Use of an online discussion board to improve diagnostic skills

We have used the “Discussion Board” feature of an online classroom application (Blackboard) to present diagnostic questions for our advanced practice nursing students in their course on differential diagnosis. [See PDF for complete abstract]

PANEL DISCUSSION: "Medical Ethics, Eugenics, and the Holocaust"

A panel discussion moderated by Dr. Thomas R. Cole, McGovern Chair in Medical Humanities and Director of the John P. McGovern Center for Humanities and Ethics at the University of Texas Health Science Center in Houston. Panelists include: Rabbi Samuel E. Karff, Rabbi Emeritus of Congregation Beth Israel and Associate Director of the John P. McGovern Center for Humanities and Ethics and Visiting Professor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of Texas Health Science Center at the Texas Medical Center. Cardinal DiNardo, the second Archbishop of the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston and the first cardinal archbishop from a diocese in the Southern United States. Dr. Sheldon Rubenfeld, Clinical Professor of Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine. He is Board Certified in Internal Medicine and in Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism, and is a Fellow in both the American College of Physicians and the American College of Endocrinology. Dr. Rubenfeld has taught "Healing by Killing: Medicine During the Third Reich" for three years and "Jewish Medical Ethics" for seven years at Baylor College of Medicine. He created a six-month program about Medicine and the Holocaust at Holocaust Museum Houston, including an exhibit entitled How Healing Becomes Killing: Eugenics, Euthanasia, Extermination and a series of lectures by distinguished speakers entitled "The Michael E. DeBakey Medical Ethics Lecture Series".

Federally regulated institutional review boards: The aspects of a "model" IRB---Is the current system in need of a tune up or complete overhaul?

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) are the primary gatekeepers for the protection of ethical standards of federally regulated research on human subjects in this country. This paper focuses on what general, broad measures that may be instituted or enhanced to exemplify a "model IRB". This is done by examining the current regulatory standards of federally regulated IRBs, not private or commercial boards, and how many of those standards have been found either inadequate or not generally understood or followed. The analysis includes suggestions on how to bring about changes in order to make the IRB process more efficient, less subject to litigation, and create standardized educational protocols for members. The paper also considers how to include better oversight for multi-center research, increased centralization of IRBs, utilization of Data Safety Monitoring Boards when necessary, payment for research protocol review, voluntary accreditation, and the institution of evaluation/quality assurance programs. ^ This is a policy study utilizing secondary analysis of publicly available data. Therefore, the research for this paper focuses on scholarly medical/legal journals, web information from the Department of Health and Human Services, Federal Drug Administration, and the Office of the Inspector General, Accreditation Programs, law review articles, and current regulations applicable to the relevant portions of the paper. ^ Two issues are found to be consistently cited by the literature as major concerns. One is a need for basic, standardized educational requirements across all IRBs and its members, and secondly, much stricter and more informed management of continuing research. There is no federally regulated formal education system currently in place for IRB members, except for certain NIH-based trials. Also, IRBs are not keeping up with research once a study has begun, and although regulated to do so, it does not appear to be a great priority. This is the area most in danger of increased litigation. Other issues such as voluntary accreditation and outcomes evaluation are slowing gaining steam as the processes are becoming more available and more sought after, such as JCAHO accrediting of hospitals. ^ Adopting the principles discussed in this paper should promote better use of a local IRBs time, money, and expertise for protecting the vulnerable population in their care. Without further improvements to the system, there is concern that private and commercial IRBs will attempt to create a monopoly on much of the clinical research in the future as they are not as heavily regulated and can therefore offer companies quicker and more convenient reviews. IRBs need to consider the advantages of charging for their unique and important services as a cost of doing business. More importantly, there must be a minimum standard of education for all IRB members in the area of the ethical standards of human research and a greater emphasis placed on the follow-up of ongoing research as this is the most critical time for study participants and may soon lead to the largest area for litigation. Additionally, there should be a centralized IRB for multi-site trials or a study website with important information affecting the trial in real time. There needs to be development of standards and metrics to assess the performance of the IRBs for quality assurance and outcome evaluations. The boards should not be content to run the business of human subjects' research without determining how well that function is actually being carried out. It is important that federally regulated IRBs provide excellence in human research and promote those values most important to the public at large.^

Seroprevalence of toxoplasmosis and current thinking regarding screening in pregnancy: A review of the literature and case study discussion

The approach to the diagnosis and treatment of congenital toxoplasmosis has been one of flux and debate, fueled by lack of knowledge, lack of consensus, different methods of screening and different national policies for screening in different parts of the world. Countries with higher prevalence of disease such as in Europe and South America have a heightened awareness of the need to screen and treat for this parasitic infection during pregnancy. In contrast, in the United States, it is a condition scarcely discussed and has been largely ignored except in some large centers and by a few researchers. Policies and research strategies for any condition should start with obtaining good data. The aims of this thesis included a review of prevalence studies conducted in the United States, focused on the past 20 years, combined with a description of original research conducted by the author several years ago. The latter was a cross-sectional study performed in Houston, one of the largest American cities with a great ethnic mix. The study analyzed prevalence rates of Toxoplasma gondii IgG antibody in sera of women of reproductive age. Overall seroprevalence was 12.3%. In keeping with other studies, higher prevalence correlated with lower socioeconomic status, Black and Hispanic and Asian ethnicities, and increasing age. A literature search revealed only three prevalence studies performed in the United States over the past 20 years, with another four studies only referred to as personal communications or within a textbook, without further study detail available. The literature review also revealed a lack of consensus on whether or not to screen for toxoplasmosis in pregnancy, and even whether or not treatment in utero is worthwhile.^ Proponents of screening and treatment in pregnancy site studies both in the United States and France, emphasize that treatment reduces disease manifestations in infants. Opponents cite other studies that show only marginal benefits, together with potential side effects of medication regimens and generation of anxiety in parents. What is agreed on so far is the value of educating pregnant women on how to avoid contracting toxoplasmosis, and educating physicians on making the best use of reference laboratories before major treatment decisions are made. Further research to reevaluate the literature critically, review new treatment regimens and examine costs and benefits of screening and treatment of toxoplasmosis in pregnancy, bringing together European and American researchers, is needed.^

Family health history discussion in patient-provider encounters

Ascertaining the family health history (FHH) may provide insight into genetic and environmental susceptibilities specific to a variety of chronic diseases, including type II diabetes mellitus. However, discussion of FHH during patient-provider encounters has been limited and uncharacterized. A longitudinal, observational study was conducted in order to compare the content of FHH topics in a convenience sample of 37 patients, 13 new and 24 established. Each patient had an average of three follow-up encounters involving 6 staff physicians at the Audie L. Murphy Memorial Veterans Hospital (VHA) in San Antonio, TX from 2003 to 2005. A total of 131 encounters were analyzed in this study. The average age of the selected population was 68 years and included 35 males and two females. Transcriptions of encounters were obtained, coded and analyzed, in NVIVO 8. Of the 131 total encounters transcribed among the 37 patients, only 24 encounters (18.3%) included discussion of FHH. Additionally, the relationship between FHH discussion and discussion of self-care management (SCM) topics were assessed. In this study, providers were more likely to initiate discussion on family health history among new patients in the first encounter (ORnew = 8.55, 95% CI: 1.49–52.90). The discussion of FHH occurred sporadically in established patients throughout the longitudinal study with no apparent pattern. Provider-initiated FHH discussion most frequently had satisfactory level(s) of discussion while patient-initiated FHH discussion most frequently had minimal level(s) of discussion. FHH discussion most oftentimes involved topics of cancer and cardiovascular disease among primary-degree familial relationships. Overall, family health histories are largely, an underutilized tool in personalized preventive care.^

When Policy Opportunity is not Enough: College Access and Enrollment Patterns among Texas Percent Plan Eligible Students

In 1998, Texas initiated a bold new statewide university admission policy aimed at increasing college access for traditionally underserved students in the state. House Bill 588 (known as the Texas Top 10 Percent Plan (TTPP)) guaranteed automatic admission to the college or university of their choice for all top performing students in Texas public high schools. Fourteen years after the plan’s implementation, we see great strides and complexities in understanding student outcomes as a result of the percent plan. However, the legal controversy over the percent plan both in Texas and other states incorporating similar yet distinctly motivated alternative admissions plans continues to play out from institutional decision boards to the highest court in the nation. This study seeks to add to that discussion by exploring two questions. Descriptively, what are the admission and enrollment patterns within racial/ethnic groups of percent plan eligible students, over time, for Texas elite, emergent elite, and remaining public institutions? Given that all eligible percent plan students may enter the institution of choice in Texas, does which type of institution a TTPP student chooses relate to their race/ethnicity? The descriptive story told by the admission and enrollment distributions of equally eligible TTPP students is a complex but compelling one. Fundamentally, it identifies that statistically different application and enrollment patterns exist for Hispanic and especially African American TTPP beneficiaries relative to their White and Asian American counterparts.