Qualitative analysis of the interdisciplinary interaction between data analysis specialists and novice clinical researchers.

BACKGROUND: The inherent complexity of statistical methods and clinical phenomena compel researchers with diverse domains of expertise to work in interdisciplinary teams, where none of them have a complete knowledge in their counterpart's field. As a result, knowledge exchange may often be characterized by miscommunication leading to misinterpretation, ultimately resulting in errors in research and even clinical practice. Though communication has a central role in interdisciplinary collaboration and since miscommunication can have a negative impact on research processes, to the best of our knowledge, no study has yet explored how data analysis specialists and clinical researchers communicate over time. METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We conducted qualitative analysis of encounters between clinical researchers and data analysis specialists (epidemiologist, clinical epidemiologist, and data mining specialist). These encounters were recorded and systematically analyzed using a grounded theory methodology for extraction of emerging themes, followed by data triangulation and analysis of negative cases for validation. A policy analysis was then performed using a system dynamics methodology looking for potential interventions to improve this process. Four major emerging themes were found. Definitions using lay language were frequently employed as a way to bridge the language gap between the specialties. Thought experiments presented a series of "what if" situations that helped clarify how the method or information from the other field would behave, if exposed to alternative situations, ultimately aiding in explaining their main objective. Metaphors and analogies were used to translate concepts across fields, from the unfamiliar to the familiar. Prolepsis was used to anticipate study outcomes, thus helping specialists understand the current context based on an understanding of their final goal. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The communication between clinical researchers and data analysis specialists presents multiple challenges that can lead to errors.

Can We Learn in the Sandbox Together?: Interprofessional Case Conferences as Facilitation Tools

Duke Medicine utilized interprofessional case conferences (ICCs) from 2008-2012 with the objective of modeling and facilitating development of teamwork skills among diverse health profession students, including physical therapy, physician assistant, medical doctor and nursing. The purpose of this publication was to describe the operational process used to develop and implement the ICCs and measure the success of the ICCs in order to shape future work. The ICCs were offered to develop skills and attitudes essential for participation in healthcare teams. Students were facilitated by faculty of different professions to conduct a comprehensive historical assessment of a standardized patient (SP), determine pertinent physical and lab assessments to undertake, and develop and share a comprehensive management plan. Cases included patient problems that were authentic and relevant to each professional student in attendance. The main barriers to implementation are outlined and the focus on the process of working together is highlighted. Evaluation showed high satisfaction rates among participants and the outcomes from these experiences are presented. The limitations of these results are discussed and recommendations for future assessment are emphasized. The ICCs demonstrated that students will come together voluntarily to learn in teams, even at a research-focused institution, and express benefit from the collaborative exercise.

Cross-hemispheric collaboration and segregation associated with task difficulty as revealed by structural and functional connectivity.

Although it is known that brain regions in one hemisphere may interact very closely with their corresponding contralateral regions (collaboration) or operate relatively independent of them (segregation), the specific brain regions (where) and conditions (how) associated with collaboration or segregation are largely unknown. We investigated these issues using a split field-matching task in which participants matched the meaning of words or the visual features of faces presented to the same (unilateral) or to different (bilateral) visual fields. Matching difficulty was manipulated by varying the semantic similarity of words or the visual similarity of faces. We assessed the white matter using the fractional anisotropy (FA) measure provided by diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and cross-hemispheric communication in terms of fMRI-based connectivity between homotopic pairs of cortical regions. For both perceptual and semantic matching, bilateral trials became faster than unilateral trials as difficulty increased (bilateral processing advantage, BPA). The study yielded three novel findings. First, whereas FA in anterior corpus callosum (genu) correlated with word-matching BPA, FA in posterior corpus callosum (splenium-occipital) correlated with face-matching BPA. Second, as matching difficulty intensified, cross-hemispheric functional connectivity (CFC) increased in domain-general frontopolar cortex (for both word and face matching) but decreased in domain-specific ventral temporal lobe regions (temporal pole for word matching and fusiform gyrus for face matching). Last, a mediation analysis linking DTI and fMRI data showed that CFC mediated the effect of callosal FA on BPA. These findings clarify the mechanisms by which the hemispheres interact to perform complex cognitive tasks.

Measuring the impact of a quality improvement collaboration to decrease maternal mortality in a Ghanaian regional hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of a continuous quality improvement collaboration at Ridge Regional Hospital, Accra, Ghana, that aimed to halve maternal and neonatal deaths. METHODS: In a quasi-experimental, pre- and post-intervention analysis, system deficiencies were analyzed and 97 improvement activities were implemented from January 2007 to December 2011. Data were collected on outcomes and implementation rates of improvement activities. Severity-adjustment models were used to calculate counterfactual mortality ratios. Regression analysis was used to determine the association between improvement activities, staffing, and maternal mortality. RESULTS: Maternal mortality decreased by 22.4% between 2007 and 2011, from 496 to 385 per 100000 deliveries, despite a 50% increase in deliveries and five- and three-fold increases in the proportion of pregnancies complicated by obstetric hemorrhage and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, respectively. Case fatality rates for obstetric hemorrhage and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy decreased from 14.8% to 1.6% and 3.1% to 1.1%, respectively. The mean implementation score was 68% for the 97 improvement processes. Overall, 43 maternal deaths were prevented by the intervention; however, risk severity-adjustment models indicated that an even greater number of deaths was averted. Mortality reduction was correlated with 26 continuous quality improvement activities, and with the number of anesthesia nurses and labor midwives. CONCLUSION: The implementation of quality improvement activities was closely correlated with improved maternal mortality.