Appropriate use criteria for ancillary diagnostic testing in dermatopathology: New recommendations for 11 tests and 220 clinical scenarios from the American Society of Dermatopathology Appropriate Use Criteria Committee.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate use criteria (AUC) provide patient-centered physician guidance in test selection. An initial set of AUC was reported by the American Society of Dermatopathology (ASDP) in 2018. AUC reflect evidence collected at single timepoints and may be affected by evolving evidence and experience. The objective of this study was to update and expand AUC for selected tests. METHODS: RAND/UCLA (RAND Corporation [Santa Monica, CA]/University of California Los Angeles) methodology used includes the following: (a) literature review; (b) review of previously rated tests and previously employed clinical scenarios; (c) selection of previously rated tests for new ratings; (d) development of new clinical scenarios; (e) selection of additional tests; (f) three rating rounds with feedback and group discussion after rounds 1 and 2. RESULTS: For 220 clinical scenarios comprising lymphoproliferative (light chain clonality), melanocytic (comparative genomic hybridization, fluorescence in situ hybridization, reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, telomerase reverse transcriptase promoter), vascular disorders (MYC), and inflammatory dermatoses (periodic acid-Schiff, Gömöri methenamine silver), consensus by panel raters was reached in 172 of 220 (78%) scenarios, with 103 of 148 (70%) rated "usually appropriate" or "rarely appropriate" and 45 of 148 (30%), "appropriateness uncertain." LIMITATIONS: The study design only measures appropriateness. Cost, availability, test comparison, and additional clinical considerations are not measured. The possibility that the findings of this study may be influenced by the inherent biases of the dermatopathologists involved in the study cannot be excluded. CONCLUSIONS: AUC are reported for selected diagnostic tests in clinical scenarios that occur in dermatopathology practice. Adhering to AUC may reduce inappropriate test utilization and improve healthcare delivery.

Appropriate use criteria in dermatopathology: Initial recommendations from the American Society of Dermatopathology.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate use criteria (AUC) provide physicians guidance in test selection, and can affect health care delivery, reimbursement policy, and physician decision-making. OBJECTIVES: The American Society of Dermatopathology, with input from the American Academy of Dermatology and the College of American Pathologists, sought to develop AUC in dermatopathology. METHODS: The RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology, which combines evidence-based medicine, clinical experience, and expert judgment, was used to develop AUC in dermatopathology. RESULTS: With the number of ratings predetermined at 3, AUC were developed for 211 clinical scenarios involving 12 ancillary studies. Consensus was reached for 188 (89%) clinical scenarios, with 93 (44%) considered "usually appropriate" and 52 (25%) "rarely appropriate" and 43 (20%) having "uncertain appropriateness." LIMITATIONS: The methodology requires a focus on appropriateness without comparison between tests and irrespective of cost. CONCLUSIONS: The ultimate decision to order specific tests rests with the physician and is one where the expected benefit exceeds the negative consequences. This publication outlines the recommendations of appropriateness-the AUC for 12 tests used in dermatopathology. Importantly, these recommendations may change considering new evidence. Results deemed "uncertain appropriateness" and where consensus was not reached may benefit from further research.

Muir-Torre syndrome appropriate use criteria: Effect of patient age on appropriate use scores.

BACKGROUND: Muir-Torre syndrome (MTS) is a rare inherited syndrome, with an increased risk of sebaceous and visceral malignancy. Prior reports suggest screening for mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency may be warranted in patients <50 years and when sebaceous neoplasms are located on a non-head and neck location. Previously, appropriate use criteria (AUC) were developed for clinical scenarios in patients >60 years concerning the use of MMR protein immunohistochemistry (MMRP-IHC). This analysis explores the appropriateness of testing in patients ≤60 years. METHODS: Panel raters from the AUC Task Force rated the use of MMRP-IHC testing for MTS for previously rated scenarios with the only difference being age. RESULTS: Results verify the previously developed AUC for the use of MMRP-IHC in neoplasms associated with MTS in patients >60 years. Results also show that in patients ≤60 years with a single sebaceous tumor on a non-head and neck site, MMRP-IHC testing should be considered. Testing can also be considered with a 2-antibody panel on periocular sebaceous carcinoma in younger patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings align with known evidence supporting the need to incorporate clinical parameters in identifying patients at risk for MTS, with age being a factor when considering MMRP-IHC testing.

Appropriate use criteria in dermatopathology: Initial recommendations from the American Society of Dermatopathology.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate use criteria (AUC) provide physicians guidance in test selection, and can affect health care delivery, reimbursement policy and physician decision-making. OBJECTIVES: The American Society of Dermatopathology, with input from the American Academy of Dermatology and the College of American Pathologists, sought to develop AUC in dermatopathology. METHODS: The RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology, which combines evidence-based medicine, clinical experience and expert judgment, was used to develop AUC in dermatopathology. RESULTS: With the number of ratings predetermined at 3, AUC were developed for 211 clinical scenarios involving 12 ancillary studies. Consensus was reached for 188 (89%) clinical scenarios, with 93 (44%) considered "usually appropriate," 52 (25%) "rarely appropriate" and 43 (20%) "uncertain appropriateness." LIMITATIONS: The methodology requires a focus on appropriateness without comparison between tests and irrespective of cost. CONCLUSIONS: The ultimate decision of when to order specific test rests with the physician and is one where the expected benefit exceeds the negative consequences. This publication outlines the recommendations of appropriateness-AUC for 12 tests used in dermatopathology. Importantly, these recommendations may change considering new evidence. Results deemed "uncertain appropriateness" and where consensus was not reached may benefit from further research.

How to assess the quality of psychotherapy outcome studies: A systematic review of quality assessment criteria.

OBJECTIVE: Although it is widely accepted that the quality of a study may affect its results, there is no agreed specific standard for assessing the quality of psychotherapy outcome studies. This study aims to review the existing variety of relevant quality assessment criteria. METHOD: We identified relevant quality measures based on a systematic literature search. To determine the specific relevance of the available quality criteria, we consulted experts in the field of psychotherapy outcome research. RESULTS: Nineteen different measures providing 185 different quality criteria were included. Four measures specifically focused psychotherapy studies, none of these were designed for studies without a control group. Experts did judge 20% of the items as "absolutely indispensable." CONCLUSIONS: Quality criteria that are exclusively related to the context of psychotherapy research are rare. Further research is required to examine the empirical relation between specific quality criteria and study results.

The Basic Documentation for Psycho-Oncology Short Form (PO-Bado SF)--an expert rating scale for distress screening: development and psychometric properties.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to validate the Basic Documentation for Psycho-Oncology Short Form (PO-Bado SF), a six item interview-based expert rating scale for distress screening in cancer patients. METHODS: Using a heterogeneous multicenter study sample (n = 1551), we examined validity, reliability, and dimensionality of the PO-Bado SF. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Distress Thermometer, the Questionnaire on Stress in Cancer, and the Patient Health Questionnaire were used to investigate convergent validity. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied to address unidimensionality. An optimal cutoff point was determined by ROC analysis and the maximum of Youden's index. An additional study with n = 41 audio recorded PO-Bado SF interviews was carried out to assess inter-rater reliability. RESULTS: Mean age of the study sample was 64.0 (SD = 12.0), 42% were women. About 24% of the patients suffered from metastases. The one-factor solution was confirmed; internal consistency of the PO-Bado SF was high (α = 0.84). The PO-Bado SF total score correlated significantly with all psychosocial measures, the highest correlation was with the HADS total score (r = 0.64). Patients with severe disease conditions (metastases, psychological/psychiatric treatment in the past, low performance status) received higher distress ratings (p < 0.001). Using HADS total score (>13) as external criterion, an optimal PO-Bado SF cutoff score of >9 emerged (sensitivity 0.75; specificity 0.82). Inter-rater reliability was satisfactory for each of the six items (intra class correlation of 0.75 to 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: The PO-Bado SF is a short, reliable and valid expert rating scale to identify distressed cancer patients.

Defining and reporting exercise intensity in interventions for older adults: a modified Delphi process.

BACKGROUND: Many exercise studies, including older adults, do not report all relevant exercise characteristics. Especially the description of exercise intensity is missing and mostly not controlled. This leads to difficulties in interpreting study results and summarizing the evidence in systematic reviews or meta-analyses. Therefore, the aim of the present Delphi study was to gain recommendations about the categorization of exercise intensity and for the conducting and reporting of characteristics in future intervention studies with older adults by experts in exercise science and physiology. METHODS: Two hundred ninety-seven international interdisciplinary participants from an EU COST action were invited to participate in three rounds of online questionnaires in April/May 2023. Up to N = 93 experts participated in each round. Round 1 included open-ended questions to solicit possible recommendations and categorizations for light, moderate, vigorous, and high intensity. In round 2, the experts rated their agreement using Likert scales (1-10) on the revealed categories and recommendations. Clusters with a higher average rating of M = 8.0 were summarized into round 3. In the final round, the results were presented for a final rating of agreement (based on a simple majority > 50%). RESULTS: In round 1 a total of 416 qualitative statements were provided from thirteen questions. From round 1 to round 3, a total of 38 items were excluded, with 205 items retained for the final consensus. In round three 37 participants completed the whole questionnaire. The experts showed overall agreement on the final categorizations with 6.7 to 8.8 out of 10 points on the Likert scale. They also showed broad consensus on the relevance of reporting exercise intensity and the recommendations for future conducting and reporting of study results. However, exercise types such as yoga, balance, and coordination training led to conflicting results for categorization into light or moderate. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: The results of the current survey can be used to classify the intensity of exercise and suggest a practical approach that can be adopted by the scientific community and applied when conducting systematic reviews and meta-analysis articles when vital and objective information regarding exercise intensity is lacking from the original article.

Selection of Indicator Bird Species as a Baseline for Knowledge Assessment in Biodiversity Survey Studies.

The loss of Earth's biodiversity is accompanied by a loss of public knowledge about species. Many scientists are convinced that knowledge about species is an important prerequisite to interest and investment in species conservation. In the past, knowledge about species has mostly been assessed using birds, but there is no consensus on which birds could serve as a baseline for knowledge about species in the general public. The aim of this study is to provide a list of the 'golden 50' bird species in Germany that can be used by educational institutions, as well as studies about species knowledge to make them more comparable. The list can also serve as a basis for the selection of so-called flagship species, which are used for the protection of habitats and other species due to their high likeability. To achieve this, three consecutive steps were conducted: an analysis of bird-related databases to determine which species might be common and known and two expert panel studies. The data analysis included several factors: species characteristics, Citizen Science data, public value and importance, and scientific studies. In both the first and second rounds, experts were asked for their opinion on which species should be known by the general public in Germany. The first expert panel, which consisted of only a small group of experts (n = 6), was mainly used to reduce the number of species for the second panel. In the second expert panel, 197 ornithologically qualified experts from all over Germany were asked for their assessment. The correlations between the expert assessments and the different variables were all significant (except for the species trait "colourfulness"), which validates the selection process used here and consequently the species list that has been compiled. The selection process can also be applied to other biogeographical regions or taxa.

Expert-based controllability assessment of control transitions from automated to manual driving.

Up to a level of full vehicle automation, drivers will have to be available as a fallback level and take back manual control of the vehicle in case of system limits or failures. Before introducing automated vehicles to the consumer market, the controllability of these control transitions has to be demonstrated. This paper presents a novel procedure for an expert-based controllability assessment of control transitions from automated to manual driving. A standardized rating scheme is developed that allows trained raters to integrate different aspects of driving performance during control transitions (e.g., quality of lateral and longitudinal control, adequateness of signalling to other road users, etc.) into one global controllability measure based on video material of the driving situation. The method is adapted from an existing assessment procedure that has been successfully applied to assess the criticality of driving situations in manual driving conditions (e.g., assessment of substance-induced impairments, assessment of fitness-to-drive of novice drivers). This paper presents the rating procedure, including instructions of how to code relevant qualities of the drivers' performance with accompanying video-demonstrations, and material used for rater training. •A rating procedure for an expert-based controllability assessment of control transitions from automated to manual driving based on observation of video material was adapted from an existing method used in studies on manual driving.•The advantage of this method consists in an integration of different dimensions of driving performance (e.g., operational and tactical driving behaviour, criticality of the situation) into one global controllability measure.•The method allows an assessment and comparison of diverse take-over scenarios, detached from driver performance variables.•The accompanying video-based training material allows reproducible and reliable execution of the rating procedure.