Research prioritization of men's health and urologic diseasess

ABSTRACT Objectives We sought to determine whether disease representation in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) reflects disease burden, measured by the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study as disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). Materials and Methods Two investigators performed independent assessment of ten men’s health and urologic diseases (MHUDs) in CDSR for systematic review and protocol representation, which were compared with percentage of total 2010 DALYs for the ten conditions. Data were analyzed for correlation using Spearman rank analysis. Results Nine of ten MHUDs were represented by at least one CDSR review. There was a poor and statistically insignificant positive correlation between CDSR representation and disease burden (rho = 0.42, p = 0.23). CDSR representation was aligned with disease burden for three conditions, greater than disease burden for one condition, and less than disease burden for six conditions. Conclusions These results yield high-quality estimates to inform future research prioritization for MHUDs. While prioritization processes are complex and multi-faceted, disease burden should be strongly considered. Awareness of research priority setting has the potential to minimize research disparities on a global scale.

Research prioritization of men's health and urologic diseases.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine whether disease representation in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) reflects disease burden, measured by the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study as disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two investigators performed independent assessment of ten men's health and urologic diseases (MHUDs) in CDSR for systematic review and protocol representation, which were compared with percentage of total 2010 DALYs for the ten conditions. Data were analyzed for correlation using Spearman rank analysis. RESULTS: Nine of ten MHUDs were represented by at least one CDSR review. There was a poor and statistically insignificant positive correlation between CDSR representation and disease burden (rho = 0.42, p = 0.23). CDSR representation was aligned with disease burden for three conditions, greater than disease burden for one condition, and less than disease burden for six conditions. CONCLUSIONS: These results yield high-quality estimates to inform future research prioritization for MHUDs. While prioritization processes are complex and multi-faceted, disease burden should be strongly considered. Awareness of research priority setting has the potential to minimize research disparities on a global scale.

Identifying gaps for research prioritisation: Global burden of external causes of injury as reflected in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

IMPORTANCE: Burden of disease should impact research prioritisation. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and determine whether systematic reviews and protocols accurately represent disease burden, as measured by disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2010 Study. METHODS: Two investigators collected GBD disability metrics for 12 external causes of injury in the GBD 2010 Study. These external causes were then assessed for systematic review and protocol representation in CDSR. Data was collected during the month of April 2015. There were no study participants aside from the researchers. Percentage of total 2010 DALYs, 2010 DALY rank, and median DALY percent change from 1990 to 2010 of the 12 external causes of injury were compared with CDSR representation of systematic reviews and protocols. Data were analysed for correlation using Spearman rank correlation. RESULTS: Eleven of the 12 causes were represented by at least one systematic review or protocol in CDSR; the category collective violence and legal intervention had no representation in CDSR. Correlation testing revealed a strong positive correlation that was statistically significant. Representation of road injury; interpersonal violence; fire, heat, and hot substances; mechanical forces; poisonings, adverse effect of medical treatment, and animal contact was well aligned with respect to DALY. Representation of falls was greater compared to DALY, while self-harm, exposure to forces of nature, and other transport injury representation was lower compared to DALY. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: CDSR representation of external causes of injury strongly correlates with disease burden. The number of systematic reviews and protocols was well aligned for seven out of 12 causes of injury. These results provide high-quality and transparent data that may guide future prioritisation decisions.

Comparing cutaneous research funded by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) with the US skin disease burden.

BACKGROUND: Disease burden should be an important component for guiding research funding. OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the relationship between dermatologic research funded from 2012 to 2013 by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and US skin disease burden as measured by disability-adjusted life years in the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was independently performed by 2 researchers who matched projects from the 2012 to 2013 NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools with 15 skin conditions and their respective disability-adjusted life years from Global Burden of Disease 2010. RESULTS: The NIH funded 1108 projects spanning the 15 skin conditions. Melanoma received almost half of the total skin condition budget (49.5%). Melanoma, nonmelanoma skin cancer, and leprosy were funded above what would be suggested by their disease burden, whereas dermatitis, acne vulgaris, pruritus, urticaria, decubitus ulcer, fungal skin diseases, alopecia areata, cellulitis, and scabies appeared underfunded. Bacterial skin diseases, viral skin diseases, and psoriasis were well matched with disease burden. LIMITATIONS: Disease burden is one of many factors that may be used to guide priority-setting decisions. CONCLUSION: Skin disease burden measured by disability-adjusted life year metrics partially correlates with NIH funding prioritization. Comparing US disease burden with NIH funding suggests possible underfunded and overfunded skin diseases.

Alignment of systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Database of Abstracts and Reviews of Effectiveness with global burden-of-disease data: a bibliographic analysis.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews of high-quality evidence are used to inform policy and practice. To improve community health, the production of such reviews should align with burden of disease. This study aims to assess if the volume of research output from systematic reviews proportionally aligns with burden of disease assessed using percentages of mortality and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). METHODS: A cross-sectional audit of reviews published between January 2012 and August 2013 in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) was undertaken. Percentages of mortality and DALYs were obtained from the 2010 Global Burden of Disease study. Standardised residual differences (SRD) based on percentages of mortality and DALYs were calculated, where conditions with SRD of more than or less than three were considered overstudied or understudied, respectively. RESULTS: 1029 reviews from CDSR and 1928 reviews from DARE were examined. There was a significant correlation between percentage DALYs and systematic reviews published in CDSR and DARE databases (CDSR: r=0.68, p=0.001; DARE: r=0.60, p<0.001). There was no significant correlation between percentage mortality and number of systematic reviews published in either database (CDSR: r=0.34, p=0.14; DARE: r=0.22, p=0.34). Relative to percentage of mortality, mental and behavioural disorders, musculoskeletal conditions and other non-communicable diseases were overstudied. Maternal disorders were overstudied relative to percentages of mortality and DALYs in CDSR. CONCLUSIONS: The focus of systematic reviews is moderately correlated with DALYs. A number of conditions may be overstudied relative to percentage of mortality particularly in the context of health and medical reviews.

Comparing burden of dermatologic disease to search interest on google trends.

Google Trends is a publicly available resource for comparing Internet search query frequency and trends interest in queries over time. The tool provides country, region, and city-specific data for term search volume on Google Search. Our study sought to compare the relative search interest to the burden of disease for the fifteen skin conditions studied by the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2010 project. Searches on Google Trends were conducted by using the most inclusive terms and true ICD code definitions as possible for the skin conditions studied. We report that relative interest on Google Trends did largely correlate to burden of disease reported by the GBD 2010 study, though some conditions were either underrepresented or overrepresented. Acne and herpes were the most Googled skin disease terms. This study provides further insight into what may be the most burdensome skin diseases because those with more burdensome diseases likely sought out information on their condition.

Impact of a dermatology wiki website on dermatology education.

BACKGROUND: The Dermatology Education Wiki (dermwiki) website serves as a resource platform for medical students and residents. The readily accessible interface provides dermatology articles, survival guides, didactic lectures, and links to faculty talks as well as research opportunities. OBJECTIVE: To assess medical student and resident satisfaction with the dermwiki website. METHODS: Fourth-year medical students taking a dermatology elective were provided with a temporary password to access relevant dermwiki information. A satisfaction survey was created to assess whether medical students found the website helpful. Second- and third-year dermatology residents were also surveyed to compare satisfaction scores prior to and after the introduction of the dermwiki website. End-of-rotation medical student exam scores were tabulated and compared to the average scores from years prior to the development of the dermwiki website. RESULTS: Medical students rated the dermatology elective with the dermwiki website higher than rotations without a wiki (8.12 vs 7.31). Students planning to go into dermatology were more satisfied with the dermwiki website, reported accessing the website more frequently (11 times vs 9.5 times), and reported more time spent studying (12.2 hours vs 6.7 hours) than students not going into dermatology. End-of-rotation medical student exam scores did not differ from those prior to the development of the demwiki website. Ten second- and third-year dermatology residents unanimously stated that they were more satisfied with the program after the institution of the dermwiki website. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, addition of the dermwiki website to the dermatology elective curriculum has improved medical student and resident satisfaction scores. The improvement is greater among students planning to enter the field of dermatology. This study serves as a model for the incorporation of internet-based interactive tools to transform and supplement the learning environment.

Teledermatology as an educational tool for teaching dermatology to residents and medical students.

Although teledermatology (TD) is regarded as a tool to improve patient access to specialty healthcare, little has been done to evaluate its role in medical education. We describe the TD program at the Denver (CO) Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center and evaluate its use as an educational tool for teaching dermatology to dermatology residents and medical students. Dermatology residents manage TD consultations and review all cases with a faculty preceptor; medical students participate as observers when possible. This study assessed dermatology resident (n=14) and medical student (n=16) perceptions of TD and its usefulness in teaching six core clinical competencies. Both residents (79%) and medical students (88%) "strongly agree" or "agree" that TD is an important educational tool. In general, medical students were slightly more satisfied than residents across all of the core competencies assessed except for patient care. Medical students and residents were most satisfied with the competencies of practice-based learning and improvement and medical knowledge, whereas they were least satisfied with those of interpersonal and communication skills and professionalism. Overall, TD is valued as a teaching tool for dermatology in the areas of patient care, medical knowledge, practice-based learning and improvement, and systems-based practice.

Global burden of eye and vision disease as reflected in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

IMPORTANCE: Eye and vision disease burden should help guide ophthalmologic research prioritization. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study 2010 compiled data from 1990 to 2010 on 291 diseases and injuries, 1160 disease and injury sequelae, and 67 risk factors in 187 countries. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) is a resource for systematic reviews in health care, with peer-reviewed systematic reviews that are published by Cochrane Review Groups. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether systematic review and protocol topics in the CDSR reflect disease burden, measured by disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), from the GBD 2010 project. This is one of a series of projects mapping GBD 2010 medical field disease burdens to corresponding systematic reviews in the CDSR. DESIGN AND SETTING: Two investigators independently assessed 8 ophthalmologic conditions in the CDSR for systematic review and protocol representation according to subject content. The 8 diseases were matched to their respective DALYs from the GBD 2010 project. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews systematic review and protocol representation and percentage of total 2010 DALYs. RESULTS: All 8 ophthalmologic conditions were represented by at least 1 systematic review in the CDSR. A total of 91.4% of systematic reviews and protocols focused on these conditions were from the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group. Comparing the number of reviews and protocols with disability, only cataract was well matched; glaucoma, macular degeneration, and other vision loss were overrepresented. In comparison, trachoma, onchocerciasis, vitamin A deficiency, and refraction and accommodation disorders were underrepresented. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These results prompt further investigation into why certain diseases are overrepresented or underrepresented in the CDSR relative to their DALY. With regard to ophthalmologic conditions, this study encourages that certain conditions get more focus to create a better representation of what is causing the most disability and mortality within this research database. These results provide high-quality and transparent data to inform future prioritization decisions.

Identifying otolaryngology systematic review research gaps: comparing Global Burden of Disease 2010 results with Cochrane Database of Systematic Review content.

IMPORTANCE: Burden of disease should inform research prioritization. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether systematic reviews and protocols published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) appropriately reflect disease burden for otolaryngologic conditions as measured by the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2010 project. DESIGN: Two investigators independently assessed 10 otolaryngologic conditions in CDSR for systematic review and protocol representation from March to June 2014. The otolaryngologic diseases were matched to their respective GBD 2010 disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) to assess their correlation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Relationship of CDSR representation (based on systematic reviews and protocols) with percentage of total 2010 DALYs, 2010 DALY rank, and DALY percentage change from 1990 to 2010 for 10 otolaryngologic conditions. RESULTS: All 10 otolaryngologic conditions were represented by at least 1 systematic review in CDSR. The number of reviews and protocols in CDSR was well matched with GBD 2010 disability metrics for only 1 disease, mouth cancer. Upper respiratory infections, otitis media, thyroid cancer, and cleft lip and cleft palate were overrepresented in CDSR, and esophageal cancer, "other hearing loss," nasopharynx cancer, larynx cancer, and "cancer of other part of pharynx and oropharynx" were underrepresented. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The representation of otolaryngologic conditions in CDSR correlates poorly with DALY metrics. The results of this study may guide future research prioritization and allocation of funds.

Identifying gaps in research prioritization: The global burden of neglected tropical diseases as reflected in the Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) impact disadvantaged populations in resource-scarce settings. Availability of synthesized evidence is paramount to end this disparity. The aim of the study was to determine whether NTD systematic reviews or protocols in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) reflect disease burden. METHODS: Two authors independently searched the CDSR for reviews/protocols regarding the NTDs diseases. Each review or protocol was classified to a single NTD category. Any discrepancy was solved by consensus with third author. NTD systematic review or protocol from CDSR were matched with disability-adjusted life year (DALY) metrics from the Global Burden of Disease 2010 Study. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and associated P values were used to assess for correlation between the number of systematic reviews and protocols and the %2010 DALY associated with each NTD. RESULTS: Overall, there was poor correlation between CDSR representation and DALYs. Yellow fever, echinococcus, onchocerciasis, and schistosomiasis representation was well-aligned with DALY. Leprosy, trachoma, dengue, leishmaniasis, and Chagas disease representation was greater, while cysticercosis, human African trypanosomiasis, ascariasis, lymphatic filariasis, and hookworm representation was lower than DALY. Three of the 18 NTDs had reviews/protocols of diagnostic test accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate the need for increased prioritization of systematic reviews on NTDs, particularly diagnostic test accuracy reviews.

Global mortality from conditions with skin manifestations.

BACKGROUND: Global Burden of Disease Study is a research database containing systematically compiled information from vital statistics and epidemiologic literature to inform research, public policy, and resource allocation. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare mortality among conditions with skin manifestations in 50 developed and 137 developing countries from 1990 to 2010. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study to calculate mean age-standardized mortality (per 100,000 persons) across countries for 10 disease categories with skin manifestations. We compared differences in mortality from these disorders by time period (year 1990 vs year 2010) and by developing versus developed country status. RESULTS: Melanoma death rates were 5.6 and 4.7 times greater in developed compared with developing countries in 1990 and 2010, respectively. Measles death rates in 1990 and 2010 were 345 and 197 times greater in developing countries, and corresponding syphilis death rates were 33 and 45 times greater. LIMITATIONS: Inability to adjust for patient-, provider-, and geographic-level confounders may limit the accuracy and generalizability of these results. CONCLUSION: The mortality burden from skin-related conditions differs between developing and developed countries, with the greatest differences observed for melanoma, measles, and syphilis. These results may help prioritize and optimize efforts to prevent and treat these disorders.