Content and Face Validity and Feasibility of 5 Candidate Instruments for Psoriatic Arthritis Randomized Controlled Trials: The PsA OMERACT Core Set Workshop at the GRAPPA 2017 Annual Meeting.

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Core Set working group is in the process of selecting core instruments for PsA clinical trials. During a 2-h workshop and breakout group discussions at the GRAPPA 2017 annual meeting in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, participants discussed the first set of candidate instruments to be taken through the OMERACT Filter 2.1 instrument selection process: 66/68 swollen/tender joint count (66/68JC), Spondyloarthritis Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) enthesitis index, patient's global assessment (GRAPPA and OMERACT formulations), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease (PsAID) questionnaires 9 and 12, and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Fatigue. Based on the assessment of domain match (content and face validity) and feasibility according to the OMERACT instrument selection criteria, the working group recommends continuing with appraisal of construct validity and discrimination for 66/68JC, SPARCC, PsAID 9 and 12, HAQ-DI, and FACIT-Fatigue. In addition, it recommends repeating the OMERACT Filter 2.1 process for patient global instruments because of insufficient votes. Additional sets of candidate instruments for the PsA core instrument set will be evaluated in a similar process.

International patient and physician consensus on a psoriatic arthritis core outcome set for clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: To identify a core set of domains (outcomes) to be measured in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) clinical trials that represent both patients' and physicians' priorities. METHODS: We conducted (1) a systematic literature review (SLR) of domains assessed in PsA; (2) international focus groups to identify domains important to people with PsA; (3) two international surveys with patients and physicians to prioritise domains; (4) an international face-to-face meeting with patients and physicians using the nominal group technique method to agree on the most important domains; and (5) presentation and votes at the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) conference in May 2016. All phases were performed in collaboration with patient research partners. RESULTS: We identified 39 unique domains through the SLR (24 domains) and international focus groups (34 domains). 50 patients and 75 physicians rated domain importance. During the March 2016 consensus meeting, 12 patients and 12 physicians agreed on 10 candidate domains. Then, 49 patients and 71 physicians rated these domains' importance. Five were important to >70% of both groups: musculoskeletal disease activity, skin disease activity, structural damage, pain and physical function. Fatigue and participation were important to >70% of patients. Patient global and systemic inflammation were important to >70% of physicians. The updated PsA core domain set endorsed by 90% of OMERACT 2016 participants includes musculoskeletal disease activity, skin disease activity, pain, patient global, physical function, health-related quality of life, fatigue and systemic inflammation. CONCLUSIONS: The updated PsA core domain set incorporates patients' and physicians' priorities and evolving PsA research. Next steps include identifying outcome measures that adequately assess these domains.

Honoring Indigenous culture-as-intervention: Development and validity of the Native Wellness AssessmentTM.

There is a need for Indigenous-centered research to appraise culture's role in wellness. Researchers described the development and validity of the Native Wellness Assessment (NWATM). The NWA has culture-as-intervention at its apex. Wellness, culture, and cultural intervention practices (CIPs) are explored from an Indigenous perspective. Indigenous clients completed matching self-report and observer versions of the NWA at three time points during addictions treatment. Statistically and psychometrically, the NWA content and structure performed well, demonstrating that culture is an effective and fair intervention for Indigenous peoples with addictions. The NWA can inform Indigenous health and community-based programs and policy.

Motivations for investigating health inequities in observational epidemiology: a content analysis of 320 studies.

OBJECTIVES: To enhance equity in clinical and epidemiological research, it is crucial to understand researcher motivations for conducting equity-relevant studies. Therefore, we evaluated author motivations in a randomly selected sample of equity-relevant observational studies published during the COVID-19 pandemic. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We searched MEDLINE for studies from 2020 to 2022, resulting in 16,828 references. We randomly selected 320 studies purposefully sampled across income setting (high vs low-middle-income), COVID-19 topic (vs non-COVID-19), and focus on populations experiencing inequities. Of those, 206 explicitly mentioned motivations which we analyzed thematically. We used discourse analysis to investigate the reasons behind emerging motivations. RESULTS: We identified the following motivations: (1) examining health disparities, (2) tackling social determinants to improve access, and (3) addressing knowledge gaps in health equity. Discourse analysis showed motivations stem from commitments to social justice and recognizing the importance of highlighting it in research. Other discourses included aspiring to improve health-care efficiency, wanting to understand cause-effect relationships, and seeking to contribute to an equitable evidence base. CONCLUSION: Understanding researchers' motivations for assessing health equity can aid in developing guidance that tailors to their needs. We will consider these motivations in developing and sharing equity guidance to better meet researchers' needs.

Protocol for an extended scoping review on the use of virtual nominal group technique in research.

INTRODUCTION: Consensus group methods such as the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) and Delphi method are commonly used in research to elicit and synthesize expert opinions when evidence is lacking. Traditionally, the NGT involves a face-to-face interaction. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many in-person meetings have moved to online settings. It is unclear to what extent the NGT has been undertaken in virtual settings. The overarching aim of this scoping review is to explore the use of the virtual NGT in research. Our specific objectives are to answer the following questions: To what extent has the NGT been used virtually? What modifications were made to accommodate this online format? What advantages and disadvantages were noted by authors in comparison with the face-to-face mode of the technique? MATERIALS AND METHODS: This scoping review will follow the steps outlined by Arksey and O'Malley and the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Several pilot searches were completed to refine inclusion and exclusion criteria. Media Synchronicity Theory will provide a conceptual framework to inform the research, including data extraction and summarizing results. As an additional extension to the literature review, online interviews with corresponding authors will be conducted to gather further information.

Evidence-based discussion increases childhood vaccination uptake: a randomised cluster controlled trial of knowledge translation in Pakistan.

BACKGROUND: Childhood vaccination rates are low in Lasbela, one of the poorest districts in Pakistan's Balochistan province. This randomised cluster controlled trial tested the effect on uptake of informed discussion of vaccination costs and benefits, without relying on improved health services. METHODS: Following a baseline survey of randomly selected representative census enumeration areas, a computer generated random number sequence assigned 18 intervention and 14 control clusters. The intervention comprised three structured discussions separately with male and female groups in each cluster. The first discussion shared findings about vaccine uptake from the baseline study; the second focussed on the costs and benefits of childhood vaccination; the third focussed on local action plans. Field teams encouraged the group participants to spread the dialogue to households in their communities. Both intervention and control clusters received a district-wide health promotion programme emphasizing household hygiene. Interviewers in the household surveys were blind of intervention status of different clusters. A follow-up survey after one year measured impact of the intervention on uptake of measles and full DPT vaccinations of children aged 12-23 months, as reported by the mother or caregiver. RESULTS: In the follow-up survey, measles and DPT vaccination uptake among children aged 12-23 months (536 in intervention clusters, 422 in control clusters) was significantly higher in intervention than in control clusters, where uptake fell over the intervention period. Adjusting for baseline differences between intervention and control clusters with generalized estimating equations, the intervention doubled the odds of measles vaccination in the intervention communities (OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.24-3.88). It trebled the odds of full DPT vaccination (OR 3.36, 95% CI 2.03-5.56). CONCLUSION: The relatively low cost knowledge translation intervention significantly increased vaccine uptake, without relying on improved services, in a poor district with limited access to services. This could have wide relevance in increasing coverage in developing countries. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN12421731.

Considering health equity when moving from evidence-based guideline recommendations to implementation: a case study from an upper-middle income country on the GRADE approach.

The availability of evidence-based guidelines does not ensure their implementation and use in clinical practice or policy making. Inequities in health have been defined as those inequalities within or between populations that are avoidable, unnecessary and also unjust and unfair. Evidence-based clinical practice and public health guidelines ('guidelines') can be used to target health inequities experienced by disadvantaged populations, although guidelines may unintentionally increase health inequities. For this reason, there is a need for evidence-based clinical practice and public health guidelines to intentionally target health inequities experienced by disadvantaged populations. Current guideline development processes do not include steps for planned implementation of equity-focused guidelines. This article describes nine steps that provide guidance for consideration of equity during guideline implementation. A critical appraisal of the literature followed by a process to build expert consensus was undertaken to define how to include consideration of equity issues during the specific GRADE guideline development process. Using a case study from Colombia we describe nine steps that were used to implement equity-focused GRADE recommendations: (1) identification of disadvantaged groups, (2) quantification of current health inequities, (3) development of equity-sensitive recommendations, (4) identification of key actors for implementation of equity-focused recommendations, (5) identification of barriers and facilitators to the implementation of equity-focused recommendations, (6) development of an equity strategy to be included in the implementation plan, (7) assessment of resources and incentives, (8) development of a communication strategy to support an equity focus and (9) development of monitoring and evaluation strategies. This case study can be used as model for implementing clinical practice guidelines, taking into account equity issues during guideline development and implementation.

Updating the Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Core Domain Set: A Report from the PsA Workshop at OMERACT 2016.

OBJECTIVE: To include the patient perspective in accordance with the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.0 in the updated Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Core Domain Set for randomized controlled trials (RCT) and longitudinal observational studies (LOS). METHODS: At OMERACT 2016, research conducted to update the PsA Core Domain Set was presented and discussed in breakout groups. The updated PsA Core Domain Set was voted on and endorsed by OMERACT participants. RESULTS: We conducted a systematic literature review of domains measured in PsA RCT and LOS, and identified 24 domains. We conducted 24 focus groups with 130 patients from 7 countries representing 5 continents to identify patient domains. We achieved consensus through 2 rounds of separate surveys with 50 patients and 75 physicians, and a nominal group technique meeting with 12 patients and 12 physicians. We conducted a workshop and breakout groups at OMERACT 2016 in which findings were presented and discussed. The updated PsA Core Domain Set endorsed with 90% agreement by OMERACT 2016 participants included musculoskeletal disease activity, skin disease activity, fatigue, pain, patient's global assessment, physical function, health-related quality of life, and systemic inflammation, which were recommended for all RCT and LOS. These were important, but not required in all RCT and LOS: economic cost, emotional well-being, participation, and structural damage. Independence, sleep, stiffness, and treatment burden were on the research agenda. CONCLUSION: The updated PsA Core Domain Set was endorsed at OMERACT 2016. Next steps for the PsA working group include evaluation of PsA outcome measures and development of a PsA Core Outcome Measurement Set.

GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper is to describe a conceptual framework for how to consider health equity in the Grading Recommendations Assessment and Development Evidence (GRADE) guideline development process. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Consensus-based guidance developed by the GRADE working group members and other methodologists. RESULTS: We developed consensus-based guidance to help address health equity when rating the certainty of synthesized evidence (i.e., quality of evidence). When health inequity is determined to be a concern by stakeholders, we propose five methods for explicitly assessing health equity: (1) include health equity as an outcome; (2) consider patient-important outcomes relevant to health equity; (3) assess differences in the relative effect size of the treatment; (4) assess differences in baseline risk and the differing impacts on absolute effects; and (5) assess indirectness of evidence to disadvantaged populations and/or settings. CONCLUSION: The most important priority for research on health inequity and guidelines is to identify and document examples where health equity has been considered explicitly in guidelines. Although there is a weak scientific evidence base for assessing health equity, this should not discourage the explicit consideration of how guidelines and recommendations affect the most vulnerable members of society.

Methodological quality of systematic reviews in subfertility: a comparison of two different approaches.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews are used widely to guide health care decisions. Several tools have been created to assess systematic review quality. The measurement tool for assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews known as the AMSTAR tool applies a yes/no score to eleven relevant domains of review methodology. This tool has been reworked so that each domain is scored based on a four point scale, producing R-AMSTAR. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We aimed to compare the AMSTAR and R-AMSTAR tools in assessing systematic reviews in the field of assisted reproduction for subfertility. All published systematic reviews on assisted reproductive technology, with the latest search for studies taking place from 2007-2011, were considered. Reviews that contained no included studies or considered diagnostic outcomes were excluded. Thirty each of Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews were randomly selected from a search of relevant databases. Both tools were then applied to all sixty reviews. The results were converted to percentage scores and all reviews graded and ranked based on this. AMSTAR produced a much wider variation in percentage scores and achieved higher inter-rater reliability than R-AMSTAR according to kappa statistics. The average rating for Cochrane reviews was consistent between the two tools (88.3% for R-AMSTAR versus 83.6% for AMSTAR) but inconsistent for non-Cochrane reviews (63.9% R-AMSTAR vs. 38.5% AMSTAR). In comparing the rankings generated between the two tools Cochrane reviews changed an average of 4.2 places, compared to 2.9 for non-Cochrane. CONCLUSION: R-AMSTAR provided greater guidance in the assessment of domains and produced quantitative results. However, there were many problems with the construction of its criteria and AMSTAR was much easier to apply consistently. We recommend that AMSTAR incorporates the findings of this study and produces additional guidance for its application in order to improve its reliability and usefulness.

Gender-based violence and HIV: relevance for HIV prevention in hyperendemic countries of southern Africa.

Gender-based violence (GBV) is common in southern Africa. Here we use GBV to include sexual and non-sexual physical violence, emotional abuse, and forms of child sexual abuse. A sizeable literature now links GBV and HIV infection.Sexual violence can lead to HIV infection directly, as trauma increases the risk of transmission. More importantly, GBV increases HIV risk indirectly. Victims of childhood sexual abuse are more likely to be HIV positive, and to have high risk behaviours.GBV perpetrators are at risk of HIV infection, as their victims have often been victimised before and have a high risk of infection. Including perpetrators and victims, perhaps one third of the southern African population is involved in the GBV-HIV dynamic.A randomised controlled trial of income enhancement and gender training reduced GBV and HIV risk behaviours, and a trial of a learning programme reported a non-significant reduction in HIV incidence and reduction of male risk behaviours (primary prevention). Interventions among survivors of GBV can reduce their HIV risk (secondary prevention). Various strategies can reduce spread of HIV from infected GBV survivors (tertiary prevention). Dealing with GBV could have an important effect on the HIV epidemic.A policy shift is necessary. HIV prevention policy should recognise the direct and indirect implications of GBV for HIV prevention, the importance of perpetrator dynamics, and that reduction of GBV should be part of HIV prevention programmes. Effective interventions are likely to include a structural component, and a GBV awareness component.

Building on the Resilience of Aboriginal People in Risk Reduction Initiatives Targeting Sexually Transmitted Infections and Blood-Borne Viruses: The Aboriginal Community Resilience to AIDS (ACRA).

There is evidence that Aboriginal people may be at increased risk of HIV infection; they also experience higher rates of other blood-borne viral (BBV) and sexually transmitted infections (STI). This project will provide insights into the role of resilience and its impact on the health and well-being of Aboriginal youth, especially as it relates to sexual and injecting behaviour. The primary recipients of this information will be agencies that provide risk education related to BBVs and STIs.The project involves several phases. First, the framework for the research will be established, with Aboriginal leadership and involvement at every level. Next, both qualitative and quantitative methodologies will be used to identify factors that protect Aboriginal youth against blood-borne viral and sexually transmitted infections and their transmission within local communities. Finally, results from this project will be used to develop interventions and appropriate frameworks for their evaluation in Aboriginal communities.An important component of this project will involve the building of capacity within participating communities, with the goal of identifying strategies related to resilience that can be incorporated into public health and clinical practice. The project will run for five years.

Is health equity considered in systematic reviews of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group?

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group (CMSG) systematic reviews and corresponding primary studies of rheumatoid arthritis interventions report and analyze the data needed to assess the effectiveness of interventions in reducing socioeconomic differences in health and/or improving the health of the poor. METHODS: We selected all CMSG reviews on rheumatoid arthritis published since issue 1, 2003. Fourteen reviews were identified; 147 of the 156 primary studies included in these reviews were obtained and assessed. We extracted data on whether the dimensions place of residence, race/ethnicity/culture, occupation, gender, religion, education, socioeconomic status, and social capital and networks (PROGRESS) were reported or analyzed, and whether any interventions were aimed at disadvantaged or low- and middle-income country populations. RESULTS: Among the dimensions of PROGRESS reported at baseline in 147 primary studies, gender (89%) was the most commonly reported, followed by education (25%) and race/ethnicity (18%). Less than 50% of the systematic reviews reported dimensions of PROGRESS even when they had been reported in the primary study. Of 147 primary studies, 6 (5%) were aimed specifically at disadvantaged populations; another 6 reported on effectiveness by at least 1 dimension of PROGRESS. CONCLUSION: Primary studies of interventions for rheumatoid arthritis generally reported few variables necessary to answer questions about health inequalities. Most CMSG systematic reviews failed to assess those variables even when described in the primary studies. The Cochrane Health Equity Field welcomes the opportunity to provide guidance to systematic review authors on incorporating equity considerations into their reviews.