A Targeted Review of Worldwide Indirect Treatment Comparison Guidelines and Best Practices.

OBJECTIVES: Controls and governance over the methodology and reporting of indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) have been introduced to minimize bias and ensure scientific credibility and transparency in healthcare decision making. The objective of this study was to highlight ITC techniques that are key to conducting objective and analytically sound analyses and to ascertain circumstantial suitability of ITCs as a source of comparative evidence for healthcare interventions. METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE was searched from January 2010 through August 2023 to identify publicly available ITC-related documents (ie, guidelines and best practices) in the English language. This was supplemented with hand searches of websites of various international organizations, regulatory agencies, and reimbursement agencies of Europe, North America, and Asia-Pacific. The jurisdiction-specific ITC methodology and reporting recommendations were reviewed. RESULTS: Sixty-eight guidelines from 10 authorities worldwide were included for synthesis. Many of the included guidelines were updated within the last 5 years and commonly cited the absence of direct comparative studies as primary justification for using ITCs. Most jurisdictions favored population-adjusted or anchored ITC techniques opposed to naive comparisons. Recommendations on the reporting and presentation of these ITCs varied across authorities; however, there was some overlap among the key elements. CONCLUSIONS: Given the challenges of conducting head-to-head randomized controlled trials, comparative data from ITCs offer valuable insights into clinical-effectiveness. As such, multiple ITC guidelines have emerged worldwide. According to the most recent versions of the guidelines, the suitability and subsequent acceptability of the ITC technique used depends on the data sources, available evidence, and magnitude of benefit/uncertainty.

Gender Analysis for One Health: Theoretical Perspectives and Recommendations for Practice.

One health emphasizes the interdependent health of humans, animals, and their shared environments and shows promise as an integrated, equitable transdisciplinary approach to important ecohealth issues. Notably, research or programming explicitly examining the intersection of gender and one health is limited, although females represent half of the human population and play important roles in human and animal health around the world. Recognizing these gaps, scholars from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in collaboration with United States Department of Agriculture convened a consultative workshop, "Women and One Health," in 2016. This paper outlines the workshop methods and highlights outcomes toward shared terminology and integration of frameworks from one health, gender analysis, and women in agriculture. Further, recommendations for education, policy, and service delivery at the intersection of women's empowerment and one health are offered as important efforts toward the dual goals of gender equality and sustainable health of humans, animals, and their shared ecosystems.

"Other" Troubles: Deconstructing Perceptions and Changing Responses to Refugees in Canada.

Canadian national identity is based on a self-image of humanitarianism and liberality governed by ethical and moral principles of social justice, universal health care and equity for all. However, recent changes to the Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP) demonstrate that the current discourse on refugee policy in Canada is built on a socially constructed image of "the refugee." Drawing on contemporary refugee literature we look at how refugees are constructed as the 'Other,' both nationally and internationally. Using the recent changes to the IFHP as a case example, we demonstrate that the construction of "the refugee" as an Other has informed the cuts to refugee care in Canada. Exposing Othering in Canadian refugee policy is necessary for providing helpful and equitable treatment to refugees in Canada.

Students' perception of case-based continuous assessment and multiple-choice assessment in a small animal surgery course for veterinary medical students.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between students' perceptions of 2 assessment methods and academic performance. STUDY DESIGN: A 2-year prospective survey study in a 4-year Doctor of Veterinary Medicine (DVM) curriculum. SAMPLE POPULATION: Year 3 DVM students (n = 44). METHODS: An assessment of learning gain questionnaire was used to investigate students' perceptions regarding multiple-choice examination (MCE) versus take-home case-based continuous assessment (CA) in a 3rd year small animal surgery lecture course. Academic performance and student assessment of learning gain in the 2 course components were compared. Relationships between student perceptions and academic performance were examined. A follow-up survey was conducted during clinical rotations in 4th year to determine change in student perceptions over time. RESULTS: Academic performance in 3rd year was significantly enhanced by use of CA, particularly for students with weaker grades. Academic performance in 4th year clinical rotations was not closely related to 3rd year performance. Many students preferred an instructional approach with provision of comprehensive notes and assessment with multiple-choice questions based on the notes. However, students recognized that feedback on work submitted for CA grading significantly facilitated learning. Student assessment of learning gain was correlated with academic performance in the 3rd year course component examined by CA, but not the component assessed using MCE. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that perceptions of learning gain, academic accomplishment, and clinical performance in 4th year are weakly correlated. Teachers should better explain to veterinary students that learning to be a clinician is more than replication of knowledge.

Creating a center for global health at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Globalization, migration, and widespread health disparities call for interdisciplinary approaches to improve health care at home and abroad. Health professions students are pursuing study abroad in increasing numbers, and universities are responding with programs to address these needs. The University of Wisconsin (UW)-Madison schools of medicine and public health, nursing, pharmacy, veterinary medicine, and the division of international studies have created an interdisciplinary center for global health (CGH). The CGH provides health professions and graduate students with courses, field experiences, and a new Certificate in Global Health. Educational programs have catalyzed a network of enthusiastic UW global health scholars. Partnerships with colleagues in less economically developed countries provide the foundation for education, research, and service programs. Participants have collaborated to improve the education of health professionals and nutrition in Uganda; explore the interplay between culture, community development, and health in Ecuador; improve animal health and address domestic violence in Mexico; and examine successful public health efforts in Thailand. These programs supply students with opportunities to understand the complex determinants of health and structure of health systems, develop adaptability and cross-cultural communication skills, experience learning and working in interdisciplinary teams, and promote equity and reduce health disparities at home and abroad. Based on the principles of equity, sustainability, and reciprocity, the CGH provides a strong foundation to address global health challenges through networking and collaboration among students, staff, and faculty within the UW and beyond.