Search

BackgroundProstate cancer is the most common cancer affecting men in the United States. Management options for localized disease exist, yet an evidence-based criterion standard for treatment still has to emerge. Although 5-year survival rates approach 98%, all treatment options carry the possibility for significant side effects, such as erectile dysfunction and urinary incontinence. It is therefore recommended that patients be actively involved in the treatment decision process. We have developed an Internet/CD-ROM-based multimedia Prostate Interactive Educational System (PIES) to enhance patients’ treatment decision making. PIES virtually mirrors a health center to provide patients with information about prostate cancer and its treatment through an intuitive interface, using videos, animations, graphics, and texts. Objectives(1) To examine the acceptability and feasibility of the PIES intervention and to report preliminary outcomes of the program in a pilot trial among patients with a new prostate cancer diagnosis, and (2) to explore the potential impact of tailoring PIES treatment information to participants’ information-seeking styles on study outcomes. MethodsParticipants (n = 72) were patients with newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer who had not made a treatment decision. Patients were randomly assigned to 3 experimental conditions: (1) control condition (providing information through standard National Cancer Institute brochures; 26%), and PIES (2) with tailoring (43%) and (3) without tailoring to a patient’s information-seeking style (31%). Questionnaires were administrated before (t1) and immediately after the intervention (t2). Measurements include evaluation and acceptability of the PIES intervention, monitoring/blunting information-seeking style, psychological distress, and decision-related variables (eg, decisional confidence, feeling informed about prostate cancer and treatment, and treatment preference). ResultsThe PIES program was well accepted by patients and did not interfere with the clinical routine. About 79% of eligible patients (72/91) completed the pre- and post-PIES intervention assessments. Patients in the PIES groups compared with those in the control condition were significantly more likely to report higher levels of confidence in their treatment choices, higher levels of helpfulness of the information they received in making a treatment decision, and that the information they received was emotionally reassuring. Patients in the PIES groups compared with those in the control condition were significantly less likely to need more information about treatment options, were less anxious about their treatment choices, and thought the information they received was clear (P < .05). Tailoring PIES information to information-seeking style was not related to decision-making variables. ConclusionsThis pilot study confirms that the implementation of PIES within a clinical practice is feasible and acceptable to patients with a recent diagnosis of prostate cancer. PIES improved key decision-making process variables and reduced the emotional impact of a difficult medical decision.

Accessible Summary: What is known on the subject?: Mental health services report adverse incidents in different ways and the relationship between adverse incidents and the workforce is uncertain. In England, there are national datasets recording all incidents and workforce statistics though there is no peer‐reviewed evidence examining recent trends. What this paper adds to existing knowledge?: Although there has been an overall increase in the number of mental health nurses, more are working in the community and the number of nurses relative to adverse incidents has decreased. There have been service‐provision changes but the role of mental health nurses has not significantly changed in this period, and we can therefore assume that their current practice is saturated with risk or increased reporting. To help understand the relationship between nurses and incidents, we need to transform how incidents are recorded in England. What are the implications for practice?: English mental health services report greater levels of patient‐related factors such as self‐harm or aggression rather than missed or erroneous care. This makes it difficult to understand if a rise in incident frequency is linked to reporting behaviour, patient risk, unsafe/ineffective care or other reasons and therefore planning workforce deployment to improve care quality is problematic. Introduction: There is a paucity of empirical data examining incidents and mental health nurses and the relationship between the two remains uncertain. Aim: Comparison of English national data for incidents and nursing workforce to examine recent trends. Method: Descriptive analysis of two national datasets of incidents and workforce data for England between 2015 and 2022. Results: A 46% increase in incidents was found; the leading causes are self‐harm and aggressive behaviour. Despite the rise in adverse incident reporting, a 6% increase in mental health nurses was found, with more nurses in community settings than hospitals. Discussion: Current services are incident reporting at greater concentrations than in previous years. Patient‐related behaviour continues to be most prominently reported, rather than possible antecedent health services issues that may contribute to reporting. Whilst staffing has increased, this does not seem to have kept pace with the implied workload evident in the increase in incident reports. Implications for Practice: Greater emphasis should be placed on health service behaviour in reporting mechanisms. Self‐harm and aggression should continue to be considered adverse outcomes, but causal health service factors, such as missed care, should be present in pooled reporting to help reduce the occurrence of adverse outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PurposeAntitumor activity of cancer immunotherapies may elicit immune responses to nontargeted (secondary) tumor antigens, or antigen spread. We evaluated humoral antigen spread after treatment with sipuleucel-T, an immunotherapy for asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), designed to target prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP; primary antigen).Experimental designSerum samples from patients with mCRPC enrolled in the placebo-controlled phase III IMPACT study (evaluable n = 142) were used to assess humoral antigen spread after treatment with sipuleucel-T. Immunoglobulin G (IgG) responses to self-antigens (including tumor antigens) were surveyed using protein microarrays and confirmed using Luminex xMAP. IgG responses were subsequently validated in ProACT (n = 33), an independent phase II study of sipuleucel-T. Association of IgG responses with overall survival (OS) was assessed using multivariate Cox models adjusted for baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and lactate dehydrogenase levels.ResultsIn patients from IMPACT and ProACT, levels of IgG against multiple secondary antigens, including PSA, KLK2/hK2, K-Ras, E-Ras, LGALS8/PCTA-1/galectin-8, and LGALS3/galectin-3, were elevated after treatment with sipuleucel-T (P < 0.01), but not control. IgG responses (≥ 2-fold elevation posttreatment) occurred in ≥ 25% of patients, appeared by 2 weeks after sipuleucel-T treatment, and persisted for up to 6 months. IgG responses to PSA and LGALS3 were associated with improved OS in sipuleucel-T-treated patients from IMPACT (P ≤ 0.05).ConclusionsSipuleucel-T induced humoral antigen spread in patients with mCRPC. IgG responses were associated with improved OS in IMPACT. The methods and results reported may identify pharmacodynamic biomarkers of clinical outcome after sipuleucel-T treatment, and help in clinical assessments of other cancer immunotherapies. See related commentary by Hellstrom and Hellstrom, p. 3581.

This document is a list of references for various research articles related to the cognitive neuroscience of self-awareness. The articles cover a range of topics, including the definition and measurement of self-awareness, its effects and functions, and its role in mental health conditions. The references provide a starting point for library patrons conducting research on self-awareness and offer a diverse range of perspectives to explore further. [Extracted from the article]

Accessible Summary: What is Known on the Subject?: Artificial intelligence (AI) is freely available, responds to very basic text input (such as a question) and can now create a wide range of outputs, communicating in many languages or art forms. AI platforms like OpenAI's ChatGPT can now create passages of text that could be used to create plans of care for people with mental health needs. As such, AI output can be difficult to distinguish from human‐output, and there is a risk that its use could go unnoticed. What this Paper Adds to Existing Knowledge?: Whilst it is known that AI can produce text or pass pre‐registration health‐profession exams, it is not known if AI can produce meaningful results for care delivery.We asked ChatGPT basic questions about a fictitious person who presents with self‐harm and then evaluated the quality of the output. We found that the output could look reasonable to laypersons but there were significant errors and ethical issues. There are potential harms to people in care if AI is used without an expert correcting or removing these errors. What are the Implications for Practice?: We suggest that there is a risk that AI use could cause harm if it was used in direct care delivery. There is a lack of policy and research to safeguard people receiving care ‐ and this needs to be in place before AI should be used in this way. Key aspects of the role of a mental health nurse are relational and AI use may diminish mental health nurses' ability to provide safe care in its current form.Many aspects of mental health recovery are linked to relationships and social engagement, however AI is not able to provide this and may push the people who are in most need of help further away from services that assist recovery. Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) is being increasingly used and discussed in care contexts. ChatGPT has gained significant attention in popular and scientific literature although how ChatGPT can be used in care‐delivery is not yet known. Aims: To use artificial intelligence (ChatGPT) to create a mental health nursing care plan and evaluate the quality of the output against the authors' clinical experience and existing guidance. Materials & Methods: Basic text commands were input into ChatGPT about a fictitious person called 'Emily' who presents with self‐injurious behaviour. The output from ChatGPT was then evaluated against the authors' clinical experience and current (national) care guidance. Results: ChatGPT was able to provide a care plan that incorporated some principles of dialectical behaviour therapy, but the output had significant errors and limitations and thus there is a reasonable likelihood of harm if used in this way. Discussion: AI use is increasing in direct‐care contexts through the use of chatbots or other means. However, AI can inhibit clinician to care‐recipient engagement, 'recycle' existing stigma, and introduce error, which may thus diminish the ability for care to uphold personhood and therefore lead to significant avoidable harms. Conclusion: Use of AI in this context should be avoided until a point where policy and guidance can safeguard the wellbeing of care recipients and the sophistication of AI output has increased. Given ChatGPT's ability to provide superficially reasonable outputs there is a risk that errors may go unnoticed and thus increase the likelihood of patient harms. Further research evaluating AI output is needed to consider how AI may be used safely in care delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]