CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) for school-based immunizations in Calgary, Canada: a pragmatic cluster trial.

ABSTRACT: School-based immunizations are fear-inducing events for many students and contribute to vaccine hesitancy. We developed an immunization delivery framework called the CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) system that incorporates evidence-based interventions to improve the experience (eg, reduce fear, pain, dizziness). We evaluated CARD in grades 6 and 9 students in Calgary, Canada. In this pragmatic, hybrid, effectiveness-implementation, cluster trial, we randomized 8 Community Health Centres providing regional immunization services to CARD or control (usual care). In the CARD group, public health staff educated students about CARD and planned processes to reduce fear cues and support student coping choices during immunization. Students self-reported fear, pain, and dizziness during immunization using a 0-10 numerical rating scale; staff recorded procedure details, including vaccines administered, fainting episodes, and coping strategies used. Staff participated in focus groups afterward. Altogether, 8839 children from 105 schools in the 2019 to 2020 school calendar year were included. Fear was lower for CARD (mean = 3.6 [SD = 3.1] vs control 4.1 [3.2]; mean difference = -0.5; 95% confidence interval = -0.74 to -0.21; P < 0.001). Effectiveness persisted after stratification by student gender (male and female) and grade level (grade 6 and grade 9). Other symptoms did not differ. Compared with control, CARD students used peers, privacy, muscle tension, and topical anesthetics more; verbal distraction, deep breathing, and adult support were used less frequently ( P < 0.05, all analyses). Immunization rate did not differ. Staff reported positive to neutral attitudes about CARD. In summary, this pragmatic trial demonstrated that CARD improved the immunization experiences of students at school.

Measuring the Burden of Infodemics: Summary of the Methods and Results of the Fifth WHO Infodemic Management Conference.

Background: An infodemic is excess information, including false or misleading information, that spreads in digital and physical environments during a public health emergency. The COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by an unprecedented global infodemic that has led to confusion about the benefits of medical and public health interventions, with substantial impact on risk-taking and health-seeking behaviors, eroding trust in health authorities and compromising the effectiveness of public health responses and policies. Standardized measures are needed to quantify the harmful impacts of the infodemic in a systematic and methodologically robust manner, as well as harmonizing highly divergent approaches currently explored for this purpose. This can serve as a foundation for a systematic, evidence-based approach to monitoring, identifying, and mitigating future infodemic harms in emergency preparedness and prevention. Objective: In this paper, we summarize the Fifth World Health Organization (WHO) Infodemic Management Conference structure, proceedings, outcomes, and proposed actions seeking to identify the interdisciplinary approaches and frameworks needed to enable the measurement of the burden of infodemics. Methods: An iterative human-centered design (HCD) approach and concept mapping were used to facilitate focused discussions and allow for the generation of actionable outcomes and recommendations. The discussions included 86 participants representing diverse scientific disciplines and health authorities from 28 countries across all WHO regions, along with observers from civil society and global public health-implementing partners. A thematic map capturing the concepts matching the key contributing factors to the public health burden of infodemics was used throughout the conference to frame and contextualize discussions. Five key areas for immediate action were identified. Results: The 5 key areas for the development of metrics to assess the burden of infodemics and associated interventions included (1) developing standardized definitions and ensuring the adoption thereof; (2) improving the map of concepts influencing the burden of infodemics; (3) conducting a review of evidence, tools, and data sources; (4) setting up a technical working group; and (5) addressing immediate priorities for postpandemic recovery and resilience building. The summary report consolidated group input toward a common vocabulary with standardized terms, concepts, study designs, measures, and tools to estimate the burden of infodemics and the effectiveness of infodemic management interventions. Conclusions: Standardizing measurement is the basis for documenting the burden of infodemics on health systems and population health during emergencies. Investment is needed into the development of practical, affordable, evidence-based, and systematic methods that are legally and ethically balanced for monitoring infodemics; generating diagnostics, infodemic insights, and recommendations; and developing interventions, action-oriented guidance, policies, support options, mechanisms, and tools for infodemic managers and emergency program managers.

Experiences of community pharmacists administering COVID-19 vaccinations: A qualitative study.

Background: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, community pharmacists have played an important role in the provision of patient care, including the delivery of COVID-19 vaccines. The additional workload and related demands arising from these extended services might affect worklife burnout. This qualitative study explored the experiences of Canadian community pharmacists in providing COVID-19 vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Eighteen community pharmacists across 10 provinces were asked about vaccination processes and perceptions about their role in separate, virtual semistructured interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a deductive approach using the Areas of Worklife Burnout framework, with pharmacists' self-reported descriptions of their activities summarized using the Association of Faculties of Pharmacy of Canada's (AFPC) professional competencies framework. Results: Participants identified aspects of their role that were rewarding and challenging. Some challenges included lack of control, increased workload, inadequate communication, unfair treatment and conflicting values. They described being able to meet challenges and demonstrating resiliency via adaptability, developing communities and valuing their contribution to ending the COVID-19 pandemic. Self-identified AFPC competencies contributing to their ability to manage their worklife included care-provider, professional, leader-manager, collaborator and scholar. Conclusion: Pharmacists accepted their additional responsibility of managing COVID-19 vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, they expressed some challenges with this role. To ensure sustainability of these services, prioritizing adequate resources, work processes and efficient communication with all relevant stakeholder groups, including public health, government and corporate leaders, is recommended for the future. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2023;156(Suppl):xx-xx.

Integration of CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) for COVID-19 community pharmacy vaccination in children: Effect on implementation outcomes.

Introduction: Community pharmacists report that providing vaccinations can be challenging, particularly if the vaccine recipient is a child, because of heightened levels of fear. The objective of this study was to determine acceptability and feasibility of the CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) system as a vaccination delivery framework for children receiving COVID-19 vaccinations in a community pharmacy setting. CARD incorporates evidence-based interventions that reduce fear and immunization stress-related responses in vaccine recipients and was demonstrated to be effective and feasible in other vaccination settings providing vaccinations to children and adults. Methods: This mixed-methods study involved 5 independent pharmacies (with 6 vaccinators) offering COVID-19 vaccinations to children between 5 and 11 years of age. Vaccinating staff and implementation leads from the pharmacy organization participated in a small-scale CARD implementation project (before-and-after design). Afterwards, they filled in quantitative surveys and provided qualitative feedback about their perceptions and experiences in focus group discussions. Qualitative data were analyzed deductively, using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results: The study was conducted between January 16 and March 20, 2022. Across both quantitative and qualitative measures, vaccinating staff reported positive attitudes about CARD and alignment with their professional roles. They reported that CARD reduced children's fear and improved the vaccination experiences in children and parents and for themselves. Vaccinators reported increased confidence due to CARD. They reported compatibility of CARD interventions within their practice and that it was time neutral. They maintained use of some interventions after the study. They also provided suggestions and shared concerns about fidelity and future feasibility of continuing various components of the program. Conclusion: CARD was demonstrated to be acceptable and feasible by vaccinators performing vaccinations in children in community pharmacies.

Community pharmacists' perceptions of the CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) system for use during vaccinations.

Introduction: We explored Canadian community pharmacists' perceptions of the CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) system, a vaccine delivery framework that integrates evidence-based interventions that reduce immunization stress-related responses (ISRRs). The objective was to introduce CARD to pharmacists and obtain their feedback to guide future implementation efforts for community pharmacy-based vaccinations. Methods: Eighteen pharmacists across all provinces participated in one-on-one moderated virtual interviews. A semistructured interview guide was used to guide the discussion and included questions about experiences with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine administration and perceptions of CARD as a framework for vaccination delivery in the pharmacy. In this report, we focus on feedback about CARD. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim and deductively coded using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results: The study was conducted from May 28 to August 16, 2021. Pharmacists' responses were categorized in 3 CFIR domains: intervention characteristics, inner setting and characteristics of individuals. Overall, pharmacists were receptive towards CARD and thought it filled a current gap in practice, particularly for childhood vaccinations. Pharmacists reported learning techniques to make vaccinations more comfortable for their clients. They provided feedback on how specific interventions could be adapted for their practice (e.g., dissemination of client-directed education via appointment booking portals, provision of distraction items in waiting and vaccinating spaces). Discussion: This study provided preliminary evidence that pharmacists found CARD acceptable and appropriate for community pharmacy-based vaccinations. The data collected from this study were used to inform a small-scale implementation project with CARD during COVID-19 vaccine administration in children aged 5 to 11 years.

CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) for community pharmacy vaccinations in children: Effect on immunization stress-related responses and satisfaction.

Introduction: CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) is a vaccine delivery program demonstrated to reduce pain, fear and associated immunization stress-related responses (ISRR) in children undergoing vaccinations at school. This study evaluated CARD's clinical impact when integrated into community pharmacy-based pediatric vaccinations. Methods: This was a before-and-after CARD implementation study in 5 independent pharmacies offering COVID-19 vaccinations to children aged 5-11 years. No changes were made to practices in the "before" phase. CARD interventions were integrated in the "after" phase (e.g., children prepared a coping plan using a checklist, distraction toolkits were placed in waiting and vaccination spaces, vaccinations were performed with privacy, needles were obscured). Children self-reported ISRR, including fear, pain and dizziness during vaccination, and both children and parents/caregivers (herein, parents) compared the child's experience to their last needle (better, same, worse). In the "after" phase, parents and children reported how much CARD helped (not at all, a little bit, a moderate amount, a lot). Results: The study was conducted between January 16 and March 20, 2022. Altogether, 152 children participated (71 before and 81 after CARD); demographic characteristics did not differ. Children's self-reported fear was lower after CARD, when assessed continuously (2.5 vs 3.7 out of 10; p = 0.02) or dichotomously, using a cut-off of 0 vs >0 (58% vs 80%; p = 0.01). Pain was lower when assessed dichotomously (<2 vs ≥2; p = 0.03). There was no difference in dizziness. After CARD, children and parents reported more positive experiences compared to the child's last needle (p = 0.01, both analyses) and more children and parents reported that distraction and child participation in the process were helpful (p < 0.001, both analyses). Overall, 92% of children and 91% of parents said CARD helped. Conclusion: CARD reduced children's fear and improved vaccination experiences for children and parents when integrated in community pharmacy-based vaccinations.

Impact of the CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) system on school-based vaccinations: A cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) system is a vaccine delivery framework that integrates evidence-based interventions to reduce stress-related responses and improve the vaccination experience for children undergoing vaccinations at school. In preliminary studies, CARD was acceptable and effective. The objective was to evaluate CARD in a large, pragmatic trial to confirm its effectiveness in real-world settings. METHODS: Hybrid effectiveness-implementation cluster randomized trial in schools receiving vaccination services from Wellington-Dufferin-Guelph Public Health. Forty schools with grade 7 students (12 years old) were randomized to CARD and control (n = 20/group). Nurses in CARD schools planned clinics with principals and educated students about CARD ahead of time. Principals disseminated information to staff and parents and sent reminders. Vaccination day processes minimized fear and facilitated student self-selected coping strategies. Nurses in control schools followed usual practices, which excluded principal meetings, education, reminders, and systematic integration of fear-reducing or child-selected coping strategies. Outcomes included stress-related symptoms (fear - primary outcome, pain, dizziness, fainting, post-vaccination reactions), use of coping interventions, vaccination uptake, attitudes and implementation outcomes (acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity). RESULTS: Altogether, 1919 students were included. Fear and pain were lower in CARD schools: OR 0.65 (95% CI 0.47-0.90) and OR 0.62 (95% CI 0.50-0.77), respectively. No students fainted in CARD schools compared to 0.8% in control (p = 0.02). Dizziness and post-vaccination reactions did not differ. Student-led coping interventions were used more frequently in CARD schools. Vaccination uptake was 76.1% in CARD schools and 72.5% in control schools (OR 1.13 (95% CI 0.85-1.50)). Staff and students had positive attitudes about CARD and implementation outcomes; however, recommendations were made to improve fidelity. DISCUSSION: CARD reduced stress-related responses in students undergoing vaccinations at school and was positively received by students and public health staff. CARD is recommended to improve the quality of vaccination delivery services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03966300.

Digital tools, multidisciplinarity and innovation for communicating vaccine safety in the COVID-19 era.

The research on the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and their commercialization is an opportunity to test and consolidate the current knowledge along with the diverse available tools related to vaccine communication.In this paper we explore the value of a multidisciplinary approach in this field: vaccine communication activities can be combined with insights from data science, risk communication, behavior change, design thinking and digital marketing. Methodologies derived from innovation and human-centered design can contribute to the development and testing of vaccine promotion campaigns, speeding up processes and streamlining the production of evidence in this area. The multiple activities involving the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine could be the fertile ground in which to develop, test and refine effective frameworks to transfer data acquired through listening strategies into effective vaccine promotion campaigns. The World Health Organization's Vaccine Safety Net is an interesting example of trusted information sources that aim toward using digital tools and innovative methodologies for communicating science-based information on vaccine safety at the global level.

A Public Health Research Agenda for Managing Infodemics: Methods and Results of the First WHO Infodemiology Conference.

BACKGROUND: An infodemic is an overflow of information of varying quality that surges across digital and physical environments during an acute public health event. It leads to confusion, risk-taking, and behaviors that can harm health and lead to erosion of trust in health authorities and public health responses. Owing to the global scale and high stakes of the health emergency, responding to the infodemic related to the pandemic is particularly urgent. Building on diverse research disciplines and expanding the discipline of infodemiology, more evidence-based interventions are needed to design infodemic management interventions and tools and implement them by health emergency responders. OBJECTIVE: The World Health Organization organized the first global infodemiology conference, entirely online, during June and July 2020, with a follow-up process from August to October 2020, to review current multidisciplinary evidence, interventions, and practices that can be applied to the COVID-19 infodemic response. This resulted in the creation of a public health research agenda for managing infodemics. METHODS: As part of the conference, a structured expert judgment synthesis method was used to formulate a public health research agenda. A total of 110 participants represented diverse scientific disciplines from over 35 countries and global public health implementing partners. The conference used a laddered discussion sprint methodology by rotating participant teams, and a managed follow-up process was used to assemble a research agenda based on the discussion and structured expert feedback. This resulted in a five-workstream frame of the research agenda for infodemic management and 166 suggested research questions. The participants then ranked the questions for feasibility and expected public health impact. The expert consensus was summarized in a public health research agenda that included a list of priority research questions. RESULTS: The public health research agenda for infodemic management has five workstreams: (1) measuring and continuously monitoring the impact of infodemics during health emergencies; (2) detecting signals and understanding the spread and risk of infodemics; (3) responding and deploying interventions that mitigate and protect against infodemics and their harmful effects; (4) evaluating infodemic interventions and strengthening the resilience of individuals and communities to infodemics; and (5) promoting the development, adaptation, and application of interventions and toolkits for infodemic management. Each workstream identifies research questions and highlights 49 high priority research questions. CONCLUSIONS: Public health authorities need to develop, validate, implement, and adapt tools and interventions for managing infodemics in acute public health events in ways that are appropriate for their countries and contexts. Infodemiology provides a scientific foundation to make this possible. This research agenda proposes a structured framework for targeted investment for the scientific community, policy makers, implementing organizations, and other stakeholders to consider.

Managing pain and fear: Playing your CARDs to improve the vaccination experience.

Most vaccinations are administered with a needle, which can cause pain and pain-related symptoms such as fear and fainting. At present, interventions aimed at preventing pain and associated symptoms are not systematically integrated in the vaccination delivery process even though they contribute to negative experiences with vaccination and vaccination noncompliance. In this article, a novel framework for vaccination delivery called the CARD™ system was reviewed. CARD is an acronym for Comfort, Ask, Relax and Distract, whereby each letter category incorporates evidence-based interventions to reduce pain and fear and related symptoms. CARD can be integrated in usual vaccination planning and delivery activities in many settings to improve the vaccination experience and decrease pain and fear as barriers to vaccination. Immunizers in all settings and organizational leaders are invited to review their vaccination services against CARD to identify opportunities for enhancing the quality of care being provided.

Feasibility of implementation of CARD™ for school-based immunizations in Calgary, Alberta: a cluster trial.

BACKGROUND: Negative experiences with school-based immunizations can contribute to vaccine hesitancy in youth and adulthood. We developed an evidence-based, multifaceted and customizable intervention to improve the immunization experience at school called the CARD™ (C-Comfort, A-Ask, R-Relax, D-Distract) system. We evaluated the feasibility of CARD™ implementation for school-based immunizations in Calgary, Canada. METHODS: In a mixed methods study, two Community Health Centres providing immunization services, including 5 schools each with grade 9 students (aged approximately 14 years), were randomized to CARD™ or control (usual care). In the CARD™ group, public health staff and students were educated about coping strategies prior to immunization clinics. Clinics were organized to reduce fear and to support student's choices for coping strategies. Public health staff in the CARD™ group participated in a focus group discussion afterwards. We sought a recruitment rate of 80% for eligible schools, an external stakeholder focus group (e.g., school staff) with 6 or more individuals, 85% of individual injection-related data acquisition (student and immunizer surveys), and 80% absolute agreement between raters for a subset of data that were double-coded. Across focus groups, we examined perceptions of acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility and fidelity of CARD™. RESULTS: Nine (90%) of eligible schools participated. Of 219 students immunized, injection-related student and immunizer data forms were acquired for 195 (89.0%) and 196 (89.5%), respectively. Reliability of data collection was high. Fifteen public health and 5 school staff participated in separate focus groups. Overall, attitudes towards CARD™ were positive and compliance with individual components of CARD™ was high. Public health staff expressed skepticism regarding the value of student participation in the CARD™ system. Suggestions were made regarding processes to refine implementation. CONCLUSION: While most outcome criteria were satisfied and overall perceptions of implementation outcomes were positive, some important challenges and opportunities were identified. Feedback is being used to inform a large cluster trial that will evaluate the impact of CARD™ during school-based immunizations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03948633 ); Submitted April 24, 2019.

Benchmarking public health pain management practices during school immunizations.

BACKGROUND: Pain and fear during immunizations can affect children and their future behaviour toward immunization. These negative experiences can be amplified when children receive vaccines as part of school-based immunization programs, where parental or tutor supports are missing. In 2015, HELPinKIDS&ADULTS, a Canadian network of experts, published a clinical practice guideline (CPG) on the management of pain and fear during immunization. This guideline has been endorsed by international, national and provincial organizations. However, the level of integration and implementation of the CPG into local and community immunization programs such as school-based immunization clinics is unclear. METHODS: An investigation whether public health units in Ontario integrated and implemented the pain and fear interventions recommended by the CPG into school-based immunization policies and practices was concluded. RESULTS: The study shows that the majority of public health units do have pain and fear policies and procedures in place, but interventions are not integrated in a consistent and formal manner, leading to suboptimal uptake of interventions during immunizations at school. CONCLUSION: For pain interventions to be applied with sufficient fidelity and in enough individuals to have a meaningful effect, organizational leaders need to create directives and procedures that support implementation in a systematic and accountable manner.

COVID-19 and missed routine immunizations: designing for effective catch-up in Canada.

COVID-19 has led to disruption in routine immunization programs around the globe and here in Canada. The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) in Canada has indicated that this sets the stage for serious outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. The World Health Organization has evidence-based guidance on how to address missed opportunities for vaccination, albeit predominately applicable for low- and middle-income countries. In Canada, immunization applies beyond infant and childhood immunization, with immunization across the life course being recommended by NACI. Three components stand out and must be integrated and used concurrently for best effect on catch-up in Canada: (1) Identify who has been missed across the life course; (2) detect delivery gaps, adapt and adjust, and develop multipronged tailored strategies for catch-up; and (3) communicate, document, evaluate and readjust the immunization programs. All must be adapted to the reality of the evolving COVID-19 pandemic. We cannot go back to a pre-COVID-19 world. However, ensuring that routine immunization and catch-up programs are done well during this pandemic strengthens the immunization foundation in Canada for when COVID-19 vaccines become available.

Overview of a Knowledge Translation (KT) Project to improve the vaccination experience at school: The CARD™ System.

BACKGROUND: Students experience fear, pain, and fainting during vaccinations at school. While evidence-based interventions exist, no Knowledge Translation (KT) interventions have been developed to mitigate these symptoms. A multidisciplinary team-the Pain Pain Go Away Team-was assembled to address this knowledge-to-care gap. This manuscript provides an overview of the methodology, knowledge products, and impact of an evidence-based KT program developed and implemented to improve the vaccination experience at school. METHODS: We adapted knowledge and assessed the barriers to knowledge use via focus group interviews with key stakeholder groups involved in school-based vaccinations: students, nurses, school staff, and parents. Next, we developed project-specific goals and data collection tools and collected baseline data. We then created a multifaceted KT intervention called The CARD™ System (C-Comfort, A-Ask, R-Relax, D-Distract) to provide a framework for planning and delivering vaccinations using a student-centred approach. Selected KT tools from this framework were reviewed in additional focus groups held in all stakeholder groups. The multifaceted KT intervention was then finalized and implemented in stages in two projects including grade 7 students undergoing school vaccinations and impact on student outcomes (e.g., symptoms of fear, pain, dizziness) and process outcomes (e.g., utilization of interventions that reduce student symptoms, vaccination rate) were assessed. RESULTS: Participants reported that improving the vaccination experience is important. Based on participant feedback, an evidence-based multifaceted KT intervention called The CARD™ System was developed that addresses user needs and preferences. Selected KT tools of this intervention were demonstrated to be acceptable and to improve knowledge and attitudes about vaccination in the stakeholder groups. In two separate implementation projects, CARD™ helped grade 7 students prepare for vaccinations and positively impacted on their vaccination experiences. CARD™ improved vaccination experiences for other stakeholder groups as well. There was no evidence of an impact on school vaccination rates. CONCLUSION: We developed and implemented a promising multifaceted KT intervention called The CARD™ System to address vaccination-associated pain, fear, and fainting. Future research is recommended to determine impact in students of different ages and in different geographical regions and clinical contexts.

Piloting The CARD™ System for education of students about vaccination: Does it improve the vaccination experience at school?

OBJECTIVE: Many students are fearful of vaccine injection-associated pain. In prior research, we created Knowledge Translation (KT) tools to address school vaccinations and associated pain, fear, and fainting. The objectives of this pilot implementation project were to determine the acceptability and impact of these KT tools on student knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of their vaccination experience. METHODS: Pre-post mixed methods design. Students in an independent school in the Greater Toronto Area, Ontario, participated in two separate focus groups before and after school vaccinations. In both sessions, they independently completed a knowledge and attitudes survey, reviewed three KT tools (two videos and one pamphlet) and then repeated the knowledge and attitudes survey. They provided structured and qualitative feedback about the KT tools and described the impact of the education on the vaccination experience. RESULTS: Altogether, 11 grade 7 students participated. Knowledge scores were higher post-tool review compared to baseline in the first focus group. There was no significant difference in fear scores and attitudes about getting vaccinated. Qualitative feedback was categorized into two themes: intervention characteristics and characteristics of the school environment. Students reported the KT tools helped them to prepare for vaccination. They used the information on vaccination day to reduce their own fear and pain and to assist peers. They believed all students should view the KT tools. Students reported that teachers and nurses did not do enough to make vaccinations a positive experience. For example, they did not provide a private setting as an option for vaccination and prevented them from using some coping strategies recommended in the KT tools. DISCUSSION: This study provides preliminary evidence of the acceptability and positive impact of the KT tools on students' vaccination experiences. Future research is recommended that involves inclusion of all students and adults in the KT intervention.

Exposure-based Interventions for the management of individuals with high levels of needle fear across the lifespan: a clinical practice guideline and call for further research.

Needle fear typically begins in childhood and represents an important health-related issue across the lifespan. Individuals who are highly fearful of needles frequently avoid health care. Although guidance exists for managing needle pain and fear during procedures, the most highly fearful may refuse or abstain from such procedures. The purpose of a clinical practice guideline (CPG) is to provide actionable instruction on the management of a particular health concern; this guidance emerges from a systematic process. Using evidence from a rigorous systematic review interpreted by an expert panel, this CPG provides recommendations on exposure-based interventions for high levels of needle fear in children and adults. The AGREE-II, GRADE, and Cochrane methodologies were used. Exposure-based interventions were included. The included evidence was very low quality on average. Strong recommendations include the following. In vivo (live/in person) exposure-based therapy is recommended (vs. no treatment) for children seven years and older and adults with high levels of needle fear. Non-in vivo (imaginal, computer-based) exposure (vs. no treatment) is recommended for individuals (over seven years of age) who are unwilling to undergo in vivo exposure. Although there were no included trials which examined children < 7 years, exposure-based interventions are discussed as good clinical practice. Implementation considerations are discussed and clinical tools are provided. Utilization of these recommended practices may lead to improved health outcomes due to better health care compliance. Research on the understanding and treatment of high levels of needle fear is urgently needed; specific recommendations are provided.

Partnering in oncogenetic research--the INHERIT BRCAs experience: opportunities and challenges.

Today it is common to conduct research in collaboration with colleagues from different disciplines and institutions. The INterdisciplinary HEalth Research International Team on BReast CAncer susceptibility (INHERIT BRCAs), involves Canadian and international experts from diverse fields working with health service providers, patients and collaborators from the World Health Organization and other European networks. Evidence-based information and knowledge transfer drive our efforts to advance genomic research to understand the genetic basis of cancer susceptibility and treatment response. Several goals reveal the interdisciplinary team approach: (a) to estimate the prevalence and penetrance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations and their deleterious impact upon different populations; (b) to pinpoint novel breast cancer susceptibility loci; (c) to assess the efficacy of clinical interventions; (d) to address changes in quality of life and health-related behaviour from the decision to undergo genetics testing and during follow-up; (e) to evaluate legal, social and ethical implications; and, finally; (f) to promote professional and public education by facilitating the transfer of research findings to clinical practice and informing policy makers. The lessons learned by the INHERIT research team and future challenges are presented.