Risk communication in clinical trials: a cognitive experiment and a survey.

BACKGROUND: A Royal Statistical Society Working Party recently recommended that "Greater use should be made of numerical, as opposed to verbal, descriptions of risk" in first-in-man clinical trials. This echoed the view of many clinicians and psychologists about risk communication. As the clinical trial industry expands rapidly across the globe, it is important to understand risk communication in Asian countries. METHODS: We conducted a cognitive experiment about participation in a hypothetical clinical trial of a pain relief medication and a survey in cancer and arthritis patients in Singapore. In part 1 of the experiment, the patients received information about the risk of side effects in one of three formats (frequency, percentage and verbal descriptor) and in one of two sequences (from least to most severe and from most to least severe), and were asked about their willingness to participate. In part 2, the patients received information about the risk in all three formats, in the same sequence, and were again asked about their willingness to participate. A survey of preference for risk presentation methods and usage of verbal descriptors immediately followed. RESULTS: Willingness to participate and the likelihood of changing one's decision were not affected by the risk presentation methods. Most patients indicated a preference for the frequency format, but patients with primary school or no formal education were indifferent. While the patients used the verbal descriptors "very common", "common" and "very rare" in ways similar to the European Commission's Guidelines, their usage of the descriptors "uncommon" and "rare" was substantially different from the EU's. CONCLUSION: In this sample of Asian cancer and arthritis patients, risk presentation format had no impact on willingness to participate in a clinical trial. However, there is a clear preference for the frequency format. The lay use of verbal descriptors was substantially different from the EU's.

Genomics research: world survey of public funding.

BACKGROUND: Over the past two decades, genomics has evolved as a scientific research discipline. Genomics research was fueled initially by government and nonprofit funding sources, later augmented by private research and development (R&D) funding. Citizens and taxpayers of many countries have funded much of the research, and have expectations about access to the resulting information and knowledge. While access to knowledge gained from all publicly funded research is desired, access is especially important for fields that have broad social impact and stimulate public dialogue. Genomics is one such field, where public concerns are raised for reasons such as health care and insurance implications, as well as personal and ancestral identification. Thus, genomics has grown rapidly as a field, and attracts considerable interest. RESULTS: One way to study the growth of a field of research is to examine its funding. This study focuses on public funding of genomics research, identifying and collecting data from major government and nonprofit organizations around the world, and updating previous estimates of world genomics research funding, including information about geographical origins. We initially identified 89 publicly funded organizations; we requested information about each organization's funding of genomics research. Of these organizations, 48 responded and 34 reported genomics research expenditures (of those that responded but did not supply information, some did not fund such research, others could not quantify it). The figures reported here include all the largest funders and we estimate that we have accounted for most of the genomics research funding from government and nonprofit sources. CONCLUSION: Aggregate spending on genomics research from 34 funding sources averaged around $2.9 billion in 2003-2006. The United States spent more than any other country on genomics research, corresponding to 35% of the overall worldwide public funding (compared to 49% US share of public health research funding for all purposes). When adjusted to genomics funding intensity, however, the United States dropped below Ireland, the United Kingdom, and Canada, as measured both by genomics research expenditure per capita and per Gross Domestic Product.

Differences in onset and abuse/dependence episodes between prescription opioids and heroin: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions.

OBJECTIVES: To examine patterns of onset and abuse/dependence episodes of prescription opioid (PO) and heroin use disorders in a national sample of adults, and to explore differences by gender and substance abuse treatment status. METHODS: Analyses of data from the 2001-2002 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (N = 43,093). RESULTS: Of all respondents, 5% (n = 1815) reported a history of nonmedical PO use (NMPOU) and 0.3% (n = 150) a history of heroin use. Abuse was more prevalent than dependence among NMPOUs (PO abuse, 29%; dependence, 7%) and heroin users (heroin abuse, 63%; dependence, 28%). Heroin users reported a short mean interval from first use to onset of abuse (1.5 years) or dependence (2.0 years), and a lengthy mean duration for the longest episode of abuse (66 months) or dependence (59 months); the corresponding mean estimates for PO abuse and dependence among NMPOUs were 2.6 and 2.9 years, respectively, and 31 and 49 months, respectively. The mean number of years from first use to remission from the most recent episode was 6.9 years for PO abuse and 8.1 years for dependence; the mean number of years from first heroin use to remission from the most recent episode was 8.5 years for heroin abuse and 9.7 years for dependence. Most individuals with PO or heroin use disorders were remitted from the most recent episode. Treated individuals, whether their problem was heroin or POs, tended to have a longer mean duration of an episode than untreated individuals. CONCLUSION: Periodic remissions from opioid or heroin abuse or dependence episodes occur commonly but take a long time. Timely and effective use of treatment services are needed to mitigate the many adverse consequences from opioid/heroin abuse and dependence.

Hemostatic assessment, treatment strategies, and hematology consultation in massive postpartum hemorrhage: results of a quantitative survey of obstetrician-gynecologists.

OBJECTIVE: To assess potential diagnostic and practice barriers to successful management of massive postpartum hemorrhage (PPH), emphasizing recognition and management of contributing coagulation disorders. STUDY DESIGN: A quantitative survey was conducted to assess practice patterns of US obstetrician-gynecologists in managing massive PPH, including assessment of coagulation. RESULTS: Nearly all (98%) of the 50 obstetrician-gynecologists participating in the survey reported having encountered at least one patient with "massive" PPH in the past 5 years. Approximately half (52%) reported having previously discovered an underlying bleeding disorder in a patient with PPH, with disseminated intravascular coagulation (88%, n=23/26) being identified more often than von Willebrand disease (73%, n=19/26). All reported having used methylergonovine and packed red blood cells in managing massive PPH, while 90% reported performing a hysterectomy. A drop in blood pressure and ongoing visible bleeding were the most commonly accepted indications for rechecking a "stat" complete blood count and coagulation studies, respectively, in patients with PPH; however, 4% of respondents reported that they would not routinely order coagulation studies. Forty-two percent reported having never consulted a hematologist for massive PPH. CONCLUSION: The survey findings highlight potential areas for improved practice in managing massive PPH, including earlier and more consistent assessment, monitoring of coagulation studies, and consultation with a hematologist.