Stakeholders' perceptions of rehabilitation services for individuals living with disability:A survey study

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) was tasked with developing health system guidelines for the implementation of rehabilitation services. Stakeholders' perceptions are an essential factor to take into account in the guideline development process. The aim of this study was to assess stakeholders' perceived feasibility and acceptability of eighteen rehabilitation services and the values they attach to ten rehabilitation outcomes.   Methods: We disseminated an online self-administered questionnaire through a number of international and regional organizations from the different WHO regions. Eligible individuals included persons with disability, caregivers of persons with disability, health professionals, administrators and policy makers. The answer options consisted of a 9-point Likert scale.   Results: Two hundred fifty three stakeholders participated. The majority of participants were health professional (64 %). In terms of outcomes, 'Increasing access' and 'Optimizing utilization' were the top service outcomes rated as critical (i.e., 7, 8 or 9 on the Likert scale) by >70 % of respondents. 'Fewer hospital admissions', 'Decreased burden of care' and 'Increasing longevity' were the services rated as least critical (57 %, 63 % and 58 % respectively). In terms of services, 'Community based rehabilitation' and 'Home based rehabilitation' were found to be both definitely feasible and acceptable (75 % and 74 % respectively). 'Integrated and decentralized rehabilitation services' was found to be less feasible than acceptable according to stakeholders (61 % and 71 % respectively). As for 'Task shifting', most stakeholders did not appear to find task shifting as either definitely feasible or definitely acceptable (63 % and 64 % respectively).   Conclusion: The majority of stakeholder's perceived 'Increasing access' and 'Optimizing utilization' as most critical amongst rehabilitation outcomes. The feasibility of the 'Integrated and decentralized rehabilitation services' was perceived to be less than their acceptability. The majority of stakeholders found 'Task shifting' as neither feasible nor acceptable

VENOUS THROMBOEMBOLISM AND BLEEDING IN MEDICAL INPATIENTS

Determining the prognosis or risk of an individual experiencing a specific health outcome within a certain time period is essential to improve health. An important aspect of prognostic research is the development of risk assessment models (RAMs). In support of the movement towards personalized medicine, health care professionals have employed RAMs to stratify an individual patient’s absolute risk of developing a health condition and select the optimal management strategy for that patient. The development of RAMs is generally conducted using data driven methods or through expert consensus. However, these methods present limitations. Accordingly, we recognized the need to select factors for RAM development or update that are evidence-based and clinically relevant using a structured and transparent approach. In this sandwich thesis, I highlight the methods used to select prognostic factors for VTE and bleeding RAMs for hospitalized medical patients. However, the same methods can be applied to any clinical outcome of interest. This work presents a conceptualized and tested novel mixed methods approach to select prognostic factors for VTE and bleeding in hospitalized medical patients that are evidence-based, clinically meaningful and relevant. Our findings may inform the development of new RAMs, the update of widely used RAMs, and external validation and prospective impact assessment studies. Also, these findings may assist decision makers in evaluating the risk of an individual having an outcome to optimize patient care.ThesisDoctor of Philosophy (PhD)Measuring the probability of an individual experiencing a specific health outcome in a certain period of time based on that individual’s risk factors is important to improve health. Prediction tools are often used to calculate the probability of an outcome. Health care practitioners use prediction tools to assess an individual’s risk of a certain health outcome and in turn provide individualized management. Prediction tools include a number of agreed upon risk factors that should be assessed in order to best estimate the risk of an outcome. These risk factors are usually selected through exploring sets of data or by consulting a group of experts in the field. However, these methods have limitations. Therefore, we recognized that it is important, when developing prediction tools, to select risk factors that are evidence-based and clinically relevant by adopting a systematic, comprehensive, structured and transparent approach. These sets of risk factors can then aid health researchers when developing new prediction tools or updating existing ones and help clinicians predicting risk. In this thesis, I highlight the methods used to select factors for prediction tools that evaluate the risk of having a venous clot or a bleeding event in patients that are hospitalized for a medical condition. However, the same methods can be applied to any clinical condition and outcome of interest. This work presents a new approach that we conceptualized and tested to select risk factors for venous clots and bleeding events in hospitalized medical patients that are evidence-based, clinically meaningful and relevant. Our findings may inform the development of new prediction tools, the update of widely used tools, and the design of studies to validate these tools. Also, these findings may assist decision makers in evaluating the risk of an individual having an outcome to optimize patient care

Sarah Bates-Kennard, oboe

Antonio PasculliGordon Percival Septimus JacobJohann Sebastian Bac

Features of the waterpipe tobacco industry: A qualitative study of the third International Hookah Fair [version 1; referees: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]

Background: Little research has been done to uncover the features of the waterpipe tobacco industry, which makes designing effective interventions and policies to counter this growing trend challenging. The objective of this study is to describe the features of the waterpipe industry. Methods: In 2015, we randomly sampled and conducted semi-structured interviews with representatives of waterpipe companies participating in a trade exhibition in Germany. We used an inductive approach to identify emerging themes. Results: We interviewed 20 representatives and four themes emerged: industry growth, cross-industry overlap, customer-product relationship, and attitude towards policy. The industry was described as transnational, generally decentralized, non-cartelized, with ad hoc relationships between suppliers, distributors and retailers. Ties with the cigarette industry were apparent. The waterpipe industry appeared to be in an early growth phase, encroaching on new markets, and comprising of mainly small family-run businesses. Customer loyalty appears stronger towards the waterpipe apparatus than tobacco. There was a notable absence of trade unionism and evidence of deliberate breaches of tobacco control laws. Conclusion: The waterpipe industry appears fragmented but is slowly growing into a mature, globalized, and customer-focused industry with ties to the cigarette industry. Now is an ideal window of opportunity to strengthen public health policy towards the waterpipe industry, which should include a specific legislative waterpipe framework

Extending the RIGHT statement for reporting adapted practice guidelines in healthcare: the RIGHT-Ad@pt Checklist protocol

Evidence-based medicine; Guideline adaptation; Guidelines as topicMedicina basada en la evidencia; Adaptación de guías clínicas; Guías clínicasMedicina basada en l'evidència; Adaptació de guies clíniques; Guies clíniquesIntroduction: The adaptation of guidelines is an increasingly used methodology for the efficient development of contextualised recommendations. Nevertheless, there is no specific reporting guidance. The essential Reporting Items of Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) statement could be useful for reporting adapted guidelines, but it does not address all the important aspects of the adaptation process. The objective of our project is to develop an extension of the RIGHT statement for the reporting of adapted guidelines (RIGHTAd@pt Checklist). Methods and analysis: To develop the RIGHT-Ad@pt Checklist, we will use a multistep process that includes: (1) establishment of a Working Group; (2) generation of an initial checklist based on the RIGHT statement; (3) optimisation of the checklist (an initial assessment of adapted guidelines, semistructured interviews, a Delphi consensus survey, an external review by guideline developers and users and a final assessment of adapted guidelines); and (4) approval of the final checklist. At each step of the process, we will calculate absolute frequencies and proportions, use content analysis to summarise and draw conclusions, discuss the results, draft a report and refine the checklist. Ethics and dissemination: We have obtained a waiver of approval from the Clinical Research Ethics Committee at the Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau (Barcelona, Spain). We will disseminate the RIGHT-Ad@pt Checklist by publishing into a peer-reviewed journal, presenting to relevant stakeholders and translating into different languages. We will continuously seek feedback from stakeholders, surveil new relevant evidence and, if necessary, update the checklist.YS is funded by China Scholarship Council (No 201707040103). LMG is funded by a Miguel Servet contract from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (CP18/00007)

GRADE concept paper 8:judging the certainty of discrimination performance estimates of prognostic models in a body of validation studies

Background: Prognostic models incorporate multiple prognostic factors to estimate the likelihood of future events for individual patients based on their prognostic factor values. Evaluating these models crucially involves conducting studies to assess their predictive performance, like discrimination. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of these validation studies play an essential role in selecting models for clinical practice.Methods: In this paper, we outline 3 thresholds to determine the target for certainty rating in the discrimination of prognostic models, as observed across a body of validation studies.Results and Conclusion: We propose 3 thresholds when rating the certainty of evidence about a prognostic model’s discrimination. The first threshold amounts to rating certainty in the model’s ability to classify better than random chance. The other 2 approaches involve setting thresholds informed by other mechanisms for classification: clinician intuition or an alternative prognostic model developed for the same disease area and outcome. The choice of threshold will vary based on the context. Instead of relying on arbitrary discrimination cut-offs, our approach positions the observed discrimination within an informed spectrum, potentially aiding decisions about a prognostic model's practical utility

Prevalence of symptom exaggeration among North American independent medical evaluation examinees: A systematic review of observational studies

Background: Independent medical evaluations (IMEs) are commonly acquired to provide an assessment of impairment; however, these assessments show poor inter-rater reliability. One potential contributor is symptom exaggeration by patients, who may feel pressure to emphasize their level of impairment to qualify for incentives. This study explored the prevalence of symptom exaggeration among IME examinees in North America, which if common may represent an important consideration for improving the reliability of IMEs. Methods: We searched CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO from inception to July 08, 2024. We included observational studies that used a known-group design or multi-modal determination method. Paired reviewers independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We performed a random-effects model meta-analysis to estimate the overall prevalence of symptom exaggeration and explored potential subgroup effects for sex, age, education, clinical condition, and confidence in the reference standard. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. Results: We included 44 studies with 46 cohorts and 9,794 patients. The median of the mean age was 40 (interquartile range [IQR] 38–42). Most cohorts included patients with traumatic brain injuries (n = 31, 67%) or chronic pain (n = 11, 24%). Prevalence of symptom exaggeration across studies ranged from 17% to 67%. We found low certainty evidence suggesting that studies with a greater proportion of women (≥40%) may be associated with higher rates of exaggeration (47%, 95%CI 36–58) vs. studies with a lower proportion of women ( Conclusion: Symptom exaggeration may occur in almost 50% of women and in approximately a third of men undergoing IMEs. The high prevalence of symptom exaggeration among IME attendees provides a compelling rationale for clinical evaluators to formally explore this issue. Future research should establish the reliability and validity of evaluation criteria for symptom exaggeration and develop a structured IME assessment approach.</p

Equity in evidence synthesis : you can’t play on broken strings

Peer reviewe

Defining decision thresholds for judgments on health benefits and harms using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks : A protocol for a randomised methodological study (GRADE-THRESHOLD)

Introduction The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and similar Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks require its users to judge how substantial the effects of interventions are on desirable and undesirable people-important health outcomes. However, decision thresholds (DTs) that could help understand the magnitude of intervention effects and serve as reference for interpretation of findings are not yet available. The objective of this study is an approach to derive and use DTs for EtD judgments about the magnitude of health benefits and harms. We hypothesise that approximate DTs could have the ability to discriminate between the existing four categories of EtD judgments (Trivial, Small, Moderate, Large), support panels of decision-makers in their work, and promote consistency and transparency in judgments. Methods and analysis We will conduct a methodological randomised controlled trial to collect the data that allow deriving the DTs. We will invite clinicians, epidemiologists, decision scientists, health research methodologists, experts in Health Technology Assessment (HTA), members of guideline development groups and the public to participate in the trial. Then, we will investigate the validity of our DTs by measuring the agreement between judgments that were made in the past by guideline panels and the judgments that our DTs approach would suggest if applied on the same guideline data. Ethics and dissemination The Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board reviewed this study as a quality improvement study and determined that it requires no further consent. Survey participants will be required to read a consent statement in order to participate in this study at the beginning of the trial. This statement reads: You are being invited to participate in a research project which aims to identify indicative DTs that could assist users of the GRADE EtD frameworks in making judgments. Your input will be used in determining these indicative thresholds. By completing this survey, you provide consent that the anonymised data collected will be used for the research study and to be summarised in aggregate in publication and electronic tools. PROTOCOL registration number NCT05237635

Recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis in the Eastern Mediterranean region:an adolopment of the 2015 American College of Rheumatology guidelines

Clinical practice guidelines can assist rheumatologists in the proper prescription of newer treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The objective of this paper is to report on the recommendations for the management of patients with RA in the Eastern Mediterranean region. We adapted the 2015 American College of Rheumatology guidelines in two separate waves. We used the adolopment methodology, and followed the 18 steps of the “Guidelines 2.0” comprehensive checklist for guideline development. For each question, we updated the original guidelines’ evidence synthesis, and we developed an Evidence Profile (EP) and an Evidence to Decision (EtD) table. In the first wave, we adoloped eight out of the 15 original questions on early RA. The strength changed for five of these recommendations from strong to conditional, due to one or more of the following factors: cost, impact on health equities, the balance of benefits, and harms and acceptability. In the second wave, we adoloped eight out of the original 44 questions on established RA. The strength changed for two of these recommendations from strong to conditional, in both cases due to cost, impact on health equities, balance of benefits and harms, and acceptability. The panel also developed a good practice recommendation. We successfully adoloped 16 recommendations for the management of early and established RA in the Eastern Mediterranean region. The process proved feasible and sensitive to contextual factors.</p