36 resultados para Cataloging Checklist
Resumo:
Background: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a complex, long-term condition occurring in all age groups. It has been reported that the incidence of renal replacement therapy in young people is 7-8 per million population. Notwithstanding those individuals who may receive a donor kidney, many individuals may be disenfranchised by perceptions of helplessness and feelings of powerlessness against a backdrop of diminished health outlook, consequently impacting on capacity for effective coping. Aim: The aim of this review is to explore how young people cope with CKD. Methods: Three hundred and thirty-seven abstracts were identified. Sixty-three papers were cross-examined using a Critical Appraisal Skills Checklist Tool. Results: Young people face various demands; these may be episodic or ongoing, depending on health and circumstance. The themes this review uncovers are: 'Lack of a Coping Definition'; 'Coping Strategies in Young People'; and 'Barriers to the Understanding of Coping in Young People'. Conclusion: More qualitative research is vital to retrieve 'real-life' perceptions from young people coping with kidney disease to identify how care should be made more explicit for them. © 2012 European Dialysis and Transplant Nurses Association/European Renal Care Association.
Resumo:
Tissue microarrays (TMAs) represent a powerful method for undertaking large-scale tissue-based biomarker studies. While TMAs offer several advantages, there are a number of issues specific to their use which need to be considered when employing this method. Given the investment in TMA-based research, guidance on design and execution of experiments will be of benefit and should help researchers new to TMA-based studies to avoid known pitfalls. Furthermore, a consensus on quality standards for TMA-based experiments should improve the robustness and reproducibility of studies, thereby increasing the likelihood of identifying clinically useful biomarkers. In order to address these issues, the National Cancer Research Institute Biomarker and Imaging Clinical Studies Group organized a 1-day TMA workshop held in Nottingham in May 2012. The document herein summarizes the conclusions from the workshop. It includes guidance and considerations on all aspects of TMA-based research, including the pre-analytical stages of experimental design, the analytical stages of data acquisition, and the postanalytical stages of data analysis. A checklist is presented which can be used both for planning a TMA experiment and interpreting the results of such an experiment. For studies of cancer biomarkers, this checklist could be used as a supplement to the REMARK guidelines.
Resumo:
A functional polymorphism (Val-158-Met) at the Catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) locus has been identified as a potential etiological factor in schizophrenia. Yet the association has not been convincingly replicated across independent samples. We hypothesized that phenotypic heterogeneity might be diluting the COMT effect. To clarify the putative association, we performed an exploratory analysis to test for association between COMT and five psychosis symptom scales. These were derived through factor analysis of the Operational Criteria Checklist for Psychiatric Illness. Our sample was the Irish Study of High Density Schizophrenia Families, a large collection consisting of 268 multiplex families. This sample has previously shown a small but significant effect of the COMT Val allele in conferring risk for schizophrenia. We tested for preferential transmission of COMT alleles from parent to affected offspring (n = 749) for each of the five factor-derived scales (negative symptoms, delusions, hallucinations, mania, and depression). Significant overtransmission of the Val allele was found for mania (P <0.05) and depression (P = 0.01) scales. Examination of odds ratios (ORs) revealed a heterogeneous effect of COMT, whereby it had no effect on Negative Symptoms, but largest impact on Depression (OR = 1.4). These results suggest a modest affective vulnerability conferred by this allele in psychosis, but will require replication.
Resumo:
Published records, original data from recent field work on all of the islands of the Azores (NE Atlantic), and a revision of the entire mollusc collection deposited in the Department of Biology of the University of the Azores (DBUA) were used to compile a checklist of the shallow-water Polyplacophora of the Azores. Lepidochitona cf. canariensis and Tonicella rubra are reported for the first time for this archipelago, increasing the recorded Azorean fauna to seven species.
Resumo:
Objective: Examine the behavioural outcomes at age 3 years of late preterm infants (LPIs) who were admitted to neonatal intensive care (NIC) in comparison with LPIs who were not admitted.
Method: This cohort study prospectively recruited 225 children born late preterm (34–36+6 weeks gestation) in 2006 in Northern Ireland, now aged 3 years. Two groups were compared: LPIs who received NIC (study; n=103) and LPIs who did not receive NIC (control; n=122). Parents/guardians completed the Child Behaviour Checklist/1½-5. Descriptive maternal and infant data were also collected.
Results: As expected LPI children admitted to NIC had higher medical risk than the non-admitted comparison group (increased caesarean section, born at earlier gestation, lower birth weight and an episode of resuscitation at birth). LPIs admitted to NIC scored higher on the Child Behaviour Checklist/1½-5 compared with those who were not admitted indicating more behavioural problems; this was statistically significant for the Aggressive Behaviour Subscale (z=−2.36) and the Externalising Problems Scale (z=−2.42). The group difference on the Externalising Problems Scale was no longer significant after controlling for gender, gestational age and deprivation score.
Conclusions: This study provides valuable data on the behaviour at age 3 years of LPIs admitted to NIC compared with LPIs not admitted to NIC. Further research would be beneficial to explore medical and psychosocial explanations for observed differences between groups using large prospective cohort studies.
Resumo:
Background and purpose
The dominant psychometric discourse of OSCEs may lead to unexpected problems, such as a checklist-based student performance1 which under emphasises the clinical relationship with student and standardised patient (SP). Such encounters can be dehumanising for SPs2 and have implications for what students learn about relational skills through the assessment process. In this study we explore medical students’ experiences of undertaking OSCEs using a phenomenological frame.
Methodology
Interpretative phenomenological analysis is a form of qualitative methodology which has strong resonance with existentialism and focuses on the lived experience without significant reference to external political or discursive
forces.
Six 4th year undergraduate medical students from Queen’s University Belfast were recruited in December 2013. Maximum variation sampling was used. Students were interviewed by a researcher in the week prior to the
OSCE and then again in the week following the OSCE in Jan 2014. Interviews were minimally structured in order to be open to respondents, rather than adhering to a fixed topic guide, but focussed on participants’ experiences, thoughts and feelings about taking part in OSCEs. Interviews were audio-recorded and
transcribed. Students were also asked to complete a short diary entry in the days prior to the OSCEs and another immediately following. Diary entries were written, emailed or audio-recorded at student’s preference.
Results
Transcripts are currently being analysed by interpretative phenomenological analysis. Preliminary analysis has demonstrated the significance of students’ relationships within the OSCE triad (student, SP and examiner); the effect of the immediate examination environment; realism versus roleplay; students’ perceptions of the purpose of assessment; and coping mechanisms.
Full results will be available by the time of the conference.
Conclusion and Discussion
Understanding the student experience in OSCEs is a crucial step in understanding the complex construction of relationships within the OSCE triad. The focus in OSCEs is typically on standardisation and reliability, but in exploring social interactions we may refocus attention on their inherent potential for learning and effects on both students and patients.
References
1. Hodges B. Medical education and the maintenance of incompetence. Med Teach 2006;28(8):690-6
2. Johnston JL, Lundy G, McCullough M, Gormley GJ. The view from over there: reframing the OSCE through the experience of standardised patient
raters. Med Educ 2013;47(9):899-909
Resumo:
Purpose: A systematic review of the validity, reliability and sensitivity of the Short Form (SF) health survey measures among breast cancer survivors.
Methods: We searched a number of databases for peer-reviewed papers. The methodological quality of the papers was assessed using the COnsenus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN).
Results: The review identified seven papers that assessed the psychometric properties of the SF-36 (n = 5), partial SF-36 (n = 1) and SF-12 (n = 1) among breast cancer survivors. Internal consistency scores for the SF measures ranged from acceptable to good across a range of language and ethnic sub-groups. The SF-36 demonstrated good convergent validity with respective subscales of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment—General scale and two lymphedema-specific measures. Divergent validity between the SF-36 and Lymph-ICF was modest. The SF-36 demonstrated good factor structure in the total breast cancer survivor study samples. However, the factor structure appeared to differ between specific language and ethnic sub-groups. The SF-36 discriminated between survivors who reported or did not report symptoms on the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial Symptom Checklist and SF-36 physical sub-scales, but not mental sub-scales, discriminated between survivors with or without lymphedema. Methodological quality scores varied between and within papers.
Conclusion: Short Form measures appear to provide a reliable and valid indication of general health status among breast cancer survivors though the limited data suggests that particular caution is required when interpreting scores provided by non-English language groups. Further research is required to test the sensitivity or responsiveness of the measure.
Resumo:
These guidelines provide a practical and evidence-based resource for the management of patients with Barrett's oesophagus and related early neoplasia. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument was followed to provide a methodological strategy for the guideline development. A systematic review of the literature was performed for English language articles published up until December 2012 in order to address controversial issues in Barrett's oesophagus including definition, screening and diagnosis, surveillance, pathological grading for dysplasia, management of dysplasia, and early cancer including training requirements. The rigour and quality of the studies was evaluated using the SIGN checklist system. Recommendations on each topic were scored by each author using a five-tier system (A+, strong agreement, to D+, strongly disagree). Statements that failed to reach substantial agreement among authors, defined as >80% agreement (A or A+), were revisited and modified until substantial agreement (>80%) was reached. In formulating these guidelines, we took into consideration benefits and risks for the population and national health system, as well as patient perspectives. For the first time, we have suggested stratification of patients according to their estimated cancer risk based on clinical and histopathological criteria. In order to improve communication between clinicians, we recommend the use of minimum datasets for reporting endoscopic and pathological findings. We advocate endoscopic therapy for high-grade dysplasia and early cancer, which should be performed in high-volume centres. We hope that these guidelines will standardise and improve management for patients with Barrett's oesophagus and related neoplasia.
Resumo:
IMPORTANCE Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of individual participant data (IPD) aim to collect, check, and reanalyze individual-level data from all studies addressing a particular research question and are therefore considered a gold standard approach to evidence synthesis. They are likely to be used with increasing frequency as current initiatives to share clinical trial data gain momentum and may be particularly important in reviewing controversial therapeutic areas.
OBJECTIVE To develop PRISMA-IPD as a stand-alone extension to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) Statement, tailored to the specific requirements of reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of IPD. Although developed primarily for reviews of randomized trials, many items will apply in other contexts, including reviews of diagnosis and prognosis.
DESIGN Development of PRISMA-IPD followed the EQUATOR Network framework guidance and used the existing standard PRISMA Statement as a starting point to draft additional relevant material. A web-based survey informed discussion at an international workshop that included researchers, clinicians, methodologists experienced in conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of IPD, and journal editors. The statement was drafted and iterative refinements were made by the project, advisory, and development groups. The PRISMA-IPD Development Group reached agreement on the PRISMA-IPD checklist and flow diagram by consensus.
FINDINGS Compared with standard PRISMA, the PRISMA-IPD checklist includes 3 new items that address (1) methods of checking the integrity of the IPD (such as pattern of randomization, data consistency, baseline imbalance, and missing data), (2) reporting any important issues that emerge, and (3) exploring variation (such as whether certain types of individual benefit more from the intervention than others). A further additional item was created by reorganization of standard PRISMA items relating to interpreting results. Wording was modified in 23 items to reflect the IPD approach.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE PRISMA-IPD provides guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of IPD.
Resumo:
Empirically derived phenotypic measurements have the potential to enhance gene-finding efforts in schizophrenia. Previous research based on factor analyses of symptoms has typically included schizoaffective cases. Deriving factor loadings from analysis of only narrowly defined schizophrenia cases could yield more sensitive factor scores for gene pathway and gene ontology analyses. Using an Irish family sample, this study 1) factor analyzed clinician-rated Operational Criteria Checklist items in cases with schizophrenia only, 2) scored the full sample based on these factor loadings, and 3) implemented genome-wide association, gene-based, and gene-pathway analysis of these SCZ-based symptom factors (final N= 507). Three factors emerged from the analysis of the schizophrenia cases: a manic, a depressive, and a positive symptom factor. In gene-based analyses of these factors, multiple genes had q<. 0.01. Of particular interest are findings for PTPRG and WBP1L, both of which were previously implicated by the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium study of SCZ; results from this study suggest that variants in these genes might also act as modifiers of SCZ symptoms. Gene pathway analyses of the first factor indicated over-representation of glutamatergic transmission, GABA-A receptor, and cyclic GMP pathways. Results suggest that these pathways may have differential influence on affective symptom presentation in schizophrenia.
Resumo:
Randomised trials are at the heart of evidence-based healthcare, but the methods and infrastructure for conducting these sometimes complex studies are largely evidence free. Trial Forge (www.trialforge.org) is an initiative that aims to increase the evidence base for trial decision making and, in doing so, to improve trial efficiency.
This paper summarises a one-day workshop held in Edinburgh on 10 July 2014 to discuss Trial Forge and how to advance this initiative. We first outline the problem of inefficiency in randomised trials and go on to describe Trial Forge. We present participants' views on the processes in the life of a randomised trial that should be covered by Trial Forge.
General support existed at the workshop for the Trial Forge approach to increase the evidence base for making randomised trial decisions and for improving trial efficiency. Agreed upon key processes included choosing the right research question; logistical planning for delivery, training of staff, recruitment, and retention; data management and dissemination; and close down. The process of linking to existing initiatives where possible was considered crucial. Trial Forge will not be a guideline or a checklist but a 'go to' website for research on randomised trials methods, with a linked programme of applied methodology research, coupled to an effective evidence-dissemination process. Moreover, it will support an informal network of interested trialists who meet virtually (online) and occasionally in person to build capacity and knowledge in the design and conduct of efficient randomised trials.
Some of the resources invested in randomised trials are wasted because of limited evidence upon which to base many aspects of design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of clinical trials. Trial Forge will help to address this lack of evidence.
Resumo:
Protocols of systematic reviews and meta-analyses allow for planning and documentation of review methods, act as a guard against arbitrary decision making during review conduct, enable readers to assess for the presence of selective reporting against completed reviews, and, when made publicly available, reduce duplication of efforts and potentially prompt collaboration. Evidence documenting the existence of selective reporting and excessive duplication of reviews on the same or similar topics is accumulating and many calls have been made in support of the documentation and public availability of review protocols. Several efforts have emerged in recent years to rectify these problems, including development of an international register for prospective reviews (PROSPERO) and launch of the first open access journal dedicated to the exclusive publication of systematic review products, including protocols (BioMed Central's Systematic Reviews). Furthering these efforts and building on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines, an international group of experts has created a guideline to improve the transparency, accuracy, completeness, and frequency of documented systematic review and meta-analysis protocols--PRISMA-P (for protocols) 2015. The PRISMA-P checklist contains 17 items considered to be essential and minimum components of a systematic review or meta-analysis protocol.This PRISMA-P 2015 Explanation and Elaboration paper provides readers with a full understanding of and evidence about the necessity of each item as well as a model example from an existing published protocol. This paper should be read together with the PRISMA-P 2015 statement. Systematic review authors and assessors are strongly encouraged to make use of PRISMA-P when drafting and appraising review protocols.
Resumo:
Systematic reviews should build on a protocol that describes the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of the review; few reviews report whether a protocol exists. Detailed, well-described protocols can facilitate the understanding and appraisal of the review methods, as well as the detection of modifications to methods and selective reporting in completed reviews. We describe the development of a reporting guideline, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015). PRISMA-P consists of a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review. Funders and those commissioning reviews might consider mandating the use of the checklist to facilitate the submission of relevant protocol information in funding applications. Similarly, peer reviewers and editors can use the guidance to gauge the completeness and transparency of a systematic review protocol submitted for publication in a journal or other medium.
Resumo:
Background
Patients admitted to the intensive care unit with critical illness often experience significant physical impairments, which typically persist for many years following resolution of the original illness. Physical rehabilitation interventions that enhance restoration of physical function have been evaluated across the continuum of recovery following critical illness including within the intensive care unit, following discharge to the ward and beyond hospital discharge. Multiple systematic reviews have been published appraising the expanding evidence investigating these physical rehabilitation interventions, although there appears to be variability in review methodology and quality. We aim to conduct an overview of existing systematic reviews of physical rehabilitation interventions for adult intensive care patients across the continuum of recovery.
Methods/design
This protocol has been developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol (PRISMA-P) guidelines. We will search the Cochrane Systematic Review Database, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica Database and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases. We will include systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials of adult patients, admitted to the intensive care unit and who have received physical rehabilitation interventions at any time point during their recovery. Data extraction will include systematic review aims and rationale, study types, populations, interventions, comparators, outcomes and quality appraisal method. Primary outcomes of interest will focus on findings reflecting recovery of physical function. Quality of reporting and methodological quality will be appraised using the PRISMA checklist and the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews tool.
Discussion
We anticipate the findings from this novel overview of systematic reviews will contribute to the synthesis and interpretation of existing evidence regarding physical rehabilitation interventions and physical recovery in post-critical illness patients across the continuum of recovery.
Resumo:
Background The use of technology in healthcare settings is on the increase and may represent a cost-effective means of delivering rehabilitation. Reductions in treatment time, and delivery in the home, are also thought to be benefits of this approach. Children and adolescents with brain injury often experience deficits in memory and executive functioning that can negatively affect their school work, social lives, and future occupations. Effective interventions that can be delivered at home, without the need for high-cost clinical involvement, could provide a means to address a current lack of provision. We have systematically reviewed studies examining the effects of technology-based interventions for the rehabilitation of deficits in memory and executive functioning in children and adolescents with acquired brain injury. Objectives To assess the effects of technology-based interventions compared to placebo intervention, no treatment, or other types of intervention, on the executive functioning and memory of children and adolescents with acquired brain injury. Search methods We ran the search on the 30 September 2015. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE(R), Ovid MEDLINE(R) In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE(R) Daily and Ovid OLDMEDLINE(R), EMBASE Classic + EMBASE (OvidSP), ISI Web of Science (SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, CPCI-S, and CPSI-SSH), CINAHL Plus (EBSCO), two other databases, and clinical trials registers. We also searched the internet, screened reference lists, and contacted authors of included studies. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials comparing the use of a technological aid for the rehabilitation of children and adolescents with memory or executive-functioning deficits with placebo, no treatment, or another intervention. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently reviewed titles and abstracts identified by the search strategy. Following retrieval of full-text manuscripts, two review authors independently performed data extraction and assessed the risk of bias. Main results Four studies (involving 206 participants) met the inclusion criteria for this review. Three studies, involving 194 participants, assessed the effects of online interventions to target executive functioning (that is monitoring and changing behaviour, problem solving, planning, etc.). These studies, which were all conducted by the same research team, compared online interventions against a 'placebo' (participants were given internet resources on brain injury). The interventions were delivered in the family home with additional support or training, or both, from a psychologist or doctoral student. The fourth study investigated the use of a computer program to target memory in addition to components of executive functioning (that is attention, organisation, and problem solving). No information on the study setting was provided, however a speech-language pathologist, teacher, or occupational therapist accompanied participants. Two studies assessed adolescents and young adults with mild to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), while the remaining two studies assessed children and adolescents with moderate to severe TBI. Risk of bias We assessed the risk of selection bias as low for three studies and unclear for one study. Allocation bias was high in two studies, unclear in one study, and low in one study. Only one study (n = 120) was able to conceal allocation from participants, therefore overall selection bias was assessed as high. One study took steps to conceal assessors from allocation (low risk of detection bias), while the other three did not do so (high risk of detection bias). Primary outcome 1: Executive functioning: Technology-based intervention versus placebo Results from meta-analysis of three studies (n = 194) comparing online interventions with a placebo for children and adolescents with TBI, favoured the intervention immediately post-treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.66 to -0.09; P = 0.62; I2 = 0%). (As there is no 'gold standard' measure in the field, we have not translated the SMD back to any particular scale.) This result is thought to represent only a small to medium effect size (using Cohen’s rule of thumb, where 0.2 is a small effect, 0.5 a medium one, and 0.8 or above is a large effect); this is unlikely to have a clinically important effect on the participant. The fourth study (n = 12) reported differences between the intervention and control groups on problem solving (an important component of executive functioning). No means or standard deviations were presented for this outcome, therefore an effect size could not be calculated. The quality of evidence for this outcome according to GRADE was very low. This means future research is highly likely to change the estimate of effect. Primary outcome 2: Memory One small study (n = 12) reported a statistically significant difference in improvement in sentence recall between the intervention and control group following an eight-week remediation programme. No means or standard deviations were presented for this outcome, therefore an effect size could not be calculated. Secondary outcomes Two studies (n = 158) reported on anxiety/depression as measured by the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and were included in a meta-analysis. We found no evidence of an effect with the intervention (mean difference -5.59, 95% CI -11.46 to 0.28; I2 = 53%). The GRADE quality of evidence for this outcome was very low, meaning future research is likely to change the estimate of effect. A single study sought to record adverse events and reported none. Two studies reported on use of the intervention (range 0 to 13 and 1 to 24 sessions). One study reported on social functioning/social competence and found no effect. The included studies reported no data for other secondary outcomes (that is quality of life and academic achievement). Authors' conclusions This review provides low-quality evidence for the use of technology-based interventions in the rehabilitation of executive functions and memory for children and adolescents with TBI. As all of the included studies contained relatively small numbers of participants (12 to 120), our findings should be interpreted with caution. The involvement of a clinician or therapist, rather than use of the technology, may have led to the success of these interventions. Future research should seek to replicate these findings with larger samples, in other regions, using ecologically valid outcome measures, and reduced clinician involvement.