Content and methodology of predoctoral Geriatric Dentistry teaching in Europe

Objectives: To explore the content and methodology of predoctoral Geriatric Dentistry teaching amongst European dental schools.
Methods: The study was conducted by the European College of Gerodontology (ECG) Education Committee. Αn electronic questionnaire has been developed with close and open-ended items, including information on the prevalence and institutional anchorage of Gerodontology programs, the educators, the content and the methodology of teaching. An electronic mail, including a hyperlink to the questionnaire, was sent to 216 dental schools in 39 European countries (Winter/ Spring 2016). The Deans were asked to either answer themselves, or forward the link to faculty members with knowledge on Gerodontology teaching at their respective schools. Repeated reminders or telephone calls were used for non-respondents and personal networks were exploited to identify potential contact persons.
Results: Until August 2016, 121 dental schools from 29 countries responded to the survey (response rate 56%, EU response rate: 60%). Gerodontology was included in the predoctoral curricula of 86% of the respondents and was compulsory in 68%. The course was mainly offered in senior students and was interdisciplinary in 30% of the schools, delivered mainly by dentists (79%), physicians (21%), psychologists (10%), and nurses (5%). It was conducted as an independent lecture series in 40% of the schools and a course director was assigned in 44% of the respondents. When embedded in other disciplines, these were mainly Prosthodontics (31%). The content included a large number of items, such as epidemiology of oral health, medical problems in old age, prosthodontic management, xerostomia, and caries risk assessment. Lectures were the most common teaching format (69%), followed by small group seminars (27%). The most common types of educational material used were scientific articles (48%), printed textbooks (44%), lecture notes (40%) and e-learning material (21%). Clinical training was offered by 64% of the respondents, within the dental school clinics (49%) and/or in outreach locations (40%).
Conclusion: Amongst the respondent European dental schools (66%) there is an increasing number that teach Gerodontology at a pre-doctoral level with significant variations in content and methodology. Official guidelines and the dissemination of the ECG pre-doctoral curriculum guidelines might help to increase the prevalence and improve the status of Gerodontology teaching in Europe.

Systematic evaluation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) protocol content and reporting in UK cancer clinical trials: the EPiC study protocol

Introduction Emerging evidence suggests that patient-reported outcome (PRO)-specific information may be omitted in trial protocols and that PRO results are poorly reported, limiting the use of PRO data to inform cancer care. This study aims to evaluate the standards of PRO-specific content in UK cancer trial protocols and their arising publications and to highlight examples of best-practice PRO protocol content and reporting where they occur. The objective of this study is to determine if these early findings are generalisable to UK cancer trials, and if so, how best we can bring about future improvements in clinical trials methodology to enhance the way PROs are assessed, managed and reported. Hypothesis: Trials in which the primary end point is based on a PRO will have more complete PRO protocol and publication components than trials in which PROs are secondary end points.

Methods and analysis Completed National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Portfolio Cancer clinical trials (all cancer specialities/age-groups) will be included if they contain a primary/secondary PRO end point. The NIHR portfolio includes cancer trials, supported by a range of funders, adjudged as high-quality clinical research studies. The sample will be drawn from studies completed between 31 December 2000 and 1 March 2014 (n=1141) to allow sufficient time for completion of the final trial report and publication. Two reviewers will then review the protocols and arising publications of included trials to: (1) determine the completeness of their PRO-specific protocol content; (2) determine the proportion and completeness of PRO reporting in UK Cancer trials and (3) model factors associated with PRO protocol and reporting completeness and with PRO reporting proportion.

Ethics and dissemination The study was approved by the ethics committee at University of Birmingham (ERN_15-0311). Trial findings will be disseminated via presentations at local, national and international conferences, peer-reviewed journals and social media including the CPROR twitter account and UOB departmental website (http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/cpro0r).