A systematic review and meta-analysis of data linkage between motor vehicle crash and hospital-based datasets.

Motor vehicle crash data linkage has emerged as a vital tool to better understand the injury outcomes and the factors contributing to crashes. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to explore the existing knowledge on data linkage between motor vehicle crashes and hospital-based datasets, summarize and highlight the findings of previous studies, and identify gaps in research. A comprehensive and systematic search of the literature yielded 54 studies for a qualitative analysis, and 35 of which were also considered for a quantitative meta-analysis. Findings highlight a range of viable methodologies for linking datasets, including manual, deterministic, probabilistic, and integrative methods. Designing a linkage method that integrates different algorithms and techniques is more likely to result in higher match rate and fewer errors. Examining the results of the meta-analysis reveals that a wide range of linkage rates were reported. There are several factors beyond the approach that affect the linkage rate including the size and coverage of both datasets and the linkage variables. Gender, age, crash type, and roadway geometry at the crash site were likely to be associated with a record's presence in a linked dataset. Linkage rate alone is not the only important metric and when linkage rate is used as a metric in research, both police and hospital rates should be reported. This study also highlights the importance of examining and accounting for population and bias introduced by linking two datasets.

Identification of urgent gaps in public and policymaker knowledge of heart failure: Results of a global survey.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in the treatment of heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction, people with HF continue to have a high risk of mortality and hospitalisation. Patients also suffer from poor quality of life, with reduced societal and economic participation. The burden of HF on patients and healthcare systems is extraordinary, yet awareness remains low. This survey was conducted to identify gaps in general public and policymaker knowledge around HF. METHODS: A closed-question web-based survey of the general public and policymakers was conducted between February and October 2020. Study outcomes assessed the participants' awareness and understanding of HF symptoms, risk factors and mortality, and views around hospital admissions in their country. Responses were collected using multiple-choice questions. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 26,272 general public respondents in 13 countries and 281 government and public sector policymakers in nine countries. While 99% of general public respondents had heard of HF, their understanding of the condition and its symptoms was poor, and only 6% identified that shortness of breath, fatigue, and leg swelling were the main symptoms of HF. Of policymaker respondents, 14% identified HF as the leading cause of avoidable hospitalisations, and only 4% recognised that ~ 87% of government spending on HF is related to hospitalisations. CONCLUSIONS: Major gaps were identified in the understanding of HF and the burden it places on patients and their caregivers, healthcare systems and society. This study confirms an ongoing need for national policy strategies and investment to raise awareness of the importance of HF prevention, early diagnosis, and implementation of effective treatments to reduce hospitalisations and death.

A Call to Action to Address the Burden of Cardiovascular Disease in People with Diabetes.

In 2022, the Global Heart Hub held a Cardio-Diabetes Think Tank to develop consensus on actions that need to be taken to address the growing burden of diabetes and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Across the world, diabetes affects almost half a billion people, who have a twofold increased risk of CVD. The patient-led think tank brought together the diabetes and CVD communities, with representatives from leading global and regional patient and professional organisations, and produced a report outlining tangible and specific actions that reflect what matters most to patients. The think tank calls for key players in both communities to work together to implement these actions, putting people at the centre of decision-making and improving cardio-diabetes care.