-
Mashup Score: 2
I learnt about Choosing Wisely in the USA from reporting at its inception and followed its progress with great interest. It was a project to prod physicians and healthcare consumers to avoid low value, potentially harmful interventions. Beginning in 2012, over 80 organisations of medical specialists created lists of the most common procedures whose necessity should be questioned. Backing up the lists were materials ‘ to help patients engage their healthcare provider in these conversations and empower them to ask questions about what tests and procedures are right for them…’ . I saw the project primarily as an empowerment tool for consumers. To me, Choosing Wisely was all about patient autonomy. But then, to people who know me, pretty much everything is about patient autonomy . But it wasn’t until I tried to use it myself that I learnt about some of the obstacles to its use. Choosing Wisely was an exciting project, but one whose success was extremely modest. Why did it not have more of
Source: ebm.bmj.comCategories: General Medicine News, PayerTweet
-
Mashup Score: 7Identifying and counteracting fraudulent responses in online recruitment for health research: a scoping review - 1 day(s) ago
Objectives This study aimed to describe how health researchers identify and counteract fraudulent responses when recruiting participants online. Design Scoping review. Eligibility criteria Peer-reviewed studies published in English; studies that report on the online recruitment of participants for health research; and studies that specifically describe methodologies or strategies to detect and address fraudulent responses during the online recruitment of research participants. Sources of evidence Nine databases, including Medline, Informit, AMED, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, IEEE Xplore, Scopus and Web of Science, were searched from inception to April 2024. Charting methods Two authors independently screened and selected each study and performed data extraction, following the Joanna Briggs Institute’s methodological guidance for scoping reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. A predefined framewor
Source: ebm.bmj.comCategories: General Medicine News, PayerTweet-
Identifying and counteracting fraudulent responses in online recruitment for health research: a scoping review #OriginalResearch by @josiicomachioo @EdelOH @julieayre32 @Adeola_B1 @RebeccaRaeside @DrRajshriRoy @AdamPoulsen #OpenAccess Link: https://t.co/8wuKB7lRDe https://t.co/bGslEnu30T
-
-
Mashup Score: 14Gender and geographical bias in the editorial decision-making process of biomedical journals: a case-control study - 3 day(s) ago
Objectives To assess whether the gender (primary) and geographical affiliation (post-hoc) of the first and/or last authors are associated with publication decisions after peer review. Design Case-control study. Setting Biomedical journals. Participants Original peer-reviewed manuscripts submitted between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2019. Main outcome measure Manuscripts accepted (cases) and rejected for publication (controls). Results Of 6213 included manuscripts, 5294 (85.2%) first and 5479 (88.1%) last authors’ gender were identified; 2511 (47.4%) and 1793 (32.7%) were women, respectively. The proportion of women first and last authors was 48.4% (n=1314) and 32.2% (n=885) among cases and 46.4% (n=1197) and 33.2% (n=908) among controls. After adjustment, the association between the first author’s gender and acceptance for publication remained non-significant 1.04 (0.92 to 1.17). Acceptance for publication was lower for first authors affiliated to Asia 0.58 (0.46 to 0.73), Africa 0.
Source: ebm.bmj.comCategories: General Medicine News, PayerTweet-
Gender and geographical bias in the editorial decision-making process of biomedical journals: a case-control study #OriginalResearch by Gayet-Ageron et al. #OpenAccess Link: https://t.co/JzrvkkcP91 https://t.co/hksGSq8Fei
-
-
Mashup Score: 7Identifying and counteracting fraudulent responses in online recruitment for health research: a scoping review - 5 day(s) ago
Objectives This study aimed to describe how health researchers identify and counteract fraudulent responses when recruiting participants online. Design Scoping review. Eligibility criteria Peer-reviewed studies published in English; studies that report on the online recruitment of participants for health research; and studies that specifically describe methodologies or strategies to detect and address fraudulent responses during the online recruitment of research participants. Sources of evidence Nine databases, including Medline, Informit, AMED, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, IEEE Xplore, Scopus and Web of Science, were searched from inception to April 2024. Charting methods Two authors independently screened and selected each study and performed data extraction, following the Joanna Briggs Institute’s methodological guidance for scoping reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. A predefined framewor
Source: ebm.bmj.comCategories: General Medicine News, PayerTweet-
Identifying and counteracting fraudulent responses in online recruitment for health research: a scoping review #OriginalResearch by @josiicomachioo @EdelOH @julieayre32 @Adeola_B1 @RebeccaRaeside @DrRajshriRoy @AdamPoulsen #OpenAccess Link: https://t.co/8wuKB7lRDe https://t.co/bGslEnu30T
-
-
Mashup Score: 3
Objectives This study aims to evaluate (1) the effect and safety of acupuncture in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and explore (2) whether the effect of acupuncture differed according to acupuncture type, acupuncture dose and follow-up time. Design Systematic review and pairwise and exploratory network meta-analysis. Setting PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals and Wanfang from inception to 13 November 2023. Participants Randomised controlled trials comparing acupuncture with sham acupuncture, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), usual care or waiting list groups, intra-articular (IA) injection and blank groups in patients with KOA. Interventions Eligible interventions included manual acupuncture (MA) and electroacupuncture (EA). Main outcomes measures The primary outcome was pain intensity at the e
Source: ebm.bmj.comCategories: General Medicine News, PayerTweet-
Clinical effect and contributing factors of acupuncture for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and pairwise and exploratory network meta-analysis #OriginalResearch #OpenAccess Link: https://t.co/3gbAYVNMB0 https://t.co/1qMBfMSDuH
-
-
Mashup Score: 7
The work of transforming scientific publications into tools that can support people in comparing treatments, tests and other interventions has been driven by efforts to support shared decision-making. The International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration has published many articles that guide this process. IPDAS, and others in this field, have considered the challenges of representing complex concepts such as effect sizes, ORs and relative risk rates in terms and formats that are easier to understand by people with varying levels of health literacy and numeracy. The underlying task is how to simplify research results without misleading people, which is essential when communicating healthcare information. Selecting outcome probabilities and comparing data collected from different populations with various study designs would be misleading. Further, only providing relative instead of absolute risk estimates would lead to misinterpretation in most situations, framing that
Source: ebm.bmj.comCategories: General Medicine News, PayerTweet-
How to best convey continuous outcomes in patient decision aids #Analysis by @glynelwyn et al. Link: https://t.co/VroKozUSOc https://t.co/p75ldWo0we
-
-
Mashup Score: 4
Decision aids (DAs) can be effective tools in improving shared decision-making processes in a clinical setting; however, much more research needs to be done on the comparative effectiveness of different types of DAs argues Joshua Christensen and colleagues. Shared decision-making (SDM) is a clinical practice that has been established in the medical field for decades1 and is the process by which a treatment decision is made through the joint efforts of both the patient and clinician. SDM has been shown to positively affect patient outcomes such as patient knowledge, satisfaction and decisional conflict.2 While these benefits of SDM are well-established, the field is lacking when it comes to the nuanced nature of when and how SDM is achieved and the best way for clinicians to implement SDM in standard practice.3 While there is no consensus on SDM best practices, the use of DAs demonstrates effectiveness in improving the decision-making process or related outcomes in clinical settings.4 W
Source: ebm.bmj.comCategories: General Medicine News, PayerTweet-
Encounter versus patient decision aids to enhance shared decision-making #Analysis Link: https://t.co/ldQAhHhhmV https://t.co/upKHcgBILt
-
-
Mashup Score: 2
I learnt about Choosing Wisely in the USA from reporting at its inception and followed its progress with great interest. It was a project to prod physicians and healthcare consumers to avoid low value, potentially harmful interventions. Beginning in 2012, over 80 organisations of medical specialists created lists of the most common procedures whose necessity should be questioned. Backing up the lists were materials ‘ to help patients engage their healthcare provider in these conversations and empower them to ask questions about what tests and procedures are right for them…’ . I saw the project primarily as an empowerment tool for consumers. To me, Choosing Wisely was all about patient autonomy. But then, to people who know me, pretty much everything is about patient autonomy . But it wasn’t until I tried to use it myself that I learnt about some of the obstacles to its use. Choosing Wisely was an exciting project, but one whose success was extremely modest. Why did it not have more of
Source: ebm.bmj.comCategories: General Medicine News, PayerTweet-
Hurdles of trying to avoid low-value care: two cheers for Choosing Wisely #PatientVoice by Dena Davis #FreeAccess Link: https://t.co/1iAyh2v7YN
-
-
Mashup Score: 14Gender and geographical bias in the editorial decision-making process of biomedical journals: a case-control study - 11 day(s) ago
Objectives To assess whether the gender (primary) and geographical affiliation (post-hoc) of the first and/or last authors are associated with publication decisions after peer review. Design Case-control study. Setting Biomedical journals. Participants Original peer-reviewed manuscripts submitted between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2019. Main outcome measure Manuscripts accepted (cases) and rejected for publication (controls). Results Of 6213 included manuscripts, 5294 (85.2%) first and 5479 (88.1%) last authors’ gender were identified; 2511 (47.4%) and 1793 (32.7%) were women, respectively. The proportion of women first and last authors was 48.4% (n=1314) and 32.2% (n=885) among cases and 46.4% (n=1197) and 33.2% (n=908) among controls. After adjustment, the association between the first author’s gender and acceptance for publication remained non-significant 1.04 (0.92 to 1.17). Acceptance for publication was lower for first authors affiliated to Asia 0.58 (0.46 to 0.73), Africa 0.
Source: ebm.bmj.comCategories: General Medicine News, PayerTweet-
Gender and geographical bias in the editorial decision-making process of biomedical journals: a case-control study #OriginalResearch by Gayet-Ageron et al. #OpenAccess Link: https://t.co/JzrvkkcP91 https://t.co/hksGSq8Fei
-
-
Mashup Score: 0
Objective The objective of this study is to analyse the perspectives of screening candidates and healthcare professionals on shared decision-making (SDM) in prostate cancer (PCa) screening using the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. Design Descriptive qualitative study (May–December 2022): six face-to-face focus groups and four semistructured interviews were conducted, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed using ATLAS.ti software. Setting Data were obtained as part of the project PROSHADE (Decision Aid for Promoting Shared Decision Making in Opportunistic Screening for Prostate Cancer) to develop a tool for SDM in PCa screening with PSA testing in Spain. Participants A total of 27 screening candidates (three groups of men: 40–50 years old; 51–60 years old and 61–80 years old), 25 primary care professionals (one group of eight nurses and two groups of physicians: one with more and one with less than 10 years of experience), and four urologists. Focus groups for patients and
Source: ebm.bmj.comCategories: General Medicine News, PayerTweet-
Perspectives of clinicians and screening candidates on shared decision-making in prostate cancer screening with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test: a qualitative study (PROSHADE study) #OriginalResearch #OpenAccess Link: https://t.co/IdDKfKqy3U https://t.co/PZ9oF97hzn
-
Hurdles of trying to avoid low-value care: two cheers for Choosing Wisely #PatientVoice by Dena Davis #FreeAccess Link: https://t.co/1iAyh2v7YN