Search

Background: Recent analyses have shown that in health services research in Germany, healthcare organisations are often considered primarily as a study setting, without fully taking their complex organisational nature into account, neither theoretically nor methodologically. Therefore, an initiative was launched to analyse the state of Organisational Health Services Research (OHSR) in Germany and to develop a strategic framework and road map to guide future efforts in the field. This paper summarizes positions that have been jointly developed by consulting experts from the interdisciplinary and international scientific community., Methods: In July 2023, a scoping workshop over the course of three days was held with 32 (inter)national experts from different research fields centred around OHSR topics using interactive workshop methods. Participants discussed their perspectives on OHSR, analysed current challenges in OHSR in Germany and developed key positions for the field's development., Results: The seven agreed-upon key positions addressed conceptual and strategic aspects. There was consensus that the field required the development of a research agenda that can guide future efforts. On a conceptual level, the need to address challenges in terms of interdisciplinarity, terminology, organisation(s) as research subjects, international comparative research and utilisation of organisational theory was recognized. On a strategic level, requirements with regard to teaching, promotion of interdisciplinary and international collaboration, suitable funding opportunities and participatory research were identified., Conclusions: This position paper seeks to serve as a framework to support further development of OHSR in Germany and as a guide for researchers and funding organisations on how to move OHSR forward. Some of the challenges discussed for German OHSR are equally present in other countries. Thus, this position paper can be used to initiate fruitful discussions in other countries., Competing Interests: LA ist Vorstandsmitglied der DGMS und des DNVF. Sie ist Mitglied des Editorial Boards des Journal of Health Care Services and Implementation. JB erhält Fördermittel für mehrere OVF-Projekte in Australien und Europa. ME ist Vorsitzender der Society for Studies in Organizing Healthcare (SHOC). Die Arbeit des Instituts für Arbeitsmedizin, Sozialmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, wird durch einen zweckungebundenen Zuschuss des Arbeitgeberverbands der Metall- und Elektroindustrie Baden-Württemberg (Südwestmetall) unterstützt. Die übrigen Autor*innen erklären, dass keine Interessenkonflikte bestehen., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

The use of participatory design (PD) provides a framework for involving users in the process of developing healthcare technologies. Within PD, theoretical and methodological decisions need to be made. However, these decisions are often not adequately described or justified. This can lead to limited interpretability of the results. This paper has three objectives: First, to provide an overview of the key theoretical and methodological decisions that must be made in PD from the perspective of health services research; second, to describe the associated challenges and third, to describe action requirements for the future development of PD in health services research., Competing Interests: Die Autorinnen/Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

CAPNET is a multicenter child abuse pediatrics research network developed to support research that will make the medical care of potentially abused children more effective, safe, and fair. CAPNET currently collects detailed clinical data from child physical abuse evaluations from 11 leading pediatric centers across the U.S. From its inception, the goal of CAPNET was to support multiple research studies addressing the care of children undergoing evaluations for physical abuse and to create a flexible data collection and quality assurance system to be a resource for the wider community of child maltreatment l researchers. Annually, CAPNET collects rich clinical data on over 4000 children evaluated due to concerns for physical abuse. CAPNET's data are well-suited to studies improving the standardization, equity, and accuracy of evaluations in the medical setting when child physical abuse is suspected. Here we describe CAPNET's development, content, lessons learned, and potential future directions of the network., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Drs. Henry's, Campbell's and Wood's institutions have been paid in cases with concern for child maltreatment for which they have been subpoenaed to provide expert testimony. Dr. Lindberg has provided paid expert witness testimony in cases with concern for child maltreatment., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background and Objectives: Evidence suggests a significant prevalence of race and ethnic disparities in the United States among people with neurologic conditions including stroke, Alzheimer disease and related dementia (ADRD), Parkinson disease (PD), epilepsy, spinal cord injury (SCI), and traumatic brain injury (TBI). Recent neurologic research has begun the paradigm shift from observational health disparities research to intervention research in an effort to narrow the disparities gap. There is an evidence base that suggests that community engagement is a necessary component of health equity. While the increase in disparities focused neurologic interventions is encouraging, it remains unclear whether and how community-engaged practices are integrated into intervention design and implementation. The purpose of this scoping review was to identify and synthesize intervention studies that have actively engaged with the community in the design and implementation of interventions to reduce disparities in neurologic conditions and to describe the common community engagement processes used., Methods: Two databases, PubMed and CINAHL, were searched to identify eligible empirical studies within the United States whose focus was on neurologic interventions addressing disparities and using community engagement practices., Results: We identified 392 disparity-focused interventions in stroke, ADRD, PD, epilepsy, SCI, and TBI, of which 53 studies incorporated community engagement practices: 32 stroke studies, 15 ADRD, 2 epilepsy studies, 2 PD studies, 1 SCI study, and 1 TBI study. Most of the interventions were designed as randomized controlled trials and were programmatic in nature. The interventions used a variety of community engagement practices: community partners (42%), culturally tailored materials and mobile health (40%), community health workers (32%), faith-based organizations and local businesses (28%), focus groups/health need assessments (25%), community advisory boards (19%), personnel recruited from the community/champions (19%), and caregiver/social support (15%)., Discussion: Our scoping review reports that the proportion of neurologic intervention studies incorporating community engagement practices is limited and that the practices used within those studies are varied. The major practices used included collaboration with community partners and utilization of culturally tailored materials. We also found inconsistent reporting and dissemination of results from studies that implemented community engagement measures in their interventions. Future directions include involving the community in research early and continuously, building curricula that address challenges to community engagement, prioritizing the inclusion of community engagement reporting in peer-reviewed journals, and prioritizing and incentivizing research of subpopulations that experience disparities in neurologic conditions., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology.)

Background: Evidence on health inequalities has been growing over the past few decades, yet the capacity to produce research on health inequalities varies between countries worldwide and needs to be strengthened. More in-depth understanding of the sociohistorical, political and institutional processes that enable this type of research and related research capacity to be generated in different contexts is needed. A recent bibliometric analysis of the health inequalities research field found inequalities in the global production of this type of research. It also found the United Kingdom to be the second-highest global contributor to this research field after the United States. This study aims to understand why and how the United Kingdom, as an example of a "high producer" of health inequalities research, has been able to generate so much health inequalities research over the past five decades, and which main mechanisms might have been involved in generating this specific research capacity over time., Methods: We conducted a realist explanatory case study, which included 12 semi-structured interviews, to test six theoretical mechanisms that we proposed might have been involved in this process. Data from the interviews and grey and scientific literature were triangulated to inform our findings., Results: We found evidence to suggest that at least four of our proposed mechanisms have been activated by certain conditions and have contributed to the health inequalities research production process in the United Kingdom over the past 50 years. Limited evidence suggests that two new mechanisms might have potentially also been at play., Conclusions: Valuable learning can be established from this case study, which explores the United Kingdom's experience in developing a strong national health inequalities research tradition, and the potential mechanisms involved in this process. More research is needed to explore additional facilitating and inhibiting mechanisms and other factors involved in this process in this context, as well as in other settings where less health inequalities research has been produced. This type of in-depth knowledge could be used to guide the development of new health inequalities research capacity-strengthening strategies and support the development of novel approaches and solutions aiming to tackle health inequalities., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objective: To identify major research topics and exhibit trends in these topics in 15 health services research, health policy, and health economics journals over 2 decades., Data Sources: The study sample of 35,159 abstracts (1999-2020) were collected from PubMed for 15 journals., Study Design: The study used a 3-phase approach for text analyses: (1) developing the corpus of 40,618 references from PubMed (excluding 5459 of those without abstract or author information); (2) preprocessing and generating the term list using natural language processing to eliminate irrelevant textual data and identify important terms and phrases; (3) analyzing the preprocessed text data using latent semantic analysis, topic analyses, and multiple correspondence analysis., Principal Findings: Application of analyses generated 16 major research topics: (1) implementation/intervention science; (2) HIV and women's health; (3) outcomes research and quality; (4) veterans/military studies; (5) provider/primary-care interventions; (6) geriatrics and formal/informal care; (7) policies and health outcomes; (8) medication treatment/therapy; (9) patient interventions; (10) health insurance legislation and policies; (11) public health policies; (12) literature reviews; (13) cost-effectiveness and economic evaluation; (14) cancer care; (15) workforce issues; and (16) socioeconomic status and disparities. The 2-dimensional map revealed that some journals have stronger associations with specific topics. Findings were not consistent with previous studies based on user perceptions., Conclusion: Findings of this study can be used by the stakeholders of health services research, policy, and economics to develop future research agendas, target journal submissions, and generate interdisciplinary solutions by examining overlapping journals for particular topics., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Narrative medicine is a humanities-based discipline that posits that attention to the patient narrative and the collaborative formation of a narrative between the patient and provider is essential for the provision of health care. In this Special Article, we review the basic theoretical constructs of the narrative medicine discipline and apply them to the perioperative setting. We frame our discussion around the 4 primary goals of the current iteration of the perioperative surgical home: enhancing patient-centered care, embracing shared decision making, optimizing health literacy, and avoiding futile surgery. We then examine the importance of incorporating narrative medicine into medical education and residency training and evaluate the literature on such narrative medicine didactics. Finally, we discuss applying health services research, specifically qualitative and mixed methods, in the rigorous evaluation of the efficacy and impact of narrative medicine clinical programs and medical education curricula., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Nathan Ford and co-authors discuss the systematic identification of research gaps in improving HIV service delivery., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: EG is a member of the Editorial Board of PLOS Medicine. The remaining authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Competing Interests: J.B. and R.K.H. work on contracts to improve care transitions quality and reduce hospital readmissions funded by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services. J.B. received funding from the University of Kentucky as a coprinciple investigator on the PCORI-funded Project ACHIEVE. S.F.J. declares no conflict of interest.

Background: The National Institute on Aging (NIA), in conjunction with the Department of Health and Human Services as part of the National Alzheimer's Project Act (NAPA), convened a 2020 Dementia Care, Caregiving, and Services Research Summit Virtual Meeting Series. This review article summarizes three areas of emerging science that are likely to grow in importance given advances in measurement, technologies, and diagnostic tests that were presented at the Summit., Results: Dr. Cassel discussed novel ethical considerations that have resulted from scientific advances that have enabled early diagnosis of pre-clinical dementia. Dr. Monin then summarized issues regarding emotional experiences in persons with dementia and their caregivers and care partners, including the protective impact of positive emotion and heterogeneity of differences in emotion by dementia type and individual characteristics that affect emotional processes with disease progression. Finally, Dr. Jared Benge provided an overview of the role of technologies in buffering the impact of cognitive change on real-world functioning and their utility in safety and monitoring of function and treatment adherence, facilitating communication and transportation, and increasing access to specialists in underserved or remote areas., Conclusions: National policy initiatives, supported by strong advocacy and increased federal investments, have accelerated the pace of scientific inquiry and innovation related to dementia care and services but have raised some new concerns regarding ethics, disparities, and attending to individual needs, capabilities, and preferences., (© 2021 The American Geriatrics Society.)

Background: Young people's advisory groups (YPAGs) for research are comprised of children or adolescents who work with researchers to shape different stages of the research process. Their involvement is expected to ensure studies better reflect the preferences and needs of targeted youth populations. However, despite their increasing use in health research, there is little systematic evidence on the methods and impacts associated with YPAGs., Method: To address this gap, we conducted a scoping review of YPAGs in youth-focused health studies. We systematically searched MEDLINE for empirical studies in populations between 12 years and 18 years of age published in 2019. If a potential YPAG was identified, authors were contacted for additional information about the activities and level of involvement of the YPAG., Findings: Of all studies that collected primary data from persons aged 12-18 years, only 21 studies reported using youth advice during their research. This represents less than 1% of all published empirical child and adolescent studies. There was variation in the type of research activity undertaken by YPAGs and their level of involvement. Most studies involved YPAGs in co-production of research design and/or in dissemination activities. The majority of authors that responded were positive about the impact of YPAGs., Interpretation: Recommendations for consistent reporting of YPAG involvement in empirical studies include reporting on the match between YPAG and study populations, frequency/format of meetings, and the nature and level of involvement., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Specialty centers improve care for patients with Down syndrome. The cohort of adults with Down syndrome is increasing, but the capacity for specialty centers to meet their medical care needs is unknown. Electronic survey of staff of specialty clinics for adults with Down syndrome was conducted. Review of online clinic listings, and calculation of the number of adults with Down syndrome were performed. Analysis identified the percent of adults with Down syndrome who could have their medical care needs met in a current specialty clinic. Fourteen specialty clinics report providing care for 4038 adults with Down syndrome. Respondents reported gaps in care including: limitations of existing clinics, need for additional clinics, and knowledgeable health professionals in Down syndrome. Survey-respondent clinic capacity would meet needs of 3% of adults with Down syndrome. Twenty-five clinics for adults with Down syndrome were listed online with capacity to care for 6517 adults with Down syndrome meeting the needs of 5% of the population. Additional clinic capacity is needed to meet the needs of adults with Down syndrome. Survey of existing clinics provides guidance to create additional clinics, including: must-have team members, current sources of clinic financial support, and gaps in current clinical care., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Background: The U.S. health care system faces increasing pressures for reform. The importance of nurses in addressing health care delivery challenges cannot be overstated., Purpose: To present a Nursing Health Services Research (NHSR) agenda for the 2020s., Method: A meeting of an interdisciplinary group of 38 health services researchers to discuss five key challenges facing health care delivery (behavioral health, primary care, maternal/neonatal outcomes, the aging population, health care spending) and identify the most pressing and feasible research questions for NHSR in the coming decade., Findings: Guided by a list of inputs affecting health care delivery (health information technology, workforce, delivery systems, payment, social determinants of health), meeting participants identified 5 to 6 research questions for each challenge. Also, eight cross-cutting themes illuminating the opportunities and barriers facing NHSR emerged., Discussion: The Agenda can act as a foundation for new NHSR - which is more important than ever - in the 2020s., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cerebrovascular disease is the second leading cause of death worldwide and provides a heavy burden of disease in Southeast Asia (SEA). Contribution to the collective knowledge of this disease is necessary to address practice and treatment disparities. There is limited data on research productivity in the region. This study aimed to determine research productivity on stroke and other cerebral and spinal vascular diseases among the SEA countries and determine its relationship with bibliometrics, socioeconomic parameters, healthcare delivery indices, and burden of disease., Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using five major healthcare databases. We included studies published until June 2020 on cerebral and spinal vascular disease with at least one author from SEA. Country-specific socioeconomic parameters, the burden of disease, healthcare delivery indices, and the number of neurologists were collected from international databases and published data. Correlational analysis was done on bibliometric indices and collected data., Results: A total of 2577 articles were included. Singapore had the most publications (n=1095, 42.5%) and citations (PlumX n=16,592, 55.2%; Scopus n=22,351, 56.7%). Gross domestic product per capita, percent gross domestic product for research and development, universal health care effective coverage index overall and for stroke treatment, and the number of neurologists had a positive correlation to bibliometric indices., Conclusions: There is a disparity in stroke research productivity among high-income and low-income countries in SEA. Priority must be given to scientific research output and its role in socioeconomic development and policy formulation., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have nothing to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Based on action research as a practitioner-involving approach, this article communicates the findings of a two-year study on implementing patient participation as an empowering learning process for both patients and rehabilitation nurses. At a rehabilitation facility for patients who have sustained spinal cord injuries, eight nurses were engaged throughout the process aiming at improving patient participation. The current practice was explored to understand possibilities and obstacles to patient participation. Observations, interviews and logbooks, creative workshops and reflective meetings led to the development and testing of four new rehabilitation initiatives aimed at enhancing patient participation. This study suggests that skills of critical reflection from action research toolbox shed light on both the notion of patient participation and caring in nursing rehabilitation. By actively involving nurses in research, the knowledge development stems from practice and the solutions therefore became practice-oriented. In addition, the personal and professional development experienced by the involved nurses points to a secondary gain in the form of an analytical and reflective approach to complex issues in relation to patient participation, rehabilitation in general and the individual nurses' sense of professional pride., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background : Never before have clinical trials drawn as much public attention as those testing interventions for COVID-19. We aimed to describe the worldwide COVID-19 clinical research response and its evolution over the first 100 days of the pandemic. Methods: Descriptive analysis of planned, ongoing or completed trials by April 9, 2020 testing any intervention to treat or prevent COVID-19, systematically identified in trial registries, preprint servers, and literature databases. A survey was conducted of all trials to assess their recruitment status up to July 6, 2020. Results: Most of the 689 trials (overall target sample size 396,366) were small (median sample size 120; interquartile range [IQR] 60-300) but randomized (75.8%; n=522) and were often conducted in China (51.1%; n=352) or the USA (11%; n=76). 525 trials (76.2%) planned to include 155,571 hospitalized patients, and 25 (3.6%) planned to include 96,821 health-care workers. Treatments were evaluated in 607 trials (88.1%), frequently antivirals (n=144) or antimalarials (n=112); 78 trials (11.3%) focused on prevention, including 14 vaccine trials. No trial investigated social distancing. Interventions tested in 11 trials with >5,000 participants were also tested in 169 smaller trials (median sample size 273; IQR 90-700). Hydroxychloroquine alone was investigated in 110 trials. While 414 trials (60.0%) expected completion in 2020, only 35 trials (4.1%; 3,071 participants) were completed by July 6. Of 112 trials with detailed recruitment information, 55 had recruited <20% of the targeted sample; 27 between 20-50%; and 30 over 50% (median 14.8% [IQR 2.0-62.0%]). Conclusions: The size and speed of the COVID-19 clinical trials agenda is unprecedented. However, most trials were small investigating a small fraction of treatment options. The feasibility of this research agenda is questionable, and many trials may end in futility, wasting research resources. Much better coordination is needed to respond to global health threats., Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed., (Copyright: © 2020 Janiaud P et al.)

Background: Primary care practice-based research networks (PBRNs) are critical laboratories for generating evidence from real-world settings, including studying natural experiments. Primary care's response to the novel coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic is arguably the most impactful natural experiment in our lifetime. EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF COVID-19: We briefly describe the OCHIN PBRN of community health centers (CHCs), its partnership with implementation scientists, and how we are leveraging this infrastructure and expertise to create a rapid research response evaluating how CHCs across the country responded to the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 RESEARCH ROADMAP: Our research agenda focuses on asking: How has care delivery in CHCs changed due to COVID-19? What impact has COVID-19 had on the delivery of preventive services in CHCs? Which PBRN services (e.g., data surveillance, training, evidence synthesis) are most impactful to real-world practices? What decision-making strategies were used in the PBRN and its practices to make real-time changes in response to the pandemic? What critical factors in successfully and sustainably transforming primary care are illuminated by pandemic-driven changes?, Discussion and Conclusions: PBRNs enable real-world evaluation of practice change and natural experiments, and thus are ideal laboratories for implementation science research. We present a real-time example of how a PBRN Implementation Laboratory activated a response to study a historic natural experiment, to help other PBRNs charting a course through this pandemic., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None., (© Copyright 2020 by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic and the UK government's subsequent coronavirus action plan have fundamentally impacted on every aspect of healthcare. One area that is severely affected is ear, nose and throat (ENT)/laryngology where speech and language therapists (SLTs) engage in a diverse range of practice with patients with a range of conditions, including voice disorders, airway problems, and head and neck cancers (HNCs). A large majority of these patients are in high-risk categories, and many specialized clinical practices are vulnerable. In addition, workforce and research issues are challenged in both the immediate context and the future., Aims: To discuss the threats and opportunities from the COVID-19 pandemic for SLTs in ENT/laryngology with specific reference to clinical practice, workforce and research leadership., Methods & Procedures: The relevant sections of the World Health Organisation's (WHO) health systems building blocks framework (2007) were used to structure the study. Expert agreement was determined by an iterative process of multiple-group discussions, the use of all recent relevant policy documentation, and other literature and shared documentation/writing. The final paper was verified and agreed by all authors., Main Contribution: The main threats to ENT/laryngology SLT clinical services include increased patient complexity related to COVID-19 voice and airway problems, delayed HNC diagnosis, reduced access to instrumental procedures and inequitable care provision. The main clinical opportunities include the potential for new modes of service delivery and collaborations, and harnessing SLT expertise in non-instrumental assessment. There are several workforce issues, including redeployment (and impact on current services), training implications and psychological impact on staff. Workforce opportunities exist for service innovation and potential extended ENT/SLT practice roles. Research is threatened by a reduction in immediate funding calls and high competition. Current research is affected by very limited access to participants and the ability to conduct face-to-face and instrumental assessments. However, research opportunities may result in greater collaboration, and changes in service delivery necessitate robust investigation and evaluation. A new national set of research priorities is likely to emerge., Conclusions & Implications: The immediate impact of the pandemic has resulted in major disruption to all aspects of clinical delivery, workforce and research for ENT/laryngology SLT. It is unclear when any of these areas will resume operations and whether permanent changes to clinical practice, professional remits and research priorities will follow. However, significant opportunity exists in the post-COVID era to re-evaluate current practice, embrace opportunities and evaluate new ways of working. What this paper adds What is already known on the subject ENT/laryngology SLTs manage patients with a range of conditions, including voice disorders, airway problems and HNCs. The diverse scope of clinical practice involves highly specialized assessment and treatment practices in patients in high-risk categories. A large majority of active research projects in this field are patient focused and involve instrumental assessment. The COVID-19 pandemic has created both opportunities and threats for ENT SLT clinical services, workforce and research. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study provides a discussion of the threats and opportunities from the COVID-19 pandemic for ENT/laryngology SLT with specific reference to clinical practice, workforce and research leadership. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in major disruption to all aspects of clinical delivery, workforce and research for ENT/laryngology SLT. Changes to clinical practice, professional remits and research priorities are of indeterminant duration at this time, and some components could be permanent. Significant clinical practice, workforce and research opportunities may exist in the post-COVID era., (© 2020 The Authors. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists.)

The COVID-19 outbreak is a stark reminder of the ongoing challenge of emerging and reemerging disease, the human cost of pandemics and the need for robust research. 1 For primary care, the advent of COVID-19 has forced an unprecedented wave of practice change. In turn, Practice-Based Research Networks (PBRNs) must rapidly pivot to address the changing environment and the critical challenges faced by primary care. The pandemic has also impacted the ability of PBRNs to deploy traditional research methods such as face-to-face patient and provider interactions, practice facilitation, and stakeholder engagement. Providers need more relevant, patient-centered evidence and the skills to effect change. These skills will become more important than ever as primary care practices evolve in response to the current COVID-19 pandemic and the disparities in health outcomes highlighted by COVID-19 and the global Black Lives Matter social movement for justice. Throughout this issue, authors detail the work conducted by PBRNs that demonstrate many of these evolving concepts. Articles explore how PBRNs can evaluate COVID-19 in primary care, the role of PBRNs in quality improvement, stakeholder engagement, prevention and chronic care management, and patient safety in primary care., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: The author has no conflicts of interest., (© Copyright 2020 by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

This applied paper is intended to serve as a "how to" guide for public health researchers, practitioners, and policy makers who are interested in building conceptual models to convey their ideas to diverse audiences. Conceptual models can provide a visual representation of specific research questions. They also can show key components of programs, practices, and policies designed to promote health. Conceptual models may provide improved guidance for prevention and intervention efforts if they are based on frameworks that integrate social ecological and biological influences on health and incorporate health equity and social justice principles. To enhance understanding and utilization of this guide, we provide examples of conceptual models developed by the P revention of L ower U rinary Tract S ymptoms (PLUS) Research Consortium. PLUS is a transdisciplinary U.S. scientific network established by the National Institutes of Health in 2015 to promote bladder health and prevent lower urinary tract symptoms, an emerging public health and prevention priority. The PLUS Research Consortium is developing conceptual models to guide its prevention research agenda. Research findings may in turn influence future public health practices and policies. This guide can assist others in framing diverse public health and prevention science issues in innovative, potentially transformative ways.

Background: People living in rural and remote communities commonly experience significant health disadvantages. Geographical barriers and reduced specialist and generalist services impact access to care when compared with metropolitan context. Innovative models of care have been developed for people living with chronic diseases in rural areas with the goal of overcoming these inequities. The aim of this paper was to describe the characteristics and outcomes of studies investigating innovative models of care for people living with chronic disease in rural areas of developed countries where a metropolitan comparator was included., Methods: An integrative systematic review was undertaken. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) method was used to understand the empirical and theoretical data on clinical outcomes for people living with chronic disease in rural compared with metropolitan contexts and their models of care in Australia, New Zealand, United States, Canada and the United Kingdom., Results: Literature searching revealed 620 articles published in English between 1st January 2000 and 31st March 2019. One hundred sixty were included in the review including 68 from the United States, 59 from Australia and New Zealand (5), 21 from Canada and 11 from the United Kingdom and Ireland. 53% (84) focused on cardiovascular disease; 27% (43) diabetes mellitus; 8% (12) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; and 13% (27) chronic kidney disease. Mortality was only reported in 10% (16) of studies and only 18% (29) reported data on Indigenous populations., Conclusions: This integrated review reveals that the published literature on common chronic health issues pertaining to rural and remote populations is largely descriptive. Only a small number of publications focus on mortality and comparative health outcomes from health care models in both urban and non-urban populations. Innovative service models and telehealth are together well represented in the published literature but data on health outcomes is relatively sparse. There is significant scope for further directly comparative studies detailing the effect of service delivery models on the health outcomes of urban and rural populations. We believe that such data would further knowledge in this field and help to break the deadly synergy between increased rurality and poorer outcomes for people with chronic disease.

Introduction: To study diversity of researchers and barriers to success among Emergency Medicine Foundation (EMF) grant recipients in the last 10 years., Methods: EMF grant awardees were approached to complete a brief survey, which included demographics, queries related to contributions to the literature, success in obtaining grants, and any perceived barriers they encountered., Results: Of the 342 researchers contacted by email, a total of 147 completed the survey for a response rate of 43%. The respondents were predominately mid to late career white-male-heterosexual-Christian with an average age of 44 years (range 25-69 years of age). With regards to training and education, the majority of respondents (50%) were either Associate or Professor clinical rank (8% instructor/resident/fellow and 31% Assistant). Sixty-two percent of the respondents reported perceived barriers to career advancement since completion of residency. The largest perceived barrier to success was medical specialty (26%), followed by gender (21%) and age (16%)., Conclusion: Our survey of EMF grant recipients in the last 10 years shows a considerable lack of diversity. The most commonly perceived barriers to career advancement by this cohort were medical specialty, gender, and age. An opportunity exists for further definition of barriers and development of mechanisms to overcome them, with a goal of increased success for those that are underrepresented.

There are relevant dimensions from a gender perspective related to  therapeutic effort. To illustrate and discuss possible gender bias related  to medicines, through the consumption analysis in women, the  prescription of biological drugs according to sex, the potential gender  inequality in adverse drug reactions, and research with clinical trials, as  well as the decisions of international institutions in the marketing of  medicinal products. There is greater tendency to prescribe pain  relievers, regardless of pain, and drugs for low intensity depressive  symptoms in women than in men. The opposite occurs in the  prescription of statins and adequate doses, and with the greater  probability of prescribing anti-tumor necrosis factor in men than in  women with ankylosing spondylitis, despite a similar disease burden.  Adverse drug reactions are observed more frequently in women than in  men, where determinants such as body weight are having little influence on the dosage. It is currently scarcely considered in the prescription that women have differences in the activity of cytochrome CYPP450 enzymes, which can affect the liver's metabolism rate. There  are even immunological, genetic and epigenetic effects (due to heredity  and uneven gene dosing located in the X and Y chromosomes) that can  influence these differences by sex. Finally, through cases of hormonal  therapy clinical trials, a drug for women's inhibited sexual desire and a  contraceptive for men, gender bias and stereotypes are shown to  influence a potential generation of inequalities, especially in adverse  drug reactions to the detriment of women. In conclusion, health  professionals frequently attribute physical symptoms to women's  emotionality, influencing their greater prescription of symptomatic drugs. Whether the same reason influences the lower prescription of  therapeutic drugs in women than in men should be analyzed. There are  biological determinants to consider due to their influence on a greater pharmacological toxicity in women. Clinical trials should improve  according to the gender recommendations by the Food and Drugs  Administration., (Copyright AULA MEDICA EDICIONES 2014. Published by AULA MEDICA. All rights reserved.)

Health registries could be used to analyze questions concerning routine practice in healthcare. Therefore, registries are a core method in health services research. The German Network for Health Services Research (Deutsches Netzwerk Versorgungsforschung, DNVF) promotes the quality of registries by scientific exchange, organization of advanced training, and recommendations in the form of a memorandum "Registry for Health Services Research". The current recommendations are an update of the memorandum's first version of 2010. The update describes the capabilities and aims of registries in health services research. Furthermore, it illustrates the state-of-the-art in designing and implementing health registries. The memorandum provides developers the methodological basis to ensure high quality health registries. It further provides users of health registries with insights that enable assessing the quality of data and results of health registries. Finally, funding agencies and health policy actors can use the quality criteria to establish a framework for the financing and legislative requirements for health registries. The memorandum provides first a definition of health registries and presents an overview of their utility in health services research and health care improvement. Second, several areas of methodological importance for the development and operation of health registries are presented. This includes the conceptual and preliminary design, implementation, technical organization of a health registry, statistical analysis, reporting of results, and data protection. From these areas, criteria are deduced to allow the assessment of the quality of a health registry. Finally, a checklist is presented., Competing Interests: Prof. Schmitt ist Forschungsleiter des Deutschen Neurodermitisregisters TREATgermany. Er erhielt institutionelle finanzielle Unterstützung für wissenschaftliche Studien von den Firmen Novartis, Sanofi, ALK, Pfizer und Wyeth. Alle weiteren Autoren erklären, dass keine Interessenkonflikte bestehen., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Background and Aim: Patient and public involvement (PPI) has potential to enhance health-care research and is increasingly an expectation, particularly for many funding bodies. However, PPI can be tokenistic, which may limit this potential. Furthermore, few studies report PPI processes and impact, particularly in doctoral research studies, which are seldom reported in peer-reviewed papers. The aim of this paper was to explore the impact of PPI on two health-related doctoral research studies and identify how PPI could be used meaningfully at this level., Method: The PPI processes included (a) involvement of two 'Research Buddies' who informed the research design and ensured implementation of a booklet intervention was feasible for family carers, (b) data analysis workshops with 'Research Buddies' to identify emerging themes from practitioner interviews, (c) public and stakeholder involvement who informed data collection tool design, and the design of an intervention to help people with obesity who attend weight loss groups., Findings: The application of PPI enhanced both doctoral studies by assisting data analysis; problem solving and improving recruitment rates; improving the usability and appeal of data collection tools and interventions; and developing implementation strategies. Patient and public involvement was considered a rewarding experience for both researchers and PPI contributors., Conclusion: This paper demonstrates the value of PPI in doctoral research in relation to its impact on research processes, researchers and contributors. We also present recommendations on how PPI could be incorporated into future doctoral research, including resources required, planning PPI processes and involving PPI contributors in all stages of research., (© 2019 The Authors Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Stakeholder participation optimizes health planning, fostering the acceptability and integration of new health services. Collaborative approaches may help overcome existing challenges in the development, implementation and evaluation of community pharmacy services (CPSs). Stakeholder analyses lay the foundation for building collaboration in the integrated delivery of health care., Objectives: This stakeholder analysis was performed to organize a collaborative initiative to develop a CPS aimed at preventing cardiovascular diseases in Andalucía (Spain). It aimed to identify stakeholders, differentiate/categorize them, and analyze stakeholder relationships., Method: Stakeholders were identified using the snowballing technique. To differentiate/categorize stakeholders and analyze the relationships (i.e., collaboration) an online web-based questionnaire was sent to 186 stakeholders. Stakeholders were asked for: (1) their influence, interest and attitude toward the initiative; (2) stakes/interests; (3) capacity to contribute to the initiative; (4) desire for involvement; (5) concerns; (6) whom they considered a key stakeholder; and (7) the level of collaboration they had with other stakeholders. Data analysis combined descriptive qualitative content analysis, descriptive quantitative analysis and social network analysis., Results: Of the 186 stakeholders approached, 96 (51.6%) participated. The identification process yielded 217 stakeholders (individuals, organizations or collectives), classified into 10 groups. Fifty-seven stakeholders were considered critical to the intended initiative. Most participant stakeholders supported the initiative and were willing to collaborate in the development of the CPS. Public health and science were the main driving interests. A collaboration network existed between the 96 stakeholders., Conclusion: This study revealed the magnitude of the social system surrounding the development of a CPS aimed at preventing cardiovascular disease. A large array of stakeholders was identified and analyzed, and a group of critical stakeholders selected. Stakeholder characteristics such as attitude toward the initiative, potential contribution, desire for involvement, and the existing collaboration network, provided complementary information that was helpful for planning the process and stakeholder engagement., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The field of health policy and systems research (HPSR) has grown rapidly in the past decade. Examining recently aggregated data from the Global Symposia on Health Systems Research, a key global fora for HPSR convened by the largest international society-Health Systems Global (HSG)-provides opportunities to enhance existing research on HPSR capacity using novel analytical techniques. This addresses the demand not only to map the field but also to examine potential predictors of acceptance to, and participation at, these global conferences to inform future work and strategies in promoting HPSR. We examined data from the abstracts submitted for two Global Symposia on Health Systems Research in 2016 and 2018 by type of institution, countries, regional groupings and gender. After mapping hotspot areas for HPSR production, we then examined how the corresponding author's characteristics were associated with being accepted to present at the Global Symposia. Our findings showed that submissions for the Global Symposia increased by 12% from 2016 to 2018. Submissions increased across all participant groups, in particular, the for-profit organizations and research/consultancy firms showing the highest increases, at 58% for both. We also found reduced submissions from high-income countries, whereas submissions from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, increased substantially revealing the inclusivity values of Symposium organizers. Submissions increased to a larger extent among women than men. Being a woman, coming from a high-income country and having multiple abstracts submitted were found to be significant predictors for an abstract to be accepted and presented in the Symposia. Findings provide critical baseline information on the extent of interest and engagement in a global forum of various institutions and researchers in HPSR that can be useful for setting future directions of HSG and other similar organizations to support the advancement of HPSR worldwide., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: In 2014, Grov et al published a comprehensive review cataloguing both men who have sex with men's (MSM's) sexual behavior transitions in online environments from the 1990s through 2013, as well as researchers' efforts in tandem to use the internet to engage MSM into research, treatment, and prevention., Methods: In this article, we discuss historical events and research having occurred in the half decade since the Grov et al publication., Results: Notable transitions include MSM's expanded use of geosocial networking apps, as well as other forms of social media accessed primarily through mobile devices, as well as the addition of biomedical prevention strategies (eg, pre-exposure prophylaxis and undetectable = untransmittable) to the proverbial HIV prevention toolkit. In tandem, researchers have rapidly expanded their employment of internet-mediated methods for the recruitment and engagement of key populations for HIV research, treatment, and prevention. In this article, we discuss methodological considerations for using the internet to conduct HIV prevention research with MSM: (1) sources of recruitment (eg, geosocial apps, Facebook, crowdsourced online panels); (2) design (eg, cross sectional, longitudinal, diaries); (3) incentives (including disincentivizing fraudulent participants and/or spam bots); (4) confidentiality; and (5) representativeness., Conclusion: We conclude by discussing future directions in HIV prevention research in light of forthcoming technologies such as fifth generation (5G) mobile networks, combined use of self-collected biological data alongside self-report, and the utility of metadata and metaresearch to document, evaluate, and inform best practices.

Rare diseases (RDs) are defined by the European Union as life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions, with a prevalence lower than 5 per 10 000 inhabitants. Around 6000 diseases are described, affecting between 6% and 8% of the European population. Due to their severity, diffusion and multi-faceted aspects, RD are an area where collaboration in public health, health care and research provides a major integrated added value. Main areas for policy actions include: the development and implementation of European Reference Networks, as a main strategy for sharing of knowledge, clinical expertise and foster research; integration of high-quality patient registries, biobanks, and bioinformatics support, as key infrastructure tools addressing research and healthcare needs; the implementation of National Plans on RD in EU Member States by sharing experiences, capacity building and linking national efforts through a common strategy at a European level; actions driven by the recommendations for primary prevention of congenital anomalies (the main RD group with multifactorial aetiology); policy provisions to foster research and development of orphan drugs.

Introduction: The number of systematic reviews of health economic evaluations (SR-HEs) is increasing. We aimed at providing a detailed overview of the characteristics and applied methods in recently published SR-HEs., Methods: We searched MEDLINE (03/2017) for SR-HEs published since 2015 using validated search filters. We included studies that performed a systematic review of full economic evaluations and searched at least one electronic database. We extracted data in a standardized, beforehand piloted form that was deduced from the items of the PRISMA and CHEERS checklists. Data were extracted by one reviewer, and a 10% random sample was verified by a second. We prepared descriptive statistical measures to describe the SR-HEs., Results: We included 202 SR-HEs. We identified similarities especially in the methods for information retrieval. Study selection, data extraction, and assessment of quality and transferability were frequently not reported or performed without taking measures to reduce errors (eg, independent study selection). A wide range of different tools was applied for critical appraisal. Moreover, the reporting of included economic evaluations and the synthesis of their results showed strong variations., Conclusions: Overall, we identified few common features in the applied methods for SR-HEs. The information retrieval processes are largely standardized, but many studies did not use validated search filters. For the other systematic review steps, the methodological approaches varied. In particular, important challenges seem to be the methodological quality and transferability assessment as well as presentation and (quantitative) synthesis of results. Efforts are needed for increasing standardization, quality of applied methods, and reporting of SR-HEs., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Competing Interests: None declared.

Health services research (HSR) is a multidisciplinary field of research that describes disease treatment and health care and their framework conditions. In the last 20 years, the HSR aspect became more and more the clinical focus of intensive care medicine. Under this aspect HSR investigates the use of clinical measures and their impact on patient outcome under routine intensive care medical conditions. This article provides an overview of the current state of HSR in intensive care medicine in Germany using the example of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The ARDS still represents a clinical disease with high intra-hospital mortality (30-60%) despite progress in intensive care medicine. Survivors of ARDS have substantial long-term limitations on physical and mental health. The treatment of ARDS patients is tedious, laborious for intensive care unit staff and complex. Despite evident treatment recommendations, these are only insufficiently implemented in the clinical routine. With the help of quality indicators, benchmarking, certification and peer review procedures, the quality of intensive care treatment in the clinical routine can be documented and improved. An important role in HSR is patient safety and focusing on the outcome with evaluation of the patient's will. As part of the establishment of the innovation fund for HSR, promising intensive medical care projects have been promoted to improve the quality of care and the quality of long-term outcome for intensive care patients. An important focus lies on the identification of factors that improve long-term quality of life after intensive care. The expansion of registries and telemedicine in intensive care offers the opportunity to bundle and share experiences more effectively and thereby establish (guideline-based) treatment recommendations faster in the clinical practice.