-
Health Economics Review Dec 2020Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) have been used to measure patient and healthcare professionals preferences in a range of settings internationally. Using DCEs in... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) have been used to measure patient and healthcare professionals preferences in a range of settings internationally. Using DCEs in primary care is valuable for determining how to improve rational shared decision making. The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the validity of the methods used for DCEs assessing the decision making of healthcare professionals in primary care.
MAIN BODY
A systematic search was conducted to identify articles with original data from a discrete choice experiment where the population was primary healthcare professionals. All publication dates from database inception to 29th February 2020 were included. A data extraction and validity assessment template based on guidelines was used. After screening, 34 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the systematic review. The sample sizes of the DCEs ranged from 10 to 3727. The published DCEs often provided insufficient detail about the process of determining the attributes and levels. The majority of the studies did not involve primary care healthcare professionals outside of the research team in attribute identification and selection. Less than 80% of the DCEs were piloted and few papers investigated internal or external validity.
CONCLUSIONS
For findings to translate into improvements in rational shared decision making in primary care DCEs need to be internally and externally valid and the findings need to be able to be communicated to stakeholders in a way that is understandable and relevant.
PubMed: 33296066
DOI: 10.1186/s13561-020-00295-8 -
The International Journal of Behavioral... Feb 2022Accurate proxy-report questionnaires, adapted to the child's developmental stage, are required to monitor 24-h movement behaviors in young children, especially for large... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Accurate proxy-report questionnaires, adapted to the child's developmental stage, are required to monitor 24-h movement behaviors in young children, especially for large samples and low-resource settings.
OBJECTIVES
This review aimed to summarize available studies evaluating measurement properties of proxy-report questionnaires assessing physical activity, sedentary behavior and/or sleep in children aged 0-5 years.
METHODS
Systematic literature searches were carried out in the PubMed, Embase and SPORTDiscus databases, up to January 2021. For physical activity and sedentary behavior questionnaires this is a review update, whereas for sleep questionnaires we included all relevant studies published up to now. Studies had to evaluate at least one of the measurement properties of a proxy-report questionnaire assessing at least duration and/or frequency of physical activity, sedentary behavior and/or sleep in 0- to 5-year-old children. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guideline was used to evaluate the quality of evidence.
RESULTS
Thirty-three studies were included, examining a total of 37 questionnaires. Ten questionnaires were designed for infants, two for toddlers, 11 for preschoolers, and 14 for a broader age range targeting multiple of these age groups. Twenty questionnaires assessed constructs of sleep, four assessed constructs of physical activity, two assessed screen behavior, five assessed constructs of both physical activity and sedentary behavior, and six assessed constructs of all 24-h movement behaviors. Content validity was evaluated for six questionnaires, structural validity for two, internal consistency for three, test-retest reliability for 16, measurement error for one, criterion validity for one, and construct validity for 26 questionnaires. None of the questionnaires were considered sufficiently valid and/or reliable for assessing one or more movement behaviors in 0- to 5-year-old children, and the quality of evidence was mostly low or very low.
CONCLUSIONS
Valid and/or reliable questionnaires assessing 24-h movement behaviors in 0- to 5-year-olds are lacking. High-quality studies are therefore required, to develop proxy-report questionnaires and evaluate their measurement properties.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42020169268.
Topics: Child, Preschool; Exercise; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Reproducibility of Results; Sedentary Behavior; Sleep; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 35164783
DOI: 10.1186/s12966-022-01251-x -
Journal of the American Pharmacists... 2023Clinician recognition of nonadherence is generally low. Tools that clinicians have used to assess medication adherence are self-reported adherence instruments that ask... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Clinician recognition of nonadherence is generally low. Tools that clinicians have used to assess medication adherence are self-reported adherence instruments that ask patients questions about their medication use experience. There is a need for more structured reviews that help clinicians comprehensively distinguish which tool might be most useful and valuable for their clinical setting and patient populations.
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review aimed to (1) identify validated, self-reported medication adherence tools that are applicable to the primary care setting and (2) summarize selected features of the tools as an assessment of clinical feasibility and applicability.
METHODS
The investigators systematically reviewed MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase via Ovid, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and CINAHL from inception to December 1, 2020. Investigators independently screened 3394 citations, identifying 43 articles describing validation parameters for 25 unique adherence tools. After screening each tool, 17 tools met the inclusion criteria and were qualitatively summarized.
RESULTS
Findings highlight 25 various tool characteristics (i.e., descriptions, parameters and diseases, measures and validity comparators, and other information), which clinicians might consider when selecting a self-reported adherence tool with strong measurement validity that is practical to administer to patients. There was much variability about the nature and extent of adherence measurement. Considerable variation was noted in the objective measures used to correlate to the self-reported tools' measurements. There were wide ranges of correlation between self-reported and objective measures. Several included tools had relatively low to moderate criterion validities. Many manuscripts did not describe whether tools were associated with costs, had copyrights, and were available in other languages; how much time was required for patients to complete self-report tools; and whether patient input informed tool development.
CONCLUSION
There is a critical need to ensure that adherence tool developers establish a key list of tool characteristics to report to help clinicians and researchers make practical comparisons among tools.
Topics: Humans; Self Report; Medication Adherence; Language; Primary Health Care
PubMed: 36372640
DOI: 10.1016/j.japh.2022.09.007 -
Forensic Science International Nov 2021Blood-drop trajectory analysis can provide investigators with retrospective information regarding the spatial positioning of an injured person. To assist with bloodstain... (Review)
Review
Blood-drop trajectory analysis can provide investigators with retrospective information regarding the spatial positioning of an injured person. To assist with bloodstain pattern analysis, various commercially available software have been developed and deployed. A systematic review was conducted to understand the extent of experimental validation and applications of blood-drop trajectory analysis software to case work. Ninety-two sources between 1987 and 2020 were identified including peer-reviewed studies and commercial websites. Thirty-four of these were validation studies, of which, only two involved impact patterns generated from greater than 1 m from the main target surface. Fifteen software were identified during this review with six documented to have been applied in casework. The reviewed software do not appear to fully satisfy relevant forensic validation criteria, based on publicly available literature. In some cases, software underwent limited experimental validation prior to real-world application with subsequent references to this in later literature. This review provides forensic investigators and bloodstain pattern analysts with a comprehensive overview of all available software options, knowledge of the extent of research into validating these techniques and highlights documented applications of these software in criminal cases.
Topics: Blood Stains; Forensic Medicine; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Software
PubMed: 34571247
DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2021.110992 -
Bronchopulmonary dysplasia prediction models: a systematic review and meta-analysis with validation.Pediatric Research Jul 2023Prediction models could identify infants at the greatest risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) and allow targeted preventative strategies. We performed a systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Prediction models could identify infants at the greatest risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) and allow targeted preventative strategies. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with external validation of identified models. Studies using predictors available before day 14 of life to predict BPD in very preterm infants were included. Two reviewers assessed 7628 studies for eligibility. Meta-analysis of externally validated models was followed by validation using 62,864 very preterm infants in England and Wales. A total of 64 studies using 53 prediction models were included totalling 274,407 infants (range 32-156,587/study). In all, 35 (55%) studies predated 2010; 39 (61%) were single-centre studies. A total of 97% of studies had a high risk of bias, especially in the analysis domain. Following meta-analysis of 22 BPD and 11 BPD/death composite externally validated models, Laughon's day one model was the most promising in predicting BPD and death (C-statistic 0.76 (95% CI 0.70-0.81) and good calibration). Six models were externally validated in our cohort with C-statistics between 0.70 and 0.90 but with poor calibration. Few BPD prediction models were developed with contemporary populations, underwent external validation, or had calibration and impact analyses. Contemporary, validated, and dynamic prediction models are needed for targeted preventative strategies. IMPACT: This review aims to provide a comprehensive assessment of all BPD prediction models developed to address the uncertainty of which model is sufficiently valid and generalisable for use in clinical practice and research. Published BPD prediction models are mostly outdated, single centre and lack external validation. Laughon's 2011 model is the most promising but more robust models, using contemporary data with external validation are needed to support better treatments.
Topics: Infant; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Infant, Premature; Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia; Infant, Very Low Birth Weight; Infant, Premature, Diseases; England
PubMed: 36624282
DOI: 10.1038/s41390-022-02451-8 -
Thyroid : Official Journal of the... Oct 2022Molecular tests for thyroid nodules with indeterminate fine needle aspiration results are increasingly used in clinical practice; however, true diagnostic summaries of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Molecular tests for thyroid nodules with indeterminate fine needle aspiration results are increasingly used in clinical practice; however, true diagnostic summaries of these tests are unknown. A systematic review and meta-analysis were completed to (1) evaluate the accuracy of commercially available molecular tests for malignancy in indeterminate thyroid nodules and (2) quantify biases and limitations in studies that validate those tests. PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were systematically searched through July 2021. English language articles that reported original clinical validation attempts of molecular tests for indeterminate thyroid nodules were included if they reported counts of true-negative, true-positive, false-negative, and false-positive results. We performed screening and full-text review, followed by assessment of eight common biases and limitations, extraction of diagnostic and histopathological information, and meta-analysis of clinical validity using a bivariate linear mixed-effects model. Forty-nine studies were included. Meta-analysis of Afirma Gene expression classifiers (GEC; = 38 studies) revealed a sensitivity of 0.92 (confidence interval: 0.90-0.94), specificity of 0.26 (0.20-0.32), negative likelihood ratio (LR-) of 0.32 (0.23-0.44), positive LR+ of 1.24 (1.15-1.35), and area under the curve (AUC) of 0.83 (0.74-0.89). Afirma Genomic Sequencing Classifier (GSC; = 10) had a sensitivity of 0.94 (0.89-0.96), specificity of 0.38 (0.27-0.50), LR- of 0.18 (0.10-0.30), LR+ of 1.52 (1.28-1.87), and AUC of 0.91 (0.62-0.92). ThyroSeq v1 and v2 ( = 10) had a sensitivity of 0.86 (0.82-0.90), specificity of 0.74 (0.59-0.85), LR- of 0.19 (0.13-0.26), LR+ of 3.52 (2.08-5.92), and AUC of 0.86 (0.81-0.90). ThyroSeq v3 ( = 6) had a sensitivity of 0.92 (0.86-0.95), specificity of 0.41 (0.18-0.69), LR- of 0.24 (0.09-0.62), LR+ of 1.67 (1.09-2.98), and AUC of 0.90 (0.63-0.92). Fourteen percent of studies conducted a blinded histopathologic review of excised thyroid nodules, and 8% made the decision to go to surgery blind to molecular test results. Meta-analyses reveal a high diagnostic accuracy of molecular tests for thyroid nodule assessment of malignancy risk; however, these studies are subject to several limitations. Limitations and their potential clinical impacts must be addressed and, when feasible, adjusted for using valid statistical methodologies.
Topics: Humans; Thyroid Nodule; Pathology, Molecular; Biopsy, Fine-Needle; Molecular Diagnostic Techniques; Bias; Thyroid Neoplasms
PubMed: 35999710
DOI: 10.1089/thy.2022.0269 -
International Journal of Environmental... Dec 2021Addressing HIV-related stigma requires the use of psychometrically sound measures. However, despite the Berger HIV stigma scale (HSS) being among the most widely used... (Review)
Review
Addressing HIV-related stigma requires the use of psychometrically sound measures. However, despite the Berger HIV stigma scale (HSS) being among the most widely used measures for assessing HIV-related stigma, no study has systematically summarised its psychometric properties. This review investigated the psychometric properties of the HSS. A systematic review of articles published between 2001 and August 2021 was undertaken (CRD42020220305) following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Additionally, we searched the grey literature and screened the reference lists of the included studies. Of the total 1241 studies that were screened, 166 were included in the review, of which 24 were development and/or validation studies. The rest were observational or experimental studies. All the studies except two reported some aspect of the scale's reliability. The reported internal consistency ranged from acceptable to excellent (Cronbach's alpha ≥ 0.70) in 93.2% of the studies. Only eight studies reported test-retest reliability, and the reported reliability was adequate, except for one study. Only 36 studies assessed and established the HSS's validity. The HSS appears to be a reliable and valid measure of HIV-related stigma. However, the validity evidence came from only 36 studies, most of which were conducted in North America and Europe. Consequently, more validation work is necessary for more precise insights.
Topics: HIV Infections; Humans; Psychometrics; Reproducibility of Results; Social Stigma; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 34948690
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182413074 -
Academic Emergency Medicine : Official... Jul 2022Knowledge of patient's health literacy (HL) in the emergency department (ED) can facilitate care delivery and reduce poor health outcomes. This systematic review... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Knowledge of patient's health literacy (HL) in the emergency department (ED) can facilitate care delivery and reduce poor health outcomes. This systematic review investigates HL measurement instruments used in the ED and their psychometric properties, accuracy in detecting limited HL, and feasibility.
METHODS
We searched in five biomedical databases for studies published between 1990 and January 2021, evaluating HL measurement instruments tested in the ED on internal consistency, criterion validity, diagnostic accuracy, or feasibility. Reviewers screened studies for relevance and assessed methodologic quality with published criteria. Data were synthesized around study and instrument characteristics and outcomes of interest.
RESULTS
Of the 2,376 references screened, seven met our inclusion criteria. Studied instruments varied in objective (n = 5) and subjective (n = 6) measurement of HL skills, and in HL constructs measured. The Brief Health Literacy Screen (BHLS) and the Subjective Numeracy Scale demonstrate acceptable and good internal consistency across studies. None of the instruments perform consistently well on criterion validity. The Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine-Revised and the Newest Vital Sign, both objective tests with short administration times, demonstrate good accuracy in one study with high risk of bias. The BHLS, a short subjective measure, shows moderate accuracy across studies including one with low risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS
Several short instruments seem valid in measuring HL and accurate in detecting limited HL among ED patients, each with its practical advantages and disadvantages and specific measurement of HL. Additional research is necessary to develop a robust evidence base supporting these instruments.
Topics: Adult; Delivery of Health Care; Emergency Service, Hospital; Health Literacy; Humans; Psychometrics; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 34919316
DOI: 10.1111/acem.14428 -
Medicinski Glasnik : Official... Feb 2024Aim This study provides a comprehensive review of the current literature on the use of ChatGPT, a generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tool, in neurosurgery. The...
Aim This study provides a comprehensive review of the current literature on the use of ChatGPT, a generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tool, in neurosurgery. The study examines potential benefits and limitations of ChatGPT in neurosurgical practice and education. Methods The study involved a systematic review of the current literature on the use of AI in neurosurgery, with a focus on ChatGPT. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed to ensure a comprehensive and transparent review process. Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. The data extracted from the included studies were analysed and synthesized to provide an overview of the current state of research on the use of ChatGPT in neurosurgery. Results The ChatGPT showed a potential to complement and enhance neurosurgical practice. However, there are risks and limitations associated with its use, including question format limitations, validation challenges, and algorithmic bias. The study highlights the importance of validating machine-generated content for accuracy and addressing ethical concerns associated with AI technologies. The study also identifies potential benefits of ChatGPT, such as providing personalized treatment plans, supporting surgical planning and navigation, and enhancing large data processing efficiency and accuracy. Conclusion The integration of AI technologies into neurosurgery should be approached with caution and careful consideration of ethical and validation issues. Continued research and development of AI tools in neurosurgery can help us further understand their potential benefits and limitations.
PubMed: 37950660
DOI: 10.17392/1661-23 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2023Dementia, a global health priority, has no current cure. Around 50 million people worldwide currently live with dementia, and this number is expected to treble by 2050.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dementia, a global health priority, has no current cure. Around 50 million people worldwide currently live with dementia, and this number is expected to treble by 2050. Some health conditions and lifestyle behaviours can increase or decrease the risk of dementia and are known as 'predictors'. Prognostic models combine such predictors to measure the risk of future dementia. Models that can accurately predict future dementia would help clinicians select high-risk adults in middle age and implement targeted risk reduction.
OBJECTIVES
Our primary objective was to identify multi-domain prognostic models used in middle-aged adults (aged 45 to 65 years) for predicting dementia or cognitive impairment. Eligible multi-domain prognostic models involved two or more of the modifiable dementia predictors identified in a 2020 Lancet Commission report and a 2019 World Health Organization (WHO) report (less education, hearing loss, traumatic brain injury, hypertension, excessive alcohol intake, obesity, smoking, depression, social isolation, physical inactivity, diabetes mellitus, air pollution, poor diet, and cognitive inactivity). Our secondary objectives were to summarise the prognostic models, to appraise their predictive accuracy (discrimination and calibration) as reported in the development and validation studies, and to identify the implications of using dementia prognostic models for the management of people at a higher risk for future dementia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and ISI Web of Science Core Collection from inception until 6 June 2022. We performed forwards and backwards citation tracking of included studies using the Web of Science platform. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included development and validation studies of multi-domain prognostic models. The minimum eligible follow-up was five years. Our primary outcome was an incident clinical diagnosis of dementia based on validated diagnostic criteria, and our secondary outcome was dementia or cognitive impairment determined by any other method.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the references, extracted data using a template based on the CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS), and assessed risk of bias and applicability of included studies using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST). We synthesised the C-statistics of models that had been externally validated in at least three comparable studies. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 20 eligible studies; eight were development studies and 12 were validation studies. There were 14 unique prognostic models: seven models with validation studies and seven models with development-only studies. The models included a median of nine predictors (range 6 to 34); the median number of modifiable predictors was five (range 2 to 11). The most common modifiable predictors in externally validated models were diabetes, hypertension, smoking, physical activity, and obesity. In development-only models, the most common modifiable predictors were obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and smoking. No models included hearing loss or air pollution as predictors. Nineteen studies had a high risk of bias according to the PROBAST assessment, mainly because of inappropriate analysis methods, particularly lack of reported calibration measures. Applicability concerns were low for 12 studies, as their population, predictors, and outcomes were consistent with those of interest for this review. Applicability concerns were high for nine studies, as they lacked baseline cognitive screening or excluded an age group within the range of 45 to 65 years. Only one model, Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Ageing, and Dementia (CAIDE), had been externally validated in multiple studies, allowing for meta-analysis. The CAIDE model included eight predictors (four modifiable predictors): age, education, sex, systolic blood pressure, body mass index (BMI), total cholesterol, physical activity and APOEƐ4 status. Overall, our confidence in the prediction accuracy of CAIDE was very low; our main reasons for downgrading the certainty of the evidence were high risk of bias across all the studies, high concern of applicability, non-overlapping confidence intervals (CIs), and a high degree of heterogeneity. The summary C-statistic was 0.71 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.76; 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence) for the incident clinical diagnosis of dementia, and 0.67 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.73; 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence) for dementia or cognitive impairment based on cognitive scores. Meta-analysis of calibration measures was not possible, as few studies provided these data.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We identified 14 unique multi-domain prognostic models used in middle-aged adults for predicting subsequent dementia. Diabetes, hypertension, obesity, and smoking were the most common modifiable risk factors used as predictors in the models. We performed meta-analyses of C-statistics for one model (CAIDE), but the summary values were unreliable. Owing to lack of data, we were unable to meta-analyse the calibration measures of CAIDE. This review highlights the need for further robust external validations of multi-domain prognostic models for predicting future risk of dementia in middle-aged adults.
Topics: Humans; Middle Aged; Cognitive Dysfunction; Dementia; Hypertension; Obesity; Prognosis
PubMed: 37265424
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014885.pub2