Search

Objectives: The proliferation of evidence synthesis methods makes it challenging for reviewers to select the ''right'' method. This study aimed to update the Right Review tool (a web-based decision support tool that guides users through a series of questions for recommending evidence synthesis methods) and establish a common set of questions for the synthesis of both quantitative and qualitative studies (https://rightreview.knowledgetranslation.net/)., Study Design and Setting: A 2-round modified international electronic modified Delphi was conducted (2022) with researchers, health-care providers, patients, and policy makers. Panel members rated the importance/clarity of the Right Review tool's guiding questions, evidence synthesis type definitions and tool output. High agreement was defined as at least 70% agreement. Any items not reaching high agreement after round 2 were discussed by the international Project Steering Group., Results: Twenty-four experts from 9 countries completed round 1, with 12 completing round 2. Of the 46 items presented in round 1, 21 reached high agreement. Twenty-seven items were presented in round 2, with 8 reaching high agreement. The Project Steering Group discussed items not reaching high agreement, including 8 guiding questions, 9 review definitions (predominantly related to qualitative synthesis), and 2 output items. Three items were removed entirely and the remaining 16 revised and edited and/or combined with existing items. The final tool comprises 42 items; 9 guiding questions, 25 evidence synthesis definitions and approaches, and 8 tool outputs., Conclusion: The freely accessible Right Review tool supports choosing an appropriate review method. The design and clarity of this tool was enhanced by harnessing the Delphi technique to shape ongoing development. The updated tool is expected to be available in Quarter 1, 2025., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests. Barbara Clyne reports financial support was provided by Health Research Board. Dr Tricco (coauthor) is an Editor at the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted governments internationally to consider strengthening their public health systems. To support the work of Ireland's Public Health Reform Expert Advisory Group, the Health Information and Quality Authority, an independent governmental agency, was asked to describe the lessons learnt regarding the public health response to COVID-19 internationally and the applicability of this response for future pandemic preparedness., Methods: Semi-structured interviews with key public health representatives from nine countries were conducted. Interviews were conducted in March and April 2022 remotely via Zoom and were recorded. Notes were taken by two researchers, and a thematic analysis undertaken., Results: Lessons learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic related to three main themes: 1) setting policy; 2) delivering public health interventions; and 3) providing effective communication. Real-time surveillance, evidence synthesis, and cross-sectoral collaboration were reported as essential for policy setting; it was noted that having these functions established prior to the pandemic would lead to a more efficient implementation in a health emergency. Delivering public health interventions such as testing, contact tracing, and vaccination were key to limiting and or mitigating the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. However, a number of challenges were highlighted such as staff capacity and burnout, delays in vaccination procurement, and reduced delivery of regular healthcare services. Clear, consistent, and regular communication of the scientific evidence was key to engaging citizens with mitigation strategies. However, these communication strategies had to compete with an infodemic of information being circulated, particularly through social media., Conclusions: Overall, functions relating to policy setting, public health interventions, and communication are key to pandemic response. Ideally, these should be established in the preparedness phase so that they can be rapidly scaled-up during a pandemic., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Adaptation has been proposed as an alternative to de novo development to take advantage of existing clinical guidelines (guidelines) and reduce duplication. We describe the process of incorporating a modified Delphi method to reach formal consensus and inform locally relevant clinical recommendations during the development, through the ADAPTE process, of the Irish National Clinical Guideline No. 23 Stratification of Clinical Risk in Pregnancy., Methods: A systematic search of guideline repositories, websites, and bibliographic databases was conducted. Quality appraisal was undertaken using AGREE II. Risk factors indicating the need for additional care were identified and extracted from high-quality guidelines. A three-round modified Delphi panel comprising healthcare stakeholders, was convened to agree and tailor risk factors., Results: Of seven relevant international guidelines identified, three were considered high quality and contained a combined 59 risk factors potentially suitable for adaptation. Following the three-round Delphi process, 49 risk factors were included in the final guideline. Excluded risk factors were generally considered to be too broad to be useful for the Irish context., Conclusion: We believe that a formal consensus technique included within the ADAPTE process increased the rigor and transparency of this process and ensured the inclusion of more locally relevant risk factors., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Language and communication have an impact on how a clinical condition is treated and experienced, from both the health care professional (HCP) and patient perspective. Malnutrition is prevalent among community-dwelling older adults, yet perceptions of patient understanding of the term malnutrition to date remain underexplored., Objective: This qualitative study explored the use and perceptions of the term malnutrition among HCPs and older adults at risk of malnutrition., Design: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted with HCPs and older adults with a prescription for oral nutritional supplements (ONS) in the community, to explore perspectives., Participants and Setting: HCPs with experience of working with older adults were recruited in primary care centers, general practitioner practices, community health organizations, and community pharmacies in County Dublin, Ireland, between 2018 and 2019. Older adults, aged ≥60 years, with a current or previous prescription for ONS were recruited from daycare centers. One-to-one interviews were conducted with general practitioners (n = 16) and patients (n = 13), and focus groups were conducted with other HCPs, including dietitians (n = 22), nurses (n = 22), pharmacists (n = 9), physiotherapists (n = 12), occupational therapists (n = 6), and speech and language therapists (n = 4)., Data Analysis: Data from interviews and focus groups were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic analysis., Results: There was mutual agreement between HCPs and patients on the main theme, "malnutrition is a term to be avoided." There were three subthemes with varying input from the different HCP groups and patients: "Malnutrition is a term a patient doesn't want to hear"-malnutrition has negative connotations that imply neglect and stigma; "malnutrition is a clinical term which patients don't understand"-with perceptions that it is better to substitute the term with simpler motivating messages; and "lack of confidence identifying malnutrition"-expressed by non-dietetics HCPs who believed they had insufficient expertise on malnutrition to communicate effectively with patients., Conclusions: HCPs and patients perceived negative connotations with the term malnutrition, and HCPs used alternatives in practice. Additional consultation with HCPs and patients is recommended to explore appropriate language for conveying health risks associated with malnutrition. Future research should also address how current communication challenges can be addressed as part of strategic management programs or interventions to prevent and treat malnutrition., (Copyright © 2021 Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The organism that causes syphilis, Treponema pallidum, is impossible to culture in the clinical laboratory. Direct visualization of the pathogen is one laboratory technique used in the diagnosis of syphilis. Currently, serologic testing is the most widely used laboratory technique in diagnosing syphilis and monitoring its course after treatment. Serologic tests are divided into two categories, the nontreponemal and treponemal antibody tests. Newer techniques such as enzyme immunoassays have shown excellent results.

C-reactive protein (CRP) was identified in 1930 and was subsequently considered to be an "acute phase protein," an early indicator of infectious or inflammatory conditions. Since its discovery, CRP has been studied as a screening device for inflammation, a marker for disease activity, and as a diagnostic adjunct. Improved methods of quantifying CRP have led to increased application to clinical medicine. In the emergency department (ED), CRP must be interpreted in the clinical context; no single value can be used to rule in or rule out a specific diagnosis. We conclude that CRP has limited utility in the ED. It may be a useful adjunct to serial examinations in equivocal presentations of appendicitis in those centers without ready access to computed tomography (CT) scan. It may be elevated with complications or treatment failures in patients with pneumonia, pancreatitis, pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), and urinary tract infections. In patients with meningitis, neonatal sepsis, and occult bacteremia, CRP is usually elevated. However, CRP has no role in diagnosing these clinical entities, and a normal CRP level should never delay antibiotic coverage.