Pragmatic methods for reviewing exceptionally large bodies of evidence: systematic mapping review and overview of systematic reviews using lung cancer survival as an exemplar.

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer (LC) is the most common cause of cancer death in the world and associated with significant economic burden. We conducted a review of published literature to identify prognostic factors associated with LC survival and determine which may be modifiable and could be targeted to improve outcomes. METHODS: The exceptionally large volume of LC prognostic research required a new staged approach to reviewing the literature. This comprised an initial mapping review of existing reviews or meta-analyses, based on titles and abstracts, followed by an overview of systematic reviews evaluating factors that independently contribute to lung cancer survival. The overview of reviews was based on full text papers and incorporated a more in-depth assessment of reviews evaluating modifiable factors. RESULTS: A large volume of published systematic reviews and meta-analyses were identified, but very few focused on modifiable factors for LC survival. Several modifiable factors were identified, which are potential candidates for targeted interventions aiming to improve cancer outcomes. The mapping review included 398 reviews, of which 207 investigated the independent effect of prognostic factors on lung cancer survival. The most frequently evaluated factors were novel biomarkers (86 biomarkers in 138 reviews). Only 15 modifiable factors were investigated in 20 reviews. Those associated with significant survival improvement included normal BMI/less weight loss, good performance status, not smoking/quitting after diagnosis, good pre-treatment quality of life, small gross volume tumour, early-stage tumour, lung resection undertaken by a thoracic/cardiothoracic surgeon, care being discussed by a multidisciplinary team, and timeliness of care. CONCLUSIONS: The study utilised a novel approach for reviewing an extensive and complicated body of research evidence. It enabled us to address a broad research question and focus on a specific area of priority. The staged approach ensured the review remained relevant to the stakeholders throughout, whilst maintaining the use of objective and transparent methods. It also provided important information on the needs of future research. However, it required extensive planning, management, and ongoing reviewer training.

Development of an intervention to expedite cancer diagnosis through primary care: a protocol.

BACKGROUND: GPs can play an important role in achieving earlier cancer diagnosis to improve patient outcomes, for example through prompt use of the urgent suspected cancer referral pathway. Barriers to early diagnosis include individual practitioner variation in knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, professional expectations, and norms. AIM: This programme of work (Wales Interventions and Cancer Knowledge about Early Diagnosis [WICKED]) will develop a behaviour change intervention to expedite diagnosis through primary care and contribute to improved cancer outcomes. DESIGN & SETTING: Non-experimental mixed-method study with GPs and primary care practice teams from Wales. METHOD: Four work packages will inform the development of the behaviour change intervention. Work package 1 will identify relevant evidence-based interventions (systematic review of reviews) and will determine why interventions do or do not work, for whom, and in what circumstances (realist review). Work package 2 will assess cancer knowledge, attitudes, and behaviour of GPs, as well as primary care teams' perspectives on cancer referral and investigation (GP survey, discrete choice experiment [DCE], interviews, and focus groups). Work package 3 will synthesise findings from earlier work packages using the behaviour change wheel as an overarching theoretical framework to guide intervention development. Work package 4 will test the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention, and determine methods for measuring costs and effects of subsequent behaviour change in a randomised feasibility trial. RESULTS: The findings will inform the design of a future effectiveness trial, with concurrent economic evaluation, aimed at earlier diagnosis. CONCLUSION: This comprehensive, evidence-based programme will develop a complex GP behaviour change intervention to expedite the diagnosis of symptomatic cancer, and may be applicable to countries with similar healthcare systems.

Intervention Now to Eliminate Repeat Unintended Pregnancy in Teenagers (INTERUPT): a systematic review of intervention effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, and qualitative and realist synthesis of implementation factors and user engagement.

BACKGROUND: Unintended repeat conceptions can result in emotional, psychological and educational harm to young women, often with enduring implications for their life chances. This study aimed to identify which young women are at the greatest risk of repeat unintended pregnancies; which interventions are effective and cost-effective; and what are the barriers to and facilitators for the uptake of these interventions. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods systematic review which included meta-analysis, framework synthesis and application of realist principles, with stakeholder input and service user feedback to address this. We searched 20 electronic databases, including MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica database, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts and Research Papers in Economics, to cover a broad range of health, social science, health economics and grey literature sources. Searches were conducted between May 2013 and June 2014 and updated in August 2015. RESULTS: Twelve randomised controlled trials (RCTs), two quasi-RCTs, 10 qualitative studies and 53 other quantitative studies were identified. The RCTs evaluated psychosocial interventions and an emergency contraception programme. The primary outcome was repeat conception rate: the event rate was 132 of 308 (43%) in the intervention group versus 140 of 289 (48%) for the control group, with a non-significant risk ratio (RR) of 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-1.08]. Four studies reported subsequent birth rates: 29 of 237 (12%) events for the intervention arm versus 46 out of 224 (21%) for the control arm, with an RR of 0.60 (95% CI 0.39-0.93). Many repeat conceptions occurred in the context of poverty, low expectations and aspirations and negligible opportunities. Qualitative and realist evidence highlighted the importance of context, motivation, future planning and giving young women a central and active role in the development of new interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Little or no evidence for the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of any of the interventions to reduce repeat pregnancy in young women was found. Qualitative and realist evidence helped to explain gaps in intervention design that should be addressed. More theory-based, rigorously evaluated programmes need to be developed to reduce unintended repeat pregnancy in young women. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42012003168 . Cochrane registration number: i = fertility/0068.

Talking about human papillomavirus and cancer: development of consultation guides through lay and professional stakeholder coproduction using qualitative, quantitative and secondary data.

BACKGROUND: High-risk human papillomaviruses (HPVs) cause all cervical cancer and the majority of vulvar, vaginal, anal, penile and oropharyngeal cancers. Although HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection, public awareness of this is poor. In addition, many clinicians lack adequate knowledge or confidence to discuss sexual transmission and related sensitive issues. Complex science needs to be communicated in a clear, digestible, honest and salient way. Therefore, the aim of this study was to coproduce with patients who have cancer appropriate resources to guide these highly sensitive and difficult consultations. METHODS: A matrix of evidence developed from a variety of sources, including a systematic review and telephone interviews with clinicians, supported the production of a draft list of approximately 100 potential educational messages. These were refined in face-to-face patient interviews using card-sorting techniques, and tested in cognitive debrief interviews to produce a â€Ëœfast and frugal’ knowledge tool. RESULTS: We developed three versions of a consultation guide, each comprising a clinician guidance sheet and patient information leaflet for gynaecological (cervical, vaginal, vulvar), anal or oropharyngeal cancers. That cancer could be caused by a sexually transmitted virus acquired many years previously was surprising to many and shocking to a few patients. However, they found the information clear, helpful and reassuring. Clinicians acknowledged a lack of confidence in explaining HPV, welcomed the clinician guidance sheets and considered printed information for patients particularly useful. CONCLUSION: Because of the â€Ëœshock factor’, clinicians will need to approach the discussion of HPV with sensitivity and take individual needs and preferences into account, but we provide a novel, rigorously developed and tested resource which should have broad applicability in the UK National Health Service and other health systems.

Assessing the complexity of interventions within systematic reviews: development, content and use of a new tool (iCAT_SR).

BACKGROUND: Health interventions fall along a spectrum from simple to more complex. There is wide interest in methods for reviewing 'complex interventions', but few transparent approaches for assessing intervention complexity in systematic reviews. Such assessments may assist review authors in, for example, systematically describing interventions and developing logic models. This paper describes the development and application of the intervention Complexity Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews (iCAT_SR), a new tool to assess and categorise levels of intervention complexity in systematic reviews. METHODS: We developed the iCAT_SR by adapting and extending an existing complexity assessment tool for randomized trials. We undertook this adaptation using a consensus approach in which possible complexity dimensions were circulated for feedback to a panel of methodologists with expertise in complex interventions and systematic reviews. Based on these inputs, we developed a draft version of the tool. We then invited a second round of feedback from the panel and a wider group of systematic reviewers. This informed further refinement of the tool. RESULTS: The tool comprises ten dimensions: (1) the number of active components in the intervention; (2) the number of behaviours of recipients to which the intervention is directed; (3) the range and number of organizational levels targeted by the intervention; (4) the degree of tailoring intended or flexibility permitted across sites or individuals in applying or implementing the intervention; (5) the level of skill required by those delivering the intervention; (6) the level of skill required by those receiving the intervention; (7) the degree of interaction between intervention components; (8) the degree to which the effects of the intervention are context dependent; (9) the degree to which the effects of the interventions are changed by recipient or provider factors; (10) and the nature of the causal pathway between intervention and outcome. Dimensions 1-6 are considered 'core' dimensions. Dimensions 7-10 are optional and may not be useful for all interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The iCAT_SR tool facilitates more in-depth, systematic assessment of the complexity of interventions in systematic reviews and can assist in undertaking reviews and interpreting review findings. Further testing of the tool is now needed.

Reducing repeat pregnancies in adolescence: applying realist principles as part of a mixed-methods systematic review to explore what works, for whom, how and under what circumstances.

BACKGROUND: Previous research has demonstrated emotional, psychological and educational harm to young mothers following unintended conceptions. The UK has one of the highest rates of pregnancies in adolescence in Western Europe with a high proportion of these being repeat pregnancies, making it a topic of interest for public health policy makers, and health and social care practitioners. As part of a wider mixed-methods systematic review, realist principles were applied to synthesise evidence about interventions aiming to reduce repeat pregnancies in adolescence. METHODS: A multi-streamed, mixed-methods systematic review was conducted searching 11 major electronic databases and 9 additional databases from 1995 onwards, using key terms such as pregnancy, teen or adolescent. The principles of realist synthesis were applied to all included literature to uncover theories about what works, for whom, how and in what context. Initial theory areas were developed through evidence scoping, group discussion by the authors and stakeholder engagement to uncover context + mechanism = outcome (CMO) configurations and related narratives. RESULTS: The searches identified 8,664 documents initially, and 403 in repeat searches, filtering to 81 included studies, including qualitative studies, randomised controlled trials, quantitative studies and grey literature. Three CMO configurations were developed. The individual experiences of young mothers' triggered self-efficacy, notions of perceived risks, susceptibility and benefits of pregnancy, resulting in the adolescent taking control of their fertility and sexual encounters. The choice between motherhood and other goals triggered notions of motivations, resulting in the adolescent managing their expectations of motherhood and controlling their fertility and sexual encounters. Barriers and facilitators to accessing services triggered notions of connectedness and self-determination; resulting in interventions that are tailored so they are relevant to young persons, and improve access to services and engagement with the issue of pregnancy in adolescence. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy in adolescence is a complex issue with many factors to consider. The conceptual platform described here could help guide policy makers and professionals towards a number of areas that need to be attended to in order to increase the likelihood of an intervention working to prevent rapid repeat pregnancy in adolescence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42012003168.

Talking about human papillomavirus and cancer: protocol for a patient-centred study to develop scripted consultations.

INTRODUCTION: Persistent infection with sexually transmitted, high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) types is the cause of all cervical cancers and some anogenital and oropharyngeal cancers. HPV is an extremely common asymptomatic infection but little known and poorly understood by the public. Patients with HPV-related cancers have new and challenging information needs due to the complex natural history of HPV and the stigma of sexual transmission. They may ask questions that are outside the remit of the traditional cancer consultation, and there is a lack of guidance on how to counsel them. This study aims to fulfil that need by developing and testing cancer site-specific scripted consultations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A synthesis of findings generated from previous work, a systematic review of information-based interventions for patients with HPV-related cancers, and interviews with cancer clinicians will provide the evidence base underpinning provisional messages. These will be explored in three phases of face-to-face interviews with 75-90 purposively selected patients recruited in cancer clinics to: (1) select and prioritise the most salient messages, (2) phrase the messages appropriately in plain English and, (3) test their acceptability and usefulness. Phases 1 and 2 will draw on card-sorting methods used in website design. In phase three, we will create cancer site-specific versions of the script and test them using cognitive interviewing techniques. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received ethical approval. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. The final product will be cancer-specific scripted consultations, most likely in the form of a two-sided information sheet with the most important messages to be conveyed in a consultation on one side, and frequently asked questions for later reading on the reverse. However, they will also be appropriate and readily adaptable to web-based uses.

Intervention Now to Eliminate Repeat Unintended Pregnancy in Teenagers (INTERUPT): a systematic review of intervention effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, and qualitative and realist synthesis of implementation factors and user engagement.

BACKGROUND: The UK has one of the highest rates of teenage pregnancies in Western Europe. One-fifth of these are repeat pregnancies. Unintended conceptions can cause substantial emotional, psychological and educational harm to teenagers, often with enduring implications for life chances. Babies of teenage mothers have increased mortality and are at a significantly increased risk of poverty, educational underachievement and unemployment later in life, with associated costs to society. It is important to identify effective, cost-effective and acceptable interventions. OBJECTIVES: To identify who is at the greatest risk of repeat unintended pregnancies; which interventions are effective and cost-effective; and what the barriers to and facilitators of the uptake of these interventions are. DATA SOURCES: We conducted a multistreamed, mixed-methods systematic review informed by service user and provider consultation to examine worldwide peer-reviewed evidence and UK-generated grey literature to find and evaluate interventions to reduce repeat unintended teenage pregnancies. We searched the following electronic databases: MEDLINE and MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, The Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and the Health Technology Assessment Database), EMBASE (Excerpta Medica database), British Nursing Index, Educational Resources Information Center, Sociological Abstracts, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, BiblioMap (the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre register of health promotion and public health research), Social Sciences Citation Index (supported by Web of Knowledge), Research Papers in Economics, EconLit (American Economic Association's electronic bibliography), OpenGrey, Scopus, Scirus, Social Care Online, National Research Register, National Institute for Health Research Clinical Research Network Portfolio and Index to THESES. Searches were conducted in May 2013 and updated in June 2014. In addition, we conducted a systematic search of Google (Google Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA) in January 2014. Database searches were guided by an advisory group of stakeholders. REVIEW METHODS: To address the topic's complexities, we used a structured, innovative and iterative approach combining methods tailored to each evidence stream. Quantitative data (effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, risk factors and effect modifiers) were synthesised with reference to Cochrane guidelines for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. Qualitative evidence addressing facilitators of and barriers to the uptake of interventions, experience and acceptability of interventions was synthesised thematically. We applied the principles of realist synthesis to uncover theories and mechanisms underpinning interventions (what works, for whom and in what context). Finally, we conducted an overarching narrative of synthesis of evidence and gathered service user feedback. RESULTS: We identified 8664 documents initially, and 816 in repeat searches. We filtered these to 12 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), four quasi-RCTs, 10 qualitative studies and 53 other quantitative studies published between 1996 and 2012. None of the RCTs was based in the UK. The RCTs evaluated an emergency contraception programme and psychosocial interventions. We found no evidence for effectiveness with regard to condom use, contraceptive use or rates of unprotected sex or use of birth control. Our primary outcome was repeat conception rate: the event rate was 132 of 308 (43%) in the intervention group versus 140 of 289 (48%) for the control goup, with a non-significant risk ratio (RR) of 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.08]. Four studies reported subsequent birth rates: 29 of 237 (12%) events for the intervention arm versus 46 out of 224 (21%) for the control arm, with a RR of 0.60 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.93). Many repeat conceptions occurred in the context of poverty, low expectations and aspirations, and negligible opportunities. Service user feedback suggested that there were specific motivations for many repeat conceptions, for example to replace loss or to please a partner. Realist synthesis highlighted that context, motivation, planning for the future and letting young women take control with connectedness and tailoring provide a conceptual framework for future research. LIMITATIONS: Included studies rarely characterised adolescent pregnancy as intended or unintended, that is interventions to reduce repeat conceptions rarely addressed whether or not pregnancies were intended. Furthermore, interventions were often not clearly defined, had multiple aims and did not indicate which elements were intended to address which aims. Nearly all of the studies were conducted in the USA and focused largely on African American or Hispanic and Latina American populations. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence to indicate that existing interventions to reduce repeat teenage pregnancy were effective; however, subsequent births were reduced by home-based interventions. Qualitative and realist evidence helped to explain gaps in intervention design that should be addressed. More theory-based, rigorously evaluated programmes need to be developed to reduce repeat teenage pregnancy in the UK. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012003168. Cochrane registration number: i=fertility/0068. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Current use was established and Cochrane guidance on selection of social theories for systematic reviews of complex interventions was developed.

OBJECTIVE: To identify examples of how social theories are used in systematic reviews of complex interventions to inform production of Cochrane guidance. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Secondary analysis of published/unpublished examples of theories of social phenomena for use in reviews of complex interventions identified through scoping searches, engagement with key authors and methodologists supplemented by snowballing and reference searching. Theories were classified (low-level, mid-range, grand). RESULTS: Over 100 theories were identified with evidence of proliferation over the last 5 years. New low-level theories (tools, taxonomies, etc) have been developed for classifying and reporting complex interventions. Numerous mid-range theories are used; one example demonstrated how control theory had changed the review's findings. Review-specific logic models are increasingly used, but these can be challenging to develop. New low-level and mid-range psychological theories of behavior change are evolving. No reviews using grand theory (e.g., feminist theory) were identified. We produced a searchable Wiki, Mendeley Inventory, and Cochrane guidance. CONCLUSIONS: Use of low-level theory is common and evolving; incorporation of mid-range theory is still the exception rather than the norm. Methodological work is needed to evaluate the contribution of theory. Choice of theory reflects personal preference; application of theory is a skilled endeavor.

Comparative clinical effectiveness of management strategies for sciatica: systematic review and network meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: There are numerous treatment approaches for sciatica. Previous systematic reviews have not compared all these strategies together. PURPOSE: To compare the clinical effectiveness of different treatment strategies for sciatica simultaneously. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched 28 electronic databases and online trial registries, along with bibliographies of previous reviews for comparative studies evaluating any intervention to treat sciatica in adults, with outcome data on global effect or pain intensity. Network meta-analysis methods were used to simultaneously compare all treatment strategies and allow indirect comparisons of treatments between studies. The study was funded by the UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment program; there are no potential conflict of interests. RESULTS: We identified 122 relevant studies; 90 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs. Interventions were grouped into 21 treatment strategies. Internal and external validity of included studies was very low. For overall recovery as the outcome, compared with inactive control or conventional care, there was a statistically significant improvement following disc surgery, epidural injections, nonopioid analgesia, manipulation, and acupuncture. Traction, percutaneous discectomy, and exercise therapy were significantly inferior to epidural injections or surgery. For pain as the outcome, epidural injections and biological agents were significantly better than inactive control, but similar findings for disc surgery were not statistically significant. Biological agents were significantly better for pain reduction than bed rest, nonopioids, and opioids. Opioids, education/advice alone, bed rest, and percutaneous discectomy were inferior to most other treatment strategies; although these findings represented large effects, they were statistically equivocal. CONCLUSIONS: For the first time, many different treatment strategies for sciatica have been compared in the same systematic review and meta-analysis. This approach has provided new data to assist shared decision-making. The findings support the effectiveness of nonopioid medication, epidural injections, and disc surgery. They also suggest that spinal manipulation, acupuncture, and experimental treatments, such as anti-inflammatory biological agents, may be considered. The findings do not provide support for the effectiveness of opioid analgesia, bed rest, exercise therapy, education/advice (when used alone), percutaneous discectomy, or traction. The issue of how best to estimate the effectiveness of treatment approaches according to their order within a sequential treatment pathway remains an important challenge.

Cost-effectiveness of different strategies to manage patients with sciatica.

The aim of this paper is to estimate the relative cost-effectiveness of treatment regimens for managing patients with sciatica. A deterministic model structure was constructed based on information from the findings from a systematic review of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, published sources of unit costs, and expert opinion. The assumption was that patients presenting with sciatica would be managed through one of 3 pathways (primary care, stepped approach, immediate referral to surgery). Results were expressed as incremental cost per patient with symptoms successfully resolved. Analysis also included incremental cost per utility gained over a 12-month period. One-way sensitivity analyses were used to address uncertainty. The model demonstrated that none of the strategies resulted in 100% success. For initial treatments, the most successful regime in the first pathway was nonopioids, with a probability of success of 0.613. In the second pathway, the most successful strategy was nonopioids, followed by biological agents, followed by epidural/nerve block and disk surgery, with a probability of success of 0.996. Pathway 3 (immediate surgery) was not cost-effective. Sensitivity analyses identified that the use of the highest cost estimates results in a similar overall picture. While the estimates of cost per quality-adjusted life year are higher, the economic model demonstrated that stepped approaches based on initial treatment with nonopioids are likely to represent the most cost-effective regimens for the treatment of sciatica. However, development of alternative economic modelling approaches is required.

Patient-reported measurement of time to diagnosis in cancer: development of the Cancer Symptom Interval Measure (C-SIM) and randomised controlled trial of method of delivery.

BACKGROUND: The duration between first symptom and a cancer diagnosis is important because, if shortened, may lead to earlier stage diagnosis and improved cancer outcomes. We have previously developed a tool to measure this duration in newly-diagnosed patients. In this two-phase study, we aimed further improve our tool and to conduct a trial comparing levels of anxiety between two modes of delivery: self-completed versus researcher-administered. METHODS: In phase 1, ten patients completed the modified tool and participated in cognitive debrief interviews. In phase 2, we undertook a Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) of the revised tool (Cancer Symptom Interval Measure (C-SIM)) in three hospitals for 11 different cancers. Respondents were invited to provide either exact or estimated dates of first noticing symptoms and presenting them to primary care. The primary outcome was anxiety related to delivery mode, with completeness of recording as a secondary outcome. Dates from a subset of patients were compared with GP records. RESULTS: After analysis of phase 1 interviews, the wording and format were improved. In phase 2, 201 patients were randomised (93 self-complete and 108 researcher-complete). Anxiety scores were significantly lower in the researcher-completed group, with a mean rank of 83.5; compared with the self-completed group, with a mean rank of 104.0 (Mann-Whitney U = 3152, p = 0.007). Completeness of data was significantly better in the researcher-completed group, with no statistically significant difference in time taken to complete the tool between the two groups. When comparing the dates in the patient questionnaires with those in the GP records, there was evidence in the records of a consultation on the same date or within a proscribed time window for 32/37 (86%) consultations; for estimated dates there was evidence for 23/37 consultations (62%). CONCLUSIONS: We have developed and tested a tool for collecting patient-reported data relating to appraisal intervals, help-seeking intervals, and diagnostic intervals in the cancer diagnostic pathway for 11 separate cancers, and provided evidence of its acceptability, feasibility and validity. This is a useful tool to use in descriptive and epidemiological studies of cancer diagnostic journeys, and causes less anxiety if administered by a researcher.

"HPV? Never heard of it!": a systematic review of girls' and parents' information needs, views and preferences about human papillomavirus vaccination.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Two human papillomavirus vaccines were licenced in 2006/2007 for cervical cancer prevention. National vaccination programmes for schoolgirls were subsequently introduced in some European countries, North America and Australia. To understand factors influencing vaccine uptake and to inform the development of appropriate UK educational materials, we aimed to synthesise evidence of girls' and parents' information needs, views and preferences regarding HPV vaccination. DESIGN: Systematic review and mixed method synthesis of qualitative and survey data. DATA SOURCES: Twelve electronic databases; bibliographies of included studies 1980 to August 2011. REVIEW METHODS: Two reviewers independently screened papers and appraised study quality. Studies were synthesised collaboratively using framework methods for qualitative data, and survey results integrated where they supported, contrasted or added to the themes identified. RESULTS: Twenty-eight qualitative studies and 44 surveys were included. Where vaccination was offered, uptake was high. Intention to decline was related to a preference for vaccinating later to avoid appearing to condone early sexual activity, concerns about vaccine safety and low perception of risk of HPV infection. Knowledge was poor and there were many misconceptions; participants tried to assess the potential benefits and harms of vaccination but struggled to interpret limited information about HPV in the context of existing knowledge about sexually transmitted infections and cancer. Conclusion Many girls and their parents have limited understanding to an extent that impinges on their ability to make informed choices about HPV vaccination and could impact on future uptake of cervical screening. This is a considerable challenge to those who design and provide information, but getting the messages right for this programme could help in developing patient information about other HPV related cancers.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of biological treatments targeting tumour necrosis factor α for sciatica.

PURPOSE: Systematic review comparing biological agents, targeting tumour necrosis factor α, for sciatica with placebo and alternative interventions. METHODS: We searched 21 electronic databases and bibliographies of included studies. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs and controlled observational studies of adults who had sciatica treated by biological agents compared with placebo or alternative interventions. RESULTS: We pooled the results of six studies (five RCTs and one non-RCT) in meta-analyses. Compared with placebo biological agents had: better global effects in the short-term odds ratio (OR) 2.0 (95 % CI 0.7-6.0), medium-term OR 2.7 (95 % CI 1.0-7.1) and long-term OR 2.3 [95 % CI 0.5 to 9.7); improved leg pain intensity in the short-term weighted mean difference (WMD) -13.6 (95 % CI -26.8 to -0.4), medium-term WMD -7.0 (95 % CI -15.4 to 1.5), but not long-term WMD 0.2 (95 % CI -20.3 to 20.8); improved Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) in the short-term WMD -5.2 (95 % CI -14.1 to 3.7), medium-term WMD -8.2 (95 % CI -14.4 to -2.0), and long-term WMD -5.0 (95 % CI -11.8 to 1.8). There was heterogeneity in the leg pain intensity and ODI results and improvements were no longer statistically significant when studies were restricted to RCTs. There was a reduction in the need for discectomy, which was not statistically significant, and no difference in the number of adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: There was insufficient evidence to recommend these agents when treating sciatica, but sufficient evidence to suggest that larger RCTs are needed.

Why do we want the right to die? A systematic review of the international literature on the views of patients, carers and the public on assisted dying.

BACKGROUND: Assisted dying is legal in four European countries and three American states. Elsewhere, particularly in more affluent or mainly Protestant countries, it remains controversial. Dominant headlines feature professional (medical, legal, religious) arguments versus celebrity campaigners; ordinary people are less clearly represented. AIM: To synthesise the international evidence of people's views and attitudes towards assisted dying in order to inform current debate about this controversial issue. DESIGN: Systematic review and mixed method synthesis of qualitative and survey data. DATA SOURCES: Eleven electronic databases from inception to October 2011; bibliographies of included studies. REVIEW METHODS: Two reviewers independently screened papers and appraised quality. Qualitative results were extracted verbatim; survey results were summarised in a table. Qualitative data were synthesised using framework methods and survey results integrated where they supported, contrasted or added to the themes identified. RESULTS: Sixteen qualitative studies and 94 surveys were included; many participants considered the immediate relevance of assisted dying for them. Themes related to poor quality of life, a good quality of death, potential abuse of assisted dying and the importance of individual stance. People valued autonomy in death as much as in life. Attitudes were diverse, complex and related to definitions of unbearable suffering including physical, psycho-social and existential factors and were consistent regardless of social, economic, legal and health-care contexts. CONCLUSION: Our review sheds light on ordinary people's perspectives about assisted dying, when they are ill or disabled. Unbearable suffering is a key construct, and common factors are revealed that lead people to ask for help to die. The consistency of international views indicates a mandate for legislative and medical systems worldwide to listen and understand this.

Activity Increase Despite Arthritis (AÏDA): phase II randomised controlled trial of an active management booklet for hip and knee osteoarthritis in primary care.

BACKGROUND: The Hip & Knee Book: Helping you cope with osteoarthritis was developed to change disadvantageous beliefs and encourage physical activity in people with hip or knee osteoarthritis. AIM: To assess the feasibility of conducting a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) of this evidence-based booklet in people with hip or knee osteoarthritis. DESIGN: Phase II feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT). METHOD: Computerised searches of patients' record databases identified people with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee, who were invited to participate in the RCT comparing the new booklet with a control booklet. Outcomes were measured at baseline, 1 month, and 3 months, and included: beliefs about hip and knee pain, exercise, and fear avoidance; level of physical activity; and health service use. RESULTS: The trial methods were feasible in terms of recruitment, randomisation, and follow-up, but most participants recruited had longstanding established symptoms. After one and 3 months, there was a small relative improvement in illness, exercise, and fear-avoidance beliefs and physical activity level in The Hip & Knee Book group (n = 59) compared with the control group (n = 60), which provides some proof of principle for using these outcomes in future trials. CONCLUSION: This feasibility study provided proof of principle for testing The Hip & Knee Book in a larger definitive RCT.

Participants' preference for type of leaflet used to feed back the results of a randomised trial: a survey.

BACKGROUND: Hundreds of thousands of volunteers take part in medical research, but many will never hear from researchers about what the study revealed. There is a growing demand for the results of randomised trials to be fed back to research participants both for ethical research practice and for ensuring their co-operation in a trial. This study aims to determine participants' preferences for type of leaflet (short versus long) used to summarise the findings of a randomised trial; and to test whether certain characteristics explained participants' preferences. METHODS: 553 participants in a randomised trial about General Practitioners' access to Magnetic Resonance Imaging for patients presenting with suspected internal derangement of the knee were asked in the final follow-up questionnaire whether they would like to be fed back the results of the trial. Participants who agreed to this were included in a postal questionnaire survey asking about their preference, if any, between a short and a long leaflet and what it was about the leaflet that they preferred. Multinomial logistic regression was used to test whether certain demographics of responding participants along with treatment group explained whether a participant had a preference for type of leaflet or no preference. RESULTS: Of the participants who returned the final follow-up questionnaire, 416 (88%) agreed to receive the results of the trial. Subsequently 132 (32%) participants responded to the survey. Most participants preferred the longer leaflet (55%) and the main reasons for this were the use of technical information (94%) and diagrams (89%). There was weak evidence to suggest that gender might explain whether participants have a preference for type of leaflet or not (P = 0.084). CONCLUSIONS: Trial participants want to receive feed back about the results and appear to prefer a longer leaflet. Males and females might require information to be communicated to them differently and should be the focus of further research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered with http://www.isrctn.org/ and ID is ISRCTN76616358.

The Hip and Knee Book: developing an active management booklet for hip and knee osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: The pain and disability of hip and knee osteoarthritis can be improved by exercise, but the best method of encouraging this is not known. AIM: To develop an evidence-based booklet for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis, offering information and advice on maintaining activity. DESIGN OF STUDY: Systematic review of reviews and guidelines, then focus groups. SETTING: Four general practices in North East Wales. METHOD: Evidence-based messages were developed from a systematic review, synthesised into patient-centred messages, and then incorporated into a narrative. A draft booklet was examined by three focus groups to improve the phrasing of its messages and discuss its usefulness. The final draft was examined in a fourth focus group. RESULTS: Six evidence-based guidelines and 54 systematic reviews were identified. The focus groups found the draft booklet to be informative and easy to read. They reported a lack of clarity about the cause of osteoarthritis and were surprised that the pain could improve. The value of exercise and weight loss beliefs was accepted and reinforced, but there was a perceived contradiction about heavy physical work being causative, while moderate exercise was beneficial. There was a fear of dependency on analgesia and misinterpretation of the message on hyaluranon injections. The information on joint replacement empowered patients to discuss referral with their GP. The text was revised to accommodate these issues. CONCLUSION: The booklet was readable, credible, and useful to end-users. A randomised controlled trial is planned, to test whether the booklet influences beliefs about osteoarthritis and exercise.

A review comparing the effectiveness of nurse-led follow up for cancer with conventional care.

Nurse-led follow-up for cancer and other models are increasingly being used to reduce workload for outpatient clinics. This article reports the results of a recently published systematic review, which compared nurse-led follow up with conventional doctor-led followup. The implications for practice are highlighted, and recommendations for further research are made.

Activity Increase Despite Arthritis (AIDA): design of a Phase II randomised controlled trial evaluating an active management booklet for hip and knee osteoarthritis [ISRCTN24554946].

BACKGROUND: Hip and knee osteoarthritis is a common cause of pain and disability, which can be improved by exercise interventions. However, regular exercise is uncommon in this group because the low physical activity level in the general population is probably reduced even further by pain related fear of movement. The best method of encouraging increased activity in this patient group is not known. A booklet has been developed for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis. It focuses on changing disadvantageous beliefs and encouraging increased physical activity. METHODS/DESIGN: This paper describes the design of a Phase II randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test the effectiveness of this new booklet for patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis in influencing illness and treatment beliefs, and to assess the feasibility of conducting a larger definitive RCT in terms of health status and exercise behaviour. A computerised search of four general medical practice patients' record databases will identify patients older than 50 years of age who have consulted with hip or knee pain in the previous twelve months. A random sample of 120 will be invited to participate in the RCT comparing the new booklet with a control booklet, and we expect 100 to return final questionnaires. This trial will assess the feasibility of recruitment and randomisation, the suitability of the control intervention and outcome measurement tools, and will provide an estimate of effect size. Outcomes will include beliefs about hip and knee pain, beliefs about exercise, fear avoidance, level of physical activity, health status and health service costs. They will be measured at baseline, one month and three months. DISCUSSION: We discuss the merits of testing effectiveness in a phase II trial, in terms of intermediate outcome measures, whilst testing the processes for a larger definitive trial. We also discuss the advantages and disadvantages of testing the psychometric properties of the primary outcome measures concurrently with the trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN24554946.