical, clinical, and epidemiologic sciences. There is also substantial interest in expanding the combinations of factors analyzed to include complex treatment protocols (e.g., multiple study arms or factorial randomization), comorbid medical conditions or risk factors, and sociodemographic and other subgroup identifiers. However, expanding the number of subgroup category combinations creates combination fatigue problems, including concerns over small sample size, reduced power, multiple testing, spurious results, and design and analytic complexity. Creative new approaches for managing combination fatigue and evaluating high-dimensional effect measure modification and interaction are needed. Intersectional MAIHDA (multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy) has already attracted substantial interest in social epidemiology, and has been hailed as the new gold standard for investigating health inequities across complex intersections of social identity. Leveraging the inherent advantages of multilevel models, a more general multicategorical MAIHDA can be used to study statistical interactions and predict effects across high-dimensional combinations of conditions, with important advantages over alternative approaches. Though it has primarily been used thus far as an analytic approach, MAIHDA should also be used as a framework for study design. In this article, I introduce MAIHDA to the broader health sciences research community, discuss its advantages over conventional approaches, and provide an overview of potential applications in clinical, biomedical, and epidemiologic research., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Research and quality improvement in pediatric hospital medicine often benefit from using mixed methods research (MMR) approaches. MMR requires the intentional collection, analysis, and mixing, or integration, of both quantitative and qualitative data to build on their complementary strengths to answer complex research questions. In this methodology paper, we define MMR, describe its characteristics, the importance of integration, and outline the core designs of explanatory sequential, exploratory sequential, and convergent MMR by illustrating practical examples from pediatric hospital medicine., (Copyright © 2023 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

This article explores experiences of teaching qualitative research (QR) broadly, and qualitative methods (QM) more specifically in medicine, highlighting the challenges faced, and offering recommendations for overcoming them. Using collective online interviews, collaborative autoethnography (CAE) was employed to generate data comprising educator's reflective accounts of teaching QM in medical schools across two continents. Three main themes were identified through collaborative thematic analysis: making meaningful contributions from a marginalized position; finding our pedagogical feet; and recognizing the translational applicability and value of QR. We reflected on the marginalized positioning of QM in medical curricula and the underestimation of the value of QR to understanding pressing health issues. Analysis of these reflections pointed to a lack of formal training for educators and curriculum space for qualitative approaches. Our teaching pedagogies, developed through our own research experiences, self-reflection and student feedback, were primarily student-centered employing a range of novel approaches designed to foster skills and interest in the craft of QR, and introduce a greater appreciation of the significance of QR approaches to medicine. CAE further allowed us to identify some key recommendations that could help medical educators plan for teaching QM and other research methods more effectively in medicine. Future curriculum development should consider the benefits of exposing learners to a range of methods and approaches from across the qualitative-quantitative spectrum., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: The classification of human responses to health conditions or life processes, assuming that human responses are the way that a person responds, referring to the individual's experiences, feelings, perceptions, behaviours and physical reactions, can be an exercise that, although challenging, is central to nursing diagnoses and, consequently, to nursing practice. It is necessary to gather and organise the existing knowledge about the human responses in adolescents with cancer, starting from the moment of diagnosis, due to the specificities inherent to this stage of human development. A scoping review is an appropriate method to use in order to map the existing knowledge on human responses in adolescents with oncological diseases experienced since the diagnosis., Inclusion Criteria: Will encompass all types of studies, including 'grey literature' that centres on human responses related to adolescents aged 10-19 years with oncological diseases. There will be no restrictions based on the type of cancer, disease stage or other contextual factors, whether in home or healthcare settings., Methods and Analysis: The review will be conducted following the guidelines outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute for scoping reviews. The search will encompass the following databases: CINAHL Complete (EBSCOhost), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (EBSCOhost), MEDLINE Complete (EBSCOhost), Nursing and Allied Health Collection: Comprehensive (EBSCOhost), Cochrane Clinical Answers (EBSCOhost Answers), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) and 'grey literature' sources accessible through the Scientific Open Access Repositories of Portugal (RCAAP). A three-step search strategy will be implemented. Titles and abstracts will undergo analysis by two independent reviewers. Articles selected for a full-text review will be organised. The results will be presented in tables and narratively summarised., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethics approval and patient consent for publication are not necessary. Findings will be disseminated through publication in scientific journals and through conference presentations., Review Registration Number: EXUB4. Registration was made in the Open Science Framework (OSF)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Spinal orthosis is a common conservative treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS), and a large body of compelling evidence from systemic review studies strongly supports the use of spinal orthosis treatment in patients with this condition. To further improve our understanding of the available data, the aim of this study is to develop and propose a protocol for a scoping review of systematic reviews of studies that investigated the effectiveness of orthotic treatment in patients with AIS. Systematic synthesis and understanding of the data will improve the efficacy of spinal orthosis treatment in this patient population., Method and Analysis: Using the scoping review methodological framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley in 2005, we developed and herewith propose a scoping review protocol to evaluate systematic reviews of studies that investigated the effectiveness of orthotic treatment in AIS. Our proposed scoping review proposal is briefly described, as follows. A search of seven online databases will be conducted to identify systematic reviews published in English language from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2023, and grey literature and reference lists of included articles will also be searched. A two-stage screening process consisting of a title and abstract screening and a full-text review will be used to determine articles' eligibility. All eligible articles will be extracted, charted and evaluated using Assessing the MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews Version 2 (AMSTAR-2) critical appraisal tool. The charted data will be quantitatively analysed and summarised, and qualitatively analysed using narrative synthesis., Ethics and Dissemination: No primary data will be collected; therefore, ethics approval is not required. Findings will be disseminated through national and international conferences and publication in a peer-reviewed journal., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

This article offers the first critical review of focused ethnography, an increasingly popular research method across health disciplines. Focused ethnographers, we argue, exemplify the practice of methodological boundary work, defining their method in contrast to the 'traditional' ethnographic approach of anthropology and sociology. To examine this boundary work, we collected two samples of health research articles published over the last decade and compared how focused ethnographers and medical anthropologists described, justified, and practised ethnography. We found that the core characteristics most often asserted to differentiate focused ethnography from conventional ethnography were: a more limited study timeframe and scope; a limited subpopulation sample; more concentrated research questions; the inclusion of insider researchers; and more orientation towards applied results. We show, however, that these are imagined binaries that fail to map onto actual differences of practice in the two samples and which obscure many similarities between them. By contrast, we identified four alternative differences between the two methods of ethnography. These centre on understandings of 'research time'; the very meaning of ethnography; the relationship of researchers to 'data'; and the presumed best method of social intervention. We therefore define focused ethnography as a versatile method of ethnography that attends to specific epistemological expectations within the health sciences regarding valid proof and empirical description, the boundaries of research, the nature of research relationships, and the duty to improve biomedicine. Ultimately, our study highlights that methodological boundary-work matters, because assumed differences and unexpressed misunderstandings can prevent productive dialogue and fruitful collaboration between disciplines to address pressing health problems., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Persistent inequities in genomic medicine and research contribute to health disparities. This analysis uses a context-specific and equity-focused strategy to evaluate enrollment patterns for Genomic Answers for Kids (GA4K), a large, metropolitan-wide genomic study on children., Methods: Electronic health records for 2247 GA4K study participants were used to evaluate the distribution of individuals by demographics (race, ethnicity, and payor type) and location (residential address). Addresses were geocoded to produce point density and 3-digit zip code maps showing local and regional enrollment patterns. Health system reports and census data were used to compare participant characteristics with reference populations at different spatial scales., Results: Racial and ethnic minoritized and populations with low-income were underrepresented in the GA4K study cohort. Geographic variation demonstrates inequity in enrollment and participation among children from historically segregated and socially disadvantaged communities., Conclusion: Our findings illustrate inequity in enrollment related to both GA4K study design and structural inequalities, which we suspect may exist for similar US-based studies. Our methods provide a scalable framework for continually evaluating and improving study design to ensure equitable participation in and benefits from genomic research and medicine. The use of high-resolution, place-based data represents a novel and practical means of identifying and characterizing inequities and targeting community engagement., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Practical skills training is an essential part of medical education. An important example is the training of Basic Life Support (BLS) skills, which are key to improve patient outcomes in life-threatening situations. However, despite practical training, BLS performance is often sub-optimal even among healthcare professionals and medical students. Finding more effective training methods is therefore of high importance. A promising method to enhance learning outcomes is reflective practice. The goal of the present study was to evaluate whether a short reflective practice intervention following standard BLS training (Peyton's 4-step approach) improves BLS training outcomes, reflected in higher BLS performance and higher self-confidence to perform BLS., Method: 287 first-year medical students were randomly assigned to one of two BLS training conditions: 1) standard BLS training (ST), 2) ST followed by a 15-minute reflective practice exercise. Outcome parameters included objective BLS performance data assessed by a resuscitation manikin, and students' self-reported confidence in their BLS skills. Outcomes were assessed directly after the training (T0) and re-assessed one week later (T1). A two-way mixed model analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to examine the effect of the intervention on BLS performance and self-reported confidence. Significance was determined by two-sided 95% confidence intervals., Results: The intervention group performed significantly more effective compressions at T1 and began significantly faster with performing their first chest compression at T0 and T1, in comparison to the control group. No significant differences between study groups regarding their self-reported confidence to perform BLS were observed., Conclusion: This research shows that standard BLS training accompanied with a simple, cost-effective reflective practice exercise can improve learners' BLS skill acquisition and retention. This shows that reflective practice has the potential to enhance practical skills training in medicine; yet, more empirical studies are needed to examine its broader applicability., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Thommes et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

The use of the Delphi technique is prevalent across health sciences research, and it is used to identify priorities, reach consensus on issues of importance and establish clinical guidelines. Thus, as a form of expert opinion research, it can address fundamental questions present in healthcare. However, there is little guidance on how to conduct them, resulting in heterogenous Delphi studies and methodological confusion. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to introduce the use of the Delphi method, assess the application of the Delphi technique within health sciences research, discuss areas of methodological uncertainty and propose recommendations. Advantages of the use of Delphi include anonymity, controlled feedback, flexibility for the choice of statistical analysis, and the ability to gather participants from geographically diverse areas. Areas of methodological uncertainty worthy of further discussion broadly include experts and data management. For experts, the definition and number of participants remain issues of contention, while there are ongoing difficulties with expert selection and retention. For data management, there are issues with data collection, defining consensus and methods of data analysis, such as percent agreement, central tendency, measures of dispersion, and inferential statistics. Overall, the use of Delphi addresses important issues present in health sciences research, but methodological issues remain. It is likely that the aggregation of future Delphi studies will eventually pave the way for more comprehensive reporting guidelines and subsequent methodological clarity., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Complicated chemical reactions occur in the decoction of traditional Chinese medicines(TCMs) which features complex components, influencing the safety, efficacy, and quality controllability of TCMs. Therefore, it is particularly important to clarify the chemical reaction mechanism of TCMs in the decoction. This study summarized eight typical chemical reactions in the decoction of TCMs, such as substitution reaction, redox reaction, isomerization/stereoselective reaction, complexation, and supramolecular reaction. With the &quot;toxicity attenuation and efficiency enhancement&quot; of aconitines and other examples, this study reviewed the reactions in decoction of TCMs, which was expected to clarify the variation mechanisms of key chemical components in this process and to help guide medicine preparation and safe and rational use of medicine in clinical settings. The current main research methods for chemical reaction mechanisms of decoction of TCMs were also summed up and compared. The novel real-time analysis device of decoction system for TCMs was found to be efficient and simple without the pre-treatment of samples. This device provides a promising solution, which has great potential in quantity evaluation and control of TCMs. Moreover, it is expected to become a foundational and exemplary research tool, which can advance the research in this field.

Importance: Despite acknowledging that medical jargon should be avoided, health care practitioners frequently use it when communicating with patients., Objective: To characterize the understanding of common medical jargon terms by surveying a cross section of the general public and studying phrases that have established meanings in regular usage but different meanings in a medical context (eg, negative and positive test results)., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, participants indicated their understanding of phrases that may have different meanings in medicine than in colloquial English via a mix of short answer and multiple choice questions. Several questions included paired phrases to assess for differences in understanding with or without jargon. Volunteers were recruited at the 2021 Minnesota State Fair near St Paul, Minnesota. An electronic survey was given to a volunteer sample of 215 adults (>18 years) who did not work or train to work in the medical field and spoke and read English., Exposures: Completing a written or verbal survey., Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was an accurate understanding of the medical terminology. Free-text responses were coded by 2 researchers for comprehension. Secondary outcomes looked for associations between volunteer demographics and understanding., Results: The 215 respondents (135 [63%] female; mean [SD] age, 42 [17] years) demonstrated a varied ability to interpret medical jargon phrases. For example, most participants (207 [96%]) knew that negative cancer screening results meant they did not have cancer, but fewer participants (143 [79%]) knew that the phrase "your tumor is progressing" was bad news, or that positive lymph nodes meant the cancer had spread (170 [67%]). While most (171 [80%]) recognized that an unremarkable chest radiography was good news, only 44 participants (21%) correctly understood that a clinician saying their radiography was impressive was generally bad news. In each of the paired phrases comparing jargon vs nonjargon approaches, the nonjargon phrase was understood significantly better (P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that several common phrases are misunderstood when used in a medical setting, with the interpreted meaning frequently the exact opposite of what is intended.

Objectives: To determine whether the statistical fragility of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in high-impact journals has improved in the last decade and to perform an umbrella review of all published data on the Fragility Index (FI) across medical specialties., Study Design and Setting: The FI was calculated for all eligible RCTs published from 2014-2021 in the New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, the Journal of the American Medical Association, the British Medical Journal, and the Annals of Internal Medicine. Trials reporting dichotomous, statistically significant, superiority results were eligible. All previously published systematic reviews on the FI were included in the umbrella review and analyzed by medical (sub) specialty., Results: Of 2,544 screened RCTs, 643 were eligible for the FI analysis. These had a median sample size of 625 (interquartile range [IQR]: 265-2,056), a median FI of 12 (IQR: 3-28), and a median Fragility Quotient of 0.015 (IQR: 0.004-0.045). This is an improvement compared with the median FI of 8 (IQR: 3-18) of RCTs published a decade earlier in the same five journals (P < 0.001). The umbrella review included 57 publications across 15 different medical specialties, with a total of between 10 and 692 RCTs for each specialty. The median FI ranged between two and four for all disciplines., Conclusion: In the last decade, the median statistical robustness of RCTs published in high-impact journals has improved, yet the unchanged lower bound of the interquartile range reveals that statistical significance in 25% of trials is still dependent on three or less events. The umbrella review revealed that statistical fragility is prevalent across all medical specialties. The FI is an easy-to-understand metric that can be used to supplement reported P values and help readers look beyond merely reaching statistical significance., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The paramedic practice environment presents unique challenges to data documentation and access, as well as linkage to other parts of the healthcare system. Variable or unknown data quality can influence the validity of research in paramedicine. A number of database quality assessment (DQA) frameworks have been developed and used to evaluate data quality in other areas of healthcare. The extent these or other DQA practices have been applied to paramedic research is not known. Accordingly, this scoping review aims to describe the range, extent and nature of DQA practices within research in paramedicine., Methods and Analysis: This scoping review will follow established methods for the conduct (Johanna Briggs Institute; Arksey and O'Malley) and reporting (Preferred Reporting Items in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews) of scoping reviews. In consultation with a professional librarian, a search strategy was developed representing the applicable population, concept and context. This strategy will be applied to MEDLINE (National Library of Medicine), Embase (Elsevier), Scopus (Elsevier) and CINAHL (EBSCO) to identify studies published from 2011 through 2021 that assess paramedic data quality as a stated goal. Studies will be included if they report quantitative results of DQA using data that relate primarily to the paramedic practice environment. Protocols, commentaries, case studies, interviews, simulations and experimental data-processing techniques will be excluded. No restrictions will be placed on language. Study selection will be performed by two reviewers, with a third available to resolve conflicts. Data will be extracted from included studies using a data-charting form piloted and iteratively revised based on studies known to be relevant. Results will be summarised in a chart of study characteristics, DQA-specific outcomes and key findings., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval is not required. Results will be submitted to relevant conferences and peer-reviewed journals., Trial Registration: 10.17605/OSF.IO/Z287T., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Statistical analyses form a fundamental part of causal inference in the experimental sciences. The statistical paradigm most commonly taught to science students around the world is that of frequentism, with a particular emphasis on the null hypothesis significance testing borne by the work of Neyman and Pearson in the early 20th century. This paradigm is often lauded as being the most objective of methods and remains commonplace in scientific journals. Despite its widespread use-and, indeed, requirement for publication in some journals-this paradigm has received substantial criticism in recent decades, and its impact on scientific publishing has been subjected to deeper scrutiny in response to the replication crisis in the psychological and medical sciences. It has been posited that the increasing use of the Bayesian statistical paradigm, made more accessible through technological advances in the last few decades, may have an important role to play in rendering research and statistical inference more robust, transparent, and reproducible. These methods can have a steep learning curve, and thus this paper seeks to introduce those working within clinical laboratories to the Bayesian paradigm of statistical analysis and provides worked examples of the Bayesian analysis of data commonly encountered in laboratory medicine using freely available, open source tools., (© American Association for Clinical Chemistry 2022.)

The ICH E9(R1) addendum on Estimands and Sensitivity Analyses in Clinical Trials has introduced a new estimand framework for the design, conduct, analysis, and interpretation of clinical trials. We share Pharmaceutical Industry experiences of implementing the estimand framework in the first two years since the final guidance became available with key lessons learned and highlight what else needs to be done to continue the journey in embedding the estimand framework in clinical trials. Emerging best practices and points to consider on strategies for implementing a new estimand thinking process are provided. Whilst much of the focus of implementing ICH E9(R1) to date has been on defining estimands, we highlight some of the important aspects relating to the choice of statistical analysis methods and sensitivity analyses to ensure estimands can be estimated robustly with minimal bias. In particular, we discuss the implications if complete follow-up is not possible when the treatment policy strategy is being used to handle intercurrent events. ICH E9(R1) was introduced just before the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, but a positive outcome from the pandemic has been an acceleration in the adoption of the estimand framework, including differentiating intercurrent events related or not related to the pandemic. In summary, much has been learned on the estimand journey and continued sharing of case studies will help to further advance the understanding and increase awareness across all clinical researchers of the estimand framework., (© 2022. The Drug Information Association, Inc.)

Abstract: The development of high-quality research is desired in all healthcare fields. Experimental and nonexperimental designs are used to investigate the effect or association of an intervention and clinical or surrogate outcome. The aims of these methods are to improve knowledge and to develop new strategies to manage a disease or condition. Randomized clinical trials are considered one of the standard methods to test the efficacy of a new drug or intervention; however, they are costly, have reduced generalizability, and cannot be feasible in all scenarios. Well-designed observational studies can provide valuable information regarding exposure factor and the event under investigation. In physical and rehabilitation medicine, where complex procedures and multiple risk factors can be involved in the same disease, the use of observational study must be planned in detail and a priori to avoid overestimations. In this article, we will give an overview of the methods used for observational design studies in physical and rehabilitation medicine using clinical examples to illustrate each method. We will describe when it is appropriate and how to use the observational studies in different scenarios explaining how to deal with potential bias and confounders using the adequate design and statistical plan for the situation., Competing Interests: Financial disclosure statements have been obtained, and no conflicts of interest have been reported by the authors or by any individuals in control of the content of this article., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: The research agenda in pediatric hospital medicine has seldom considered the perspectives of young people, parents and caregivers, and health care professionals. Their perspectives may be useful in identifying questions on topics for research., Objective: To prioritize unanswered research questions in pediatric hospital medicine from the perspectives of young people, parents/caregivers, and health care professionals., Design, Setting, and Participants: Between August 4, 2020, and August 19, 2021, two online surveys and a virtual workshop were conducted, using modified Delphi technique and nominal group technique. Young people, parents/caregivers, and health care professionals with experiences in pediatric hospital medicine in Canada were included., Interventions: The established James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership method was used. In phase 1, a survey collected unanswered questions regarding pediatric hospital medicine via 3 open-ended questions. Survey responses were used to develop summary questions that went through an evidence-checking process. Unanswered questions were brought to a phase 2 interim prioritization survey. The top 10 unanswered research questions in pediatric hospital medicine were established at the final priority setting workshop., Main Outcomes and Measures: Survey responses, top 10 research questions., Results: The phase 1 survey was completed by 188 participants (148 of 167 [89%] females; 17 of 167 [10%] males; mean [SD] age, 39.5 [12.4] years) and generated 495 unanswered research questions and comments, of which 58 were deemed out of scope. The remaining 437 responses were grouped into themes (eg, communication, shared decision-making, health service delivery, and health service management) and then refined to 75 unanswered research questions. Of these 75, only 4 questions had sufficient evidence. To make the number of questions in phase 2 manageable, 21 questions submitted by only 1 respondent were eliminated. Fifty unanswered research questions were included in the phase 2 survey, which was completed by 201 participants (165 of 186 [89%] females; 19 of 186 [10%] males; mean [SD] age, 40.0 [11.0] years). A short list of 16 questions-the top 10 questions from patient partners (youths, parents/caregivers) and clinicians-was presented at the final priority setting workshop and the top 10 questions were prioritized. The top 10 questions focused on the care of special inpatient populations (eg, children with medical complexity), communication, shared decision-making, support strategies in the hospital, mental health supports, shortening length of stay, and supporting Indigenous patients, parents/caregivers, and families., Conclusions and Relevance: This patient-oriented pediatric hospital medicine priority setting partnership identified the most important unanswered research questions focused on the care of children in the hospital. These questions provide a possible roadmap for research on areas deemed important to young people, parents/caregivers, and clinicians.

Background: Statistical methods (SM) are a ubiquitous tool in research. This study aimed to review SM used in original article published in the Archives of Iranian Medicine (AIM) and assess their effect on article acceptance period., Methods: The original articles published in the period 2015-2019 from volumes 18 to 22 and issues 1 to 12 of the AIM were reviewed and six items such as SM, study design, statistical population, sample size, software and acceptance period were extracted. Mean (SD), frequency (percentage) and multiple response analysis (MRA) were used for description. The Kruskal-Wallis test and Spearman correlation coefficient were used for data analysis in SPSS 26 with significance level at 5%., Results: During the study period, 423 original articles were reviewed. The statistical population in most of them was patients (38.8% and 164 articles), and most studies (51.5% and 218 articles) had a sample size of less than 500 people. The study design in most of the articles was analytical-observational (55.1% and 233 articles), and 79.7% (337 articles) used SPSS for data analysis. The median (IQR) acceptance period was 194 (134.25). MRA results showed that the highest rate of use of SM was related to descriptive statistics (277 articles, 30.3%) and Chi square test (130 articles, 14.2%). In the last two years, the acceptance period had a declining trend. There was no significant relation between mentioned variables and acceptance period ( P >0.05)., Conclusion: Contrary to the researchers' misconceptions, the acceptance period was not affected by SM, study design, statistical population, sample size, or type of software., (2022 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.)

Introduction: Several economic evaluations of musculoskeletal physiotherapy have been published in the literature. We aim to provide an overview of these existing economic evaluations. This overview will be useful for healthcare funders in identifying studies matching their context. In addition, research gaps as well as literature extensive enough to be combined in a meta-analysis will be identified. This will support researchers in planning relevant research projects., Methods and Analyses: We will search in PubMed, EconLit and NHS-EED for relevant literature. Full economic evaluations of musculoskeletal physiotherapy interventions will be included, regardless of type, and economic evaluation perspective. Initial searches were performed on 7th October 2021. Study selection, data extraction and the quality evaluation will be conducted initially by two independent researchers. If their agreement is sufficient, one reviewer will proceed with the respected process. From the included studies, we will extract information on the publication year, the country of origin, the type of economical evaluation analyses and the specific musculoskeletal condition. An overview will be provided, concerning the distributions of the included studies regarding the extracted information. Furthermore, an evaluation of the individual study quality will be offered., Ethics and Dissemination: No ethical approval will be required for this systematic review, since no human participants are involved. We aim to distribute the findings of this review in a peer-reviewed journal, on national and international conferences, as well as via social media., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: A growing evidence base demonstrates the effectiveness of supported self-management in stroke for stroke survivors and their families. However, there is significant variation in its implementation in community stroke care and little understanding about how supported self-management works and is delivered across different settings, models used and contexts of community stroke rehabilitation., Methods and Analysis: Using a mixed method, realist approach across two phases, this protocol describes a study on community-based supported self-management. The aim is to identify the mechanisms and outcomes of supported self-management in stroke and to understand how supported self-management is implemented in different contexts of community stroke rehabilitation. Phase 1 involves (1) a realist synthesis, (2) a scoping and mapping of current community rehabilitation settings and (3) a Q-methodology study to develop initial programme theories about how community-based supported self-management works, for whom and in what contexts. Phase 2 involves realist informed interviews/focus groups with stroke survivors, community rehabilitation practitioners and team managers from across Scotland to test and refine programme theories and an explanatory model for how supported self-management works across different contexts of community-based stroke rehabilitation., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval and R&D approvals have been granted from East of Scotland Research Ethics Committee (REC reference number: 19/ES/0055) and participating NHS boards. An understanding of how, for whom and in what contexts community-based supported self-management works will help to strengthen its delivery in practice. Such an understanding will enable the design of context-specific recommendations for policy and practice that genuinely reflect the challenges in implementing supported self-management in community stroke care. Results will be disseminated to clinical partners working in community stroke rehabilitation, stroke survivors and families and to policymakers and third sector partners involved in the provision of long-term support for people affected by stroke., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42020166208., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Design: Meta-research., Objective: To compare the prevalence of reporting p values, effect estimates and clinical relevance in physiotherapy randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in the years 2000 and 2018., Methods: We performed a meta-research study of physiotherapy RCTs obtained from six major physiotherapy peer-reviewed journals that were published in the years 2000 and 2018. We searched the databases Embase, Medline and PubMed in May 2019, and extracted data on the study characteristics and whether articles reported on statistical significance, effect estimates and confidence intervals for baseline, between-group, and within-group differences, and clinical relevance. Data were presented using descriptive statistics and inferences were made based on proportions. A 20% difference between 2000 and 2018 was regarded as a meaningful difference., Results: We found 140 RCTs: 39 were published in 2000 and 101 in 2018. Overall, there was a high prevalence (>90%) of reporting p values for the main (between-group) analysis, with no difference between years. Statistical significance testing was frequently used for evaluating baseline differences, increasing from 28% in 2000 to 61.4% in 2018. The prevalence of reporting effect estimates, CIs and the mention of clinical relevance increased from 2000 to 2018 by 26.6%, 34% and 32.8% respectively. Despite an increase in use in 2018, over 40% of RCTs failed to report effect estimates, CIs and clinical relevance of results., Conclusion: The prevalence of using p values remains high in physiotherapy research. Although the proportion of reporting effect estimates, CIs and clinical relevance is higher in 2018 compared to 2000, many publications still fail to report and interpret study findings in this way., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AV was a member of the editorial board of the J Physiother (until 2020) and currently is an associate editor of the J Orthop Sports Phys Ther., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Understanding the impact different journal articles have in any academic field is important - particularly in emerging professions. A bibliometric analysis like this does not yet exist for paramedicine, despite the rapid increase in its primary literature. The objective of the present study was to identify and analyse the 100 top-cited articles about paramedicine., Methods: We searched the Scopus database in August 2020 for studies relating to paramedicine. After screening titles and abstracts, we extracted the citation count, journal name, publication year, and country of origin. We manually assessed whether the study was clinical or not, noted the sex of the authors, the profession of first and last authors and the study design used., Results: The median citation count for the top 100 papers in paramedicine was 58 (interquartile range 46-84 citations). The articles were published across 48 different journals, with Resuscitation and Prehospital Emergency Care being the two most frequent. The top-cited paramedic papers originated from 16 different countries and were written predominantly by medical doctors. Three quarters (73%) of the studies had a clinical focus, and a quarter (26%) were randomised controlled trials., Conclusions: The evolution of paramedicine towards professionalism is backed up by the growth of its own body of knowledge. This analysis of the 100 most cited studies in paramedicine is the first of its kind and highlights that paramedicine articles have a high citation count and are published across numerous journals, but with a relative lack of contribution from paramedic practitioners and female researchers., (© 2021 Australasian College for Emergency Medicine.)

Background: Use of race and ethnicity is common in medical tests and procedures, even though these categories are defined by sociological, historical, and political processes, and vary considerably in their definitions over time and place. Because all societies organize themselves around these constructs in some way, they are undeniable facets of the human experience, with myriad health consequences. In the biomedical literature, they are also commonly interpreted as representing biological heterogeneity that is relevant for health and disease., Content: We review the use of race and ethnicity in medical practice, especially in the USA, and provide 2 specific examples to represent a large number of similar instances. We then critique these uses along a number of different dimensions, including limitations in measurement, within- versus between-group variance, and implications for informativeness of risk markers for individuals, generalization from arbitrary or nonrepresentative samples, perpetuation of myths and stereotypes, instability in time and place, crowding out of more relevant risk markers, stigmatization, and the tainting of medicine with the history of oppression. We conclude with recommendations to improve practice that are technical, ethical, and pragmatic., Summary: Medicine has evolved from a mystical healing art to a mature science of human health through a rigorous process of quantification, experimentation, and evaluation. Folkloric traditions, such as race- and ethnic-specific medicine will fade from use as we become increasingly critical of outdated and irrational clinical practices and replace these with personalized, evidenced-based tests, algorithms, and procedures that privilege patients' individual humanity over obsolete and misleading labels., (© American Association for Clinical Chemistry 2021. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: This study aims to provide a cross-sectional view of craniofacial trials and to identify factors associated with completion, publication, and trial longevity., Materials and Methods: This is a cross-sectional study of cleft and craniofacial clinical trials registered with ClinicalTrials.gov between September 1999 and April 2020. Predictor variables included funding source, trial design, trial location, number of recruitment sites, and investigator specialty.Study outcomes were completion status, publication status, and trial duration. Univariate comparisons and multivariate regression models were calculated for each outcome., Results: The final sample included 179 clinical trials pertaining to craniofacial care. Nearly all trials were single-center (86.5%), and roughly half of trials were interventional (57.0%) or conducted in the United States (40.5%). No single specialty predominated, although plastic surgery (13.4%) was the most common investigator specialty. The completion rate was 82.7%, the publication rate was 40.8%, and the mean trial duration was 39.1 months. Interventional design (odds ratio = 0.30, P = 0.02) and United States location (odds ratio = 0.15, P < 0.01) were each independently associated with lower odds of trial completion. Trial longevity was independently associated with the National Institute of Health-funding (P < 0.01) and multicenter design (P < 0.01)., Conclusions: Craniofacial trials are multidisciplinary and have a high rate of completion. Although most existing trials were conducted at only a single-center, multicenter efforts significantly increased trial longevity without compromising completion and publication rates. Given the diverse array of conditions and lines of inquiry that compose craniofacial care, it is reassuring that collaboration did not negatively affect trial outcomes., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 by Mutaz B. Habal, MD.)

Objectives: To identify the engagement of health sciences librarians (HSLs) in open science (OS) through the delivery of library services, support, and programs for researchers., Methods: We performed a scoping review guided by Arksey and O'Malley's framework and Joanna Briggs' Manual for Scoping Reviews. Our search methods consisted of searching five bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LISTA, and Web of Science Core Collection), reference harvesting, and targeted website and journal searching. To determine study eligibility, we applied predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria and reached consensus when there was disagreement. We extracted data in duplicate and performed qualitative analysis to map key themes., Results: We included fifty-four studies. Research methods included descriptive or narrative approaches (76%); surveys, questionnaires, and interviews (15%); or mixed methods (9%). We labeled studies with one or more of FOSTER's six OS themes: open access (54%), open data (43%), open science (24%), open education (6%), open source (6%), and citizen science (6%). Key drivers in OS were scientific integrity and transparency, openness as a guiding principle in research, and funder mandates making research publicly accessible., Conclusions: HSLs play key roles in advancing OS worldwide. Formal studies are needed to assess the impact of HSLs' engagement in OS. HSLs should promote adoption of OS within their research communities and develop strategic plans aligned with institutional partners. HSLs can promote OS by adopting more rigorous and transparent research practices of their own. Future research should examine HSLs' engagement in OS through social justice and equity perspectives., (Copyright © 2021 Dean Giustini, Kevin B. Read, Ariel Deardorff, Lisa Federer, Melissa L. Rethlefsen.)

Background: Patient engagement is becoming more customary in medicine development. However, embedding it in organizational decision-making remains challenging, partly due to lack of agreement on its value and the means to evaluate it. The objective of this project was to develop a monitoring and evaluation framework, with metrics, to demonstrate impact and enhance learning., Methods: A consortium of five patient groups, 15 biopharmaceutical companies and two academic groups iteratively created a framework in a multi-phase participatory process, including analysis of its application in 24 cases., Results: The framework includes six components, with 87 metrics and 15 context factors distributed among (sub)components: (a) Input: expectations, preparations, resources, representativeness of stakeholders; (b) Activities/process: structure, management, interactions, satisfaction; (c) Learnings and changes; (d) Impacts: research relevance, study ethics and inclusiveness, study quality and efficiency, quality of evidence and uptake of products, empowerment, reputation and trust, embedding of patient engagement; (e) Context: policy, institutional, community, decision-making contextual factors. Case study findings show a wide variation in use of metrics. There is no 'one size fits all' set of metrics appropriate for every initiative or organization. Presented sample sets of metrics can be tailored to individual situations., Conclusion: Introducing change into any process is best done when the value of that change is clear. This framework allows participants to select what metrics they value and assess to what extent patient engagement has contributed., Patient Contribution: Five patient groups were involved in all phases of the study (design, conduct, interpretation of data) and in writing the manuscript., (© 2021 The Authors. Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Abstract: Measuring patient satisfaction scores and interpreting factors that impact their variation is of importance as scores influence various aspects of health care administration. Our objective was to evaluate if Press Ganey scores differ between medical specialties.New patient visits between January 2014 and December 2016 at a single tertiary academic center were included in this study. Press Ganey scores were compared between specialties using a multivariable logistic mixed effects model. Secondary outcomes included a comparison between surgical versus non-surgical specialties, and pediatric versus adult specialties. Due to the survey's high ceiling effect, satisfaction was defined as a perfect total score.Forty four thousand four hundred ninety six patients met inclusion criteria. Compared to internal medicine, plastic surgery, general surgery, dermatology, and family medicine were more likely to achieve a perfect overall score, as, with odds ratios of 1.46 (P = .02), 1.29 (P = .002), 1.22 (P = .004), and 1.16 (P = .02) respectively. Orthopaedics, pediatric medicine, pediatric neurology, neurology, and pain management were less likely to achieve satisfaction with odds ratios of 0.85 (P = .047), 0.71 (P < .001), 0.63 (P = .005), 0.57 (P < .001), and 0.51 (P = .006), respectively. Compared to pediatric specialties, adult specialties were more likely to achieve satisfaction (OR 1.73; P < .001). There were no significant differences between surgical versus non-surgical specialties.Press Ganey scores systematically differ between specialties within the studied institution. These differences should be considered by healthcare systems that use patient satisfaction data to modify provider reimbursement., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interests to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Narrative is now a commonly used term in medical education, ethics, and practice. Yet the concept of narrative defies singular definition, and definitional and functional pluralism about narrative in health care remains underappreciated. Diverse conceptualizations of narrative are generically grouped under umbrella terms like "medical humanities" or "narrative medicine." Such broad grouping risks undermining attention to relevant differences in use, meaning, or theory of narrative, overestimating the scope of certain criticisms of narrative practice or use, while overlooking more insidious concerns. This essay moves toward a conceptual clarification of narrative in medicine through a process of naming and sorting. Narrative conceptualizations are grouped into narrative premises which include descriptive and normative claims about narrative, and narrative practices, which put narrative into action as process, method, or tool. A philosophical pragmatist approach to narrative in medicine reworks narrative anxieties about fact and fiction, truth or falsehood, in terms of the justifiability of belief, the inclusion or exclusion of experience, and the rationality of practices that are never perfect and always up for revision.

Clinical Research is a complicated process within a research institution or a tertiary care hospital, almost all research project proposal needs to get an institutional review board (IRB) approval before any research activity takes place. IRB approval involves various processes, in form of sub-committees through which the proposal is reviewed. It is of utmost importance to understand the complete functioning of an IRB, in order to automate the various processes using a management system. The Research office entity forms the central body managing the IRB functions. It provides all sorts of administrative support as far as guidelines, documentation, communication and co-ordination is concerned; hence the research office forms the administrative wing of the IRB. Further the IRB has several sub-committees such as the Ethics Committee, Basic Research committee and the Animal Care and Use Committee. Each committee has a chairperson and several members from different specialty to cover all the aspects of research. Each committee may have its own process/workflow of approval, but usually the process of each committee is somewhat similar to each other. Apart from these workflows process the things that needs to be digitized would include researcher's profile, pre-award and post-award management, publication management, graduate student management and research analytics for the organization.

Research in the critically ill is complex by the heterogeneity of patients, the difficulties to achieve representative sample sizes and the number of variables simultaneously involved. However, the quantity and quality of records is high as well as the relevance of the variables used, such as survival. The methodological tools have evolved to offering new perspectives and analysis models that allow extracting relevant information from the data that accompanies the critically ill patient. The need for training in methodology and interpretation of results is an important challenge for the intensivists who wish to be updated on the research developments and clinical advances in Intensive Medicine., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier España, S.L.U. y SEMNIM. All rights reserved.)

Cognition could be seen as a cascade of top-down and bottom-up processes across behavioural and psychophysiological layers in a cognitive architecture. Typical behavioural measurements used in education do not give information about lower cognitive layers. Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) derived from electroencephalography allow researchers to look at and assess these lower cognitive layers in tasks pertinent for education, such as reading. This methodology can also record ERPs, which are neural responses linked with particular sensory, cognitive or motor events. Despite some limitations, ERPs are useful in educational settings because they allow to measure processes that are very fast, which is the case in many simple cognitive tasks. They are also very helpful when behavioural measurements cannot be used. However, a challenge in leveraging the potential of neuroscience in education is the requirement for interdisciplinary work. Besides, the technical aspects of the electroencephalogram (EEG) and ERP research represent a huge challenge for the typical educational researcher. The goal of this article is to present a brief contextualized view about the use of ERPs in educational research based on the book written by Luck (2014). This article presents the common challenges in designing ERPs experiments accompanied by a range of possible solutions. The approach is augmented with examples from a review of a field of educational research, which has drawn heavily on neuroscience experiments, namely, reading. This paper extends to current and cutting-edge research by concluding with emerging methods in education such as fixation-related potentials. The EEG can also be very useful to answer particular research questions in education because it provides continuous information in the timescale of milliseconds to assess cognition and affectivity.

Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) form the foundational background of modern medical practice. They are considered the highest quality of evidence, and their results help inform decisions concerning drug development and use, preventive therapies, and screening programs. However, the inputs that justify an RCT to be conducted have not been studied., Methods: We reviewed the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases across six specialties (Ophthalmology, Otorhinolaryngology (ENT), General Surgery, Psychiatry, Obstetrics-Gynecology (OB-GYN), and Internal Medicine) and randomly chose 25 RCTs from each specialty except for Otorhinolaryngology (20 studies) and Internal Medicine (28 studies). For each RCT, we recorded information relating to the justification for conducting RCTs such as average study size cited, number of studies cited, and types of studies cited. The justification varied widely both within and between specialties., Results: For Ophthalmology and OB-GYN, the average study sizes cited were around 1100 patients, whereas they were around 500 patients for Psychiatry and General Surgery. Between specialties, the average number of studies cited ranged from around 4.5 for ENT to around 10 for Ophthalmology, but the standard deviations were large, indicating that there was even more discrepancy within each specialty. When standardizing by the sample size of the RCT, some of the discrepancies between and within specialties can be explained, but not all. On average, Ophthalmology papers cited review articles the most (2.96 studies per RCT) compared to less than 1.5 studies per RCT for all other specialties., Conclusions: The justifications for RCTs vary widely both within and between specialties, and the justification for conducting RCTs is not standardized.

Around the year 1643, Joan Baptista van Helmont, a Flemish chemist, alchemist and physician who had devised what he claimed to be a new form of medicine, proposed a 'challenge' to traditional Galenic physicians to compare treatment of fever by traditional methods and by a regime which did not involve bloodletting and purging. Two groups of patients were to be treated and 'casting of lots' was to be used - in some way not specified in detail - to decide who received which treatment. This 'challenge' has been regarded as the first proposal for the use of randomisation in a clinical trial. This paper explains the background to the challenge and discusses what can be deduced from Helmont's text about the details of how he proposed that the 'trial' was to be carried out. It concludes that internal evidence in Helmont's writings makes it certain that no such 'trial' was ever conducted. It seems that the 'challenge' was probably a rhetorical device to support Helmont's vehement criticism of traditional Galenic medicine and its practitioners, and, in particular, toemphasise his absolute opposition to the use of bloodletting as a medicaltreatment. An appendix includes a short summary of Helmont's theories of the origins of disease and transcriptions of the passages of Helmont's Latin text translated in the article.

Objectives: Regression discontinuity (RD) designs allow for rigorous causal inference when patients receive a treatment based on scoring above or below a cutoff point on a continuously measured variable. We provide an introduction to the theory of RD and a systematic review and assessment of the RD literature in medicine, epidemiology, and public health., Study Design and Setting: We review the necessary conditions for valid RD results, provide a practical guide to RD implementation, compare RD to other methodologies, and conduct a systematic review of the RD literature in PubMed., Results: We describe five key elements of analysis all RD studies should report, including tests of validity conditions and robustness checks. Thirty two empirical RD studies in PubMed met our selection criteria. Most of the 32 RD articles analyzed the effectiveness of social policies or mental health interventions, with only two evaluating clinical interventions to improve physical health. Seven out of the 32 studies reported on all the five key elements., Conclusion: Increased use of RD provides an exciting opportunity for obtaining unbiased causal effect estimates when experiments are not feasible or when we want to evaluate programs under "real-life" conditions. Although treatment eligibility in medicine, epidemiology, and public health is commonly determined by threshold rules, use of RD in these fields has been very limited until now., (Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Enhanced recovery programmes (ERPs) have been developed over the past 10 years to improve patient outcomes and to accelerate recovery after surgery. The existing literature focuses on specific specialties, mainly colorectal surgery. The aim of this review was to investigate whether the effect of ERPs on patient outcomes varies across surgical specialties or with the design of individual programmes., Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to January 2013 for randomized or quasi-randomized trials comparing ERPs with standard care in adult elective surgical patients., Results: Thirty-eight trials were included in the review, with a total of 5099 participants. Study design and quality was poor. Meta-analyses showed that ERPs reduced the primary length of stay (standardized mean difference -1·14 (95 per cent confidence interval -1·45 to -0·85)) and reduced the risk of all complications within 30 days (risk ratio (RR) 0·71, 95 per cent c.i. 0·60 to 0·86). There was no evidence of a reduction in mortality (RR 0·69, 95 per cent c.i. 0·34 to 1·39), major complications (RR 0·95, 0·69 to 1·31) or readmission rates (RR 0·96, 0·59 to 1·58). The impact of ERPs was similar across specialties and there was no consistent evidence that elements included within ERPs affected patient outcomes., Conclusion: ERPs are effective in reducing length of hospital stay and overall complication rates across surgical specialties. It was not possible to identify individual components that improved outcome. Qualitative synthesis may be more appropriate to investigate the determinants of success., (© 2014 BJS Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Shared care (an enhanced information exchange over and above routine outpatient letters) is commonly used to improve care coordination and communication between a specialist and primary care services for people with long-term conditions. Evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of shared care is mixed. Informed decision-making for targeting shared care requires a greater understanding of how it works, for whom it works, in what contexts and why. This protocol outlines how realist review methods can be used to synthesise evidence on shared care for long-term conditions.A further aim of the review is to explore economic evaluations of shared care. Economic evaluations are difficult to synthesise due to problems in accounting for contextual differences that impact on resource use and opportunity costs. Realist review methods have been suggested as a way to overcome some of these issues, so this review will also assess whether realist review methods are amenable to synthesising economic evidence., Methods/design: Database and web searching will be carried out in order to find relevant evidence to develop and test programme theories about how shared care works. The review will have two phases. Phase 1 will concentrate on the contextual conditions and mechanisms that influence how shared care works, in order to develop programme theories, which partially explain how it works. Phase 2 will focus on testing these programme theories. A Project Reference Group made up of health service professionals and people with actual experience of long-term conditions will be used to ground the study in real-life experience. Review findings will be disseminated through local and sub-national networks for integrated care and long-term conditions., Discussion: This realist review will explore why and for whom shared care works, in order to support decision-makers working to improve the effectiveness of care for people outside hospital. The development of realist review methods to take into account cost and cost-effectiveness evidence is particularly innovative and challenging, and if successful will offer a new approach to synthesising economic evidence. This systematic review protocol is registered on the PROSPERO database (registration number: CRD42012002842).

In 1885, Daniel Carrion (1857-1885), a young Peruvian medical student, was trying to establish the prodromal symptoms of 'verruga disease', an infectious disease rare outside South America but endemic in parts of Peru. As part of this investigation he was inoculated with fluid from a verruga lesion from a patient with the chronic form of the disease. He recorded the clinical features which developed, including fever, malaise, arthralgia, vomiting and anaemia, and it became apparent that he had developed the anaemic, febrile, acute phase of the illness (known as Oroya fever). This did not however progress in his case to the chronic form of the disease, and he died a few weeks later on 5 October 1885. His sacrifice served to establish, supposedly, that Oroya fever and verruga disease had a common aetiology and his death stimulated further research into the cause, now established as the bacterium Bartonella bacilliformis. Carrion is considered a martyr of Peruvian medicine and 5 October has been designated Peruvian Medicine Day in his honour.