Using qualitative comparative analysis as a mixed methods synthesis in systematic mixed studies reviews: Guidance and a worked example.

Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) is a hybrid method designed to bridge the gap between qualitative and quantitative research in a case-sensitive approach that considers each case holistically as a complex configuration of conditions and outcomes. QCA allows for multiple conjunctural causation, implying that it is often a combination of conditions that produces an outcome, that multiple pathways may lead to the same outcome, and that in different contexts, the same condition may have a different impact on the outcome. This approach to complexity allows QCA to provide a practical understanding for complex, real-world situations, and the context of implementing interventions. There are guides for conducting QCA in primary research and quantitative systematic reviews yet, to our knowledge, no guidance for conducting QCA in systematic mixed studies reviews (SMSRs). Thus, the specific objectives of this paper are to (1) describe a step-by-step approach for novice researchers for using QCA to integrate qualitative and quantitative evidence, including guidance on how to use software; (2) highlight specific challenges; (3) propose potential solutions from a worked example; and (4) provide recommendations for reporting.

Perceptions and Preoccupations of Patients and Physicians Regarding Use of Medical Cannabis as an Intervention Against Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: Results from a Qualitative Study.

Objective: Explore perceptions and preoccupations regarding use of medical cannabis against chronic musculoskeletal pain, among patients and physicians. Design: Qualitative study using interviews with patients and physicians, based on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). Setting: The study was conducted in Quebec, Canada, in spring 2020. Subjects: We included 27 adult patients and 11 physicians (GPs, anesthesiologists, psychiatrists, and a rheumatologist); the mean age of patients was 48.2 years; 59.3% of patients and 36.4% of physicians were women; 59.3% of patients used no medical cannabis at the time of study; 45.5% of physicians had never authorized it. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted, transcribed and for the qualitative analysis codes were developed in a hybrid, inductive and deductive approach. Guided by the TPB, facilitators and barriers, perceived benefits and harms, and perceived norms that may influence cannabis use or authorization were documented. Results: Although medical cannabis is an interesting avenue for the relief of chronic musculoskeletal pain, doctors and patients agreed that it remained a last line option, due to the lack of scientific evidence regarding its safety and efficacy. The norms surrounding medical cannabis also play an important role in the social and professional acceptance of this therapeutic option. Conclusion: Medical cannabis is seen as a last line option among interventions in the management of chronic pain, and attitudes and prior experiences play a role in the decision to use it. Study results may contribute to improved shared decision making between patients and physicians regarding this option.

Clinical Integration of Digital Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Primary Health Care for Chronic Disease Management: Protocol for a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Health measurement guides policies and health care decisions are necessary to describe and attain the quintuple aim of improving patient experience, population health, care team well-being, health care costs, and equity. In the primary care setting, patient-reported outcome measurement allows outcome comparisons within and across settings and helps improve the clinical management of patients. However, these digital patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are still not adapted to the clinical context of primary health care, which is an indication of the complexity of integrating these tools in this context. We must then gather evidence of their impact on chronic disease management in primary health care and understand the characteristics of effective implementation. OBJECTIVE: We will conduct a systematic review to identify and assess the impact of electronic PROMs (ePROMs) implementation in primary health care for chronic disease management. Our specific objectives are to (1) determine the impact of ePROMs in primary health care for chronic disease management and (2) compare and contrast characteristics of effective ePROMs' implementation strategies. METHODS: We will conduct a systematic review of the literature in accordance with the guidelines of the Cochrane Methods Group and in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for its reporting. A specific search strategy was developed for relevant databases to identify studies. Two reviewers will independently apply the inclusion criteria using full texts and will extract the data. We will use a 2-phase sequential mixed methods synthesis design by conducting a qualitative synthesis first, and use its results to perform a quantitative synthesis. RESULTS: This study was initiated in June 2022 by assembling the research team and the knowledge transfer committee. The preliminary search strategy will be developed and completed in September 2022. The main search strategy, data collection, study selection, and application of inclusion criteria were completed between October and December 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this review will help support implementation efforts to accelerate innovations and digital adoption for primary health care and will be relevant for improving clinical management of chronic diseases and health care services and policies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42022333513; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=333513. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/48155.

Curriculum frameworks and educational programs in artificial intelligence for medical students, residents, and practicing physicians: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this scoping review is to synthesize knowledge from the literature on curriculum frameworks and current educational programs that focus on the teaching and learning of artificial intelligence (AI) for medical students, residents, and practicing physicians. INTRODUCTION: To advance the implementation of AI in clinical practice, physicians need to have a better understanding of AI and how to use it within clinical practice. Consequently, medical education must introduce AI topics and concepts into the curriculum. Curriculum frameworks are educational road maps to teaching and learning. Therefore, any existing AI curriculum frameworks must be reviewed and, if none exist, such a framework must be developed. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will include articles that describe curriculum frameworks for teaching and learning AI in medicine, irrespective of country. All types of articles and study designs will be included, except conference abstracts and protocols. METHODS: This review will follow the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. Keywords will first be identified from relevant articles. Another search will then be conducted using the identified keywords and index terms. The following databases will be searched: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), and Scopus. Gray literature will also be searched. Articles will be limited to the English and French languages, commencing from the year 2000. The reference lists of all included articles will be screened for additional articles. Data will then be extracted from included articles and the results will be presented in a table.

Learning from intersectoral initiatives to respond to the needs of refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants without status in the context of COVID-19 in Quebec and Ontario: a qualitative multiple case study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants without status experience precarious living and working conditions that disproportionately expose them to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In the two most populous Canadian provinces (Quebec and Ontario), to reduce the vulnerability factors experienced by the most marginalized migrants, the public and community sectors engage in joint coordination efforts called intersectoral collaboration. This collaboration ensures holistic care provisioning, inclusive of psychosocial support, assistance to address food security, and educational and employment assistance. This research project explores how community and public sectors collaborated on intersectoral initiatives during the COVID-19 pandemic to support refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants without status in the cities of Montreal, Sherbrooke, and Toronto, and generates lessons for a sustainable response to the heterogeneous needs of these migrants. METHODS: This theory-informed participatory research is co-created with socioculturally diverse research partners (refugees, asylum seekers and migrants without status, employees of community organizations, and employees of public organizations). We will utilize Mirzoev and Kane's framework on health systems' responsiveness to guide the four phases of a qualitative multiple case study (a case being an intersectoral initiative). These phases will include (1) building an inventory of intersectoral initiatives developed during the pandemic, (2) organizing a deliberative workshop with representatives of the study population, community, and public sector respondents to select and validate the intersectoral initiatives, (3) interviews (n = 80) with community and public sector frontline workers and managers, municipal/regional/provincial policymakers, and employees of philanthropic foundations, and (4) focus groups (n = 80) with refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants without status. Qualitative data will be analyzed using thematic analysis. The findings will be used to develop discussion forums to spur cross-learning among service providers. DISCUSSION: This research will highlight the experiences of community and public organizations in their ability to offer responsive services for refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants without status in the context of a pandemic. We will draw lessons learnt from the promising practices developed in the context of COVID-19, to improve services beyond times of crisis. Lastly, we will reflect upon our participatory approach-particularly in relation to the engagement of refugees and asylum seekers in the governance of our research.

Expected Health Benefits as the Ultimate Outcome of Information Available on Stroke Engine, a Knowledge Translation Stroke Rehabilitation Website: Web-Based Survey.

BACKGROUND: Electronic knowledge resources are readily available and typically target different audiences, including health professionals and the public, that is, those with lived experience and their relatives. The knowledge-to-action framework, in combination with the information assessment method (IAM), considering both the value-of-information construct and the conceptual model of acquisition-cognition-application, can be used to support the evaluation process of such resources. As an example, Stroke Engine is an evidence-based knowledge translation resource in stroke rehabilitation (assessments and interventions) for health professionals and students as well as individuals who have sustained a stroke and their relatives. According to Google Analytics, the website is perused >10,000 times per week. OBJECTIVE: With the overall aim to improve the content available on Stroke Engine, we documented Stroke Engine users' perceptions of situational relevance, cognitive impact, intention to use, and expected patient and health benefits regarding the information consulted. METHODS: A web-based survey anchored in the IAM was made available via an invitation tab. The IAM is a validated questionnaire that is designed to assess the value of information. Sociodemographic characteristics were also collected, and a space for free-text comments was provided. Descriptive statistics were used, and thematic analysis was used for the free-text comments. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 6634 respondents. Health professionals (3663/6634, 55.22%) and students (2784/6634, 41.97%) represented 97.18% (6447/6634) of the total responses. The remaining 2.82% (187/6634) of the responses were from individuals who had sustained a stroke (87/6634, 1.31%) and their relatives (100/6634, 1.51%). Regarding situational relevance, assessments (including selecting, obtaining, and interpreting results from a test) was the main topic searched by health professionals (1838/3364, 54.64%) and students (1228/2437, 50.39%), whereas general information on stroke rehabilitation was the top-ranked topic for nearly two-thirds of the individuals with stroke (45/76, 59%) and their relatives (57/91, 63%). Cognitive impact was characterized by learning something new. Intention to use was high (4572/6379, 71.67%) among the respondents and varied in context (eg, refine a topic, research, class assignments, teaching, and education). Respondents commented on ways to improve content. Expected patient and health benefits such as improvement in health and well-being was the top-ranked category for all 4 subgroups, followed by the avoidance of unnecessary or inappropriate treatment for health professionals (183/623, 29.4%) and a feeling of being reassured for individuals with stroke (26/75, 35%) and their relatives (28/97, 29%). CONCLUSIONS: Valuable feedback on Stroke Engine was obtained in terms of its accessibility, relevance for informational needs and retrieval, accuracy, and applicability; however, of utmost importance is the potential implementation of its evidence-based content in clinical practice and the perceived expected impact on patients, their relatives, and their health professionals. The feedback received allowed for corrections and the identification of key topics for further development.

How People Use Web-Based Parenting Information to Support Others in Their Social Circle: Qualitative Descriptive Study.

BACKGROUND: Almost two-thirds of the North American population have searched for health information on the web, and the majority report searching on behalf of someone else in their social circle, a phenomenon referred to as proxy seeking. Little is known about how proxy seekers use web-based health information and the outcomes they experience. OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study was to explore why proxy seekers used a parenting website on behalf of parents in their social circle and the outcomes they reported. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive study was conducted in the context of a partnership with a web-based parenting resource to explore the contexts and motivations for proxy web-based health information seeking, use of information, and subsequent outcomes. A total of 14 participants who self-identified as family members, friends of parents of young children, or professionals who worked with young children were interviewed, and a thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: The following 4 reasons for proxy seeking were uncovered: for reassurance, out of personal curiosity, as part of a professional role, or following an explicit request from the parents. Information was used to provide informational support for parents or material support for a child. Positive outcomes of using the information and some of the resulting interpersonal tensions were described. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides an in-depth look at proxy seeking behavior and outcomes among users of a web-based parenting resource.

Decision-making and related outcomes of patients with complex care needs in primary care settings: a systematic literature review with a case-based qualitative synthesis.

BACKGROUND: In primary care, patients increasingly face difficult decisions related to complex care needs (multimorbidity, polypharmacy, mental health issues, social vulnerability and structural barriers). There is a need for a pragmatic conceptual model to understand decisional needs among patients with complex care needs and outcomes related to decision. We aimed to identify types of decisional needs among patients with complex care needs, and decision-making configurations of conditions associated with decision outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a systematic mixed studies review. Two specialized librarians searched five bibliographic databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and SSCI). The search strategy was conducted from inception to December 2017. A team of twenty crowd-reviewers selected empirical studies on: (1) patients with complex care needs; (2) decisional needs; (3) primary care. Two reviewers appraised the quality of included studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. We conducted a 2-phase case-based qualitative synthesis framed by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework and Gregor's explicative-predictive theory type. A decisional need case involved: (a) a decision (what), (b) concerning a patient with complex care needs with bio-psycho-social characteristics (who), (c) made independently or in partnership (how), (d) in a specific place and time (where/when), (e) with communication and coordination barriers or facilitators (why), and that (f) influenced actions taken, health or well-being, or decision quality (outcomes). RESULTS: We included 47 studies. Data sufficiency qualitative criterion was reached. We identified 69 cases (2997 participants across 13 countries) grouped into five types of decisional needs: 'prioritization' (n = 26), 'use of services' (n = 22), 'prescription' (n = 12), 'behavior change' (n = 4) and 'institutionalization' (n = 5). Many decisions were made between clinical encounters in situations of social vulnerability. Patterns of conditions associated with decision outcomes revealed four decision-making configurations: 'well-managed' (n = 13), 'asymmetric encounters' (n = 21), 'self-management by default' (n = 8), and 'chaotic' (n = 27). Shared decision-making was associated with positive outcomes. Negative outcomes were associated with independent decision-making. CONCLUSION: Our results could extend decision-making models in primary care settings and inform subsequent user-centered design of decision support tools for heterogenous patients with complex care needs.

Impact and Perceived Value of iGeriCare e-Learning Among Dementia Care Partners and Others: Pilot Evaluation Using the IAM4all Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Care partners of people living with dementia may benefit from web-based education. We developed iGeriCare, an award-winning internet-based platform with 12 multimedia e-learning lessons about dementia. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to evaluate users' perceptions of impact. METHODS: From March 17, 2021 to May 16, 2022, data were collected upon lesson completion. We used the content-validated Information Assessment Method for all (IAM4all) for patients and the public adapted for dementia care partners. The IAM4all questionnaire assesses outcomes of web-based consumer health information. Responses were collected using SurveyMonkey, and data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics (version 28). RESULTS: A total of 409 responses were collected, with 389 (95.1%) survey respondents completing the survey. Of 409 respondents, 179 (43.8%) identified as a family or friend care partner, 84 (20.5%) identified as an individual concerned they may have mild cognitive impairment or dementia, 380 (92.9%) identified the lesson as relevant or very relevant, and 403 (98.5%) understood the lesson well or very well. Over half of respondents felt they were motivated to learn more, they were taught something new, or they felt validated in what they do, while some felt reassured or felt that the lesson refreshed their memory. Of 409 respondents, 401 (98%) said they would use the information, in particular, to better understand something, discuss the information with someone else, do things differently, or do something. CONCLUSIONS: Users identified iGeriCare as relevant and beneficial and said that they would use the information. To our knowledge, this is the first time the IAM4all questionnaire has been used to assess patient and caregiver feedback on internet-based dementia education resources. A randomized controlled trial to study feasibility and impact on caregiver knowledge, self-efficacy, and burden is in progress.

Application of Artificial Intelligence in Shared Decision Making: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) has shown promising results in various fields of medicine. It has the potential to facilitate shared decision making (SDM). However, there is no comprehensive mapping of how AI may be used for SDM. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify and evaluate published studies that have tested or implemented AI to facilitate SDM. METHODS: We performed a scoping review informed by the methodological framework proposed by Levac et al, modifications to the original Arksey and O'Malley framework of a scoping review, and the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review framework. We reported our results based on the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) reporting guideline. At the identification stage, an information specialist performed a comprehensive search of 6 electronic databases from their inception to May 2021. The inclusion criteria were: all populations; all AI interventions that were used to facilitate SDM, and if the AI intervention was not used for the decision-making point in SDM, it was excluded; any outcome related to patients, health care providers, or health care systems; studies in any health care setting, only studies published in the English language, and all study types. Overall, 2 reviewers independently performed the study selection process and extracted data. Any disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer. A descriptive analysis was performed. RESULTS: The search process yielded 1445 records. After removing duplicates, 894 documents were screened, and 6 peer-reviewed publications met our inclusion criteria. Overall, 2 of them were conducted in North America, 2 in Europe, 1 in Australia, and 1 in Asia. Most articles were published after 2017. Overall, 3 articles focused on primary care, and 3 articles focused on secondary care. All studies used machine learning methods. Moreover, 3 articles included health care providers in the validation stage of the AI intervention, and 1 article included both health care providers and patients in clinical validation, but none of the articles included health care providers or patients in the design and development of the AI intervention. All used AI to support SDM by providing clinical recommendations or predictions. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence of the use of AI in SDM is in its infancy. We found AI supporting SDM in similar ways across the included articles. We observed a lack of emphasis on patients' values and preferences, as well as poor reporting of AI interventions, resulting in a lack of clarity about different aspects. Little effort was made to address the topics of explainability of AI interventions and to include end-users in the design and development of the interventions. Further efforts are required to strengthen and standardize the use of AI in different steps of SDM and to evaluate its impact on various decisions, populations, and settings.

Lessons learned from using whiteboard videos and YouTube for deprescribing guidelines knowledge mobilization.

OBJECTIVES: Deprescribing is the planned and supervised process of dose reduction or stopping medication. Few clinical guidelines exist to help health care professionals in making decisions about deprescribing. The Bruyère Deprescribing Guidelines Team developed a series of evidence-based medication-class specific deprescribing guidelines and, to extend reach and uptake, disseminated them as whiteboard videos published on YouTube. This paper reports on the creation, sharing and evaluation of videos on proton pump inhibitor (PPI), antihyperglycemic (AHG), antipsychotic (AP) and benzodiazepine receptor agonist (BZRA) deprescribing guidelines. METHODS: Whiteboard videos depict an animator drawing on a whiteboard, while the narrator reads the script. In each video, the deprescribing algorithm is applied to mock patient cases. The videos were shared on YouTube and promoted via Twitter and other web-based tools. Evaluation methods included YouTube analytics and the validated Information Assessment Method (IAM) questionnaire. KEY FINDINGS: The four videos have a combined total of 26 387 views over the approximately 50 months since publishing, with viewers watching 34-40% of the videos' runtimes on average. The PPI and AHG deprescribing videos were viewed 4318 times in 97 countries during the first year. IAM respondents perceived the PPI, AHG and AP video content to be relevant, useful to learning and applicable to patient care. CONCLUSIONS: Using whiteboard videos on YouTube to explain deprescribing guidelines was a successful approach to knowledge mobilization. The evaluation approach is innovative as it combines typical success factors for online learning videos (e.g. views, estimated minutes watched) with responses to a validated information assessment tool.

Contexts and Outcomes of Proxy Online Health Information Seeking: Mixed Studies Review With Framework Synthesis.

BACKGROUND: High-quality online health information (OHI) can reduce unnecessary visits to health professionals and improve health. One of the ways that people use OHI is to support others with health conditions through proxy OHI seeking. Members of a person's social circle may help them overcome information-seeking barriers and illness challenges. There are several models on proxy information seeking. Yet, we know little about the use and outcomes of OHI on behalf of someone else. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this paper are to explore and revise a framework on the context and outcomes of proxy OHI seeking. METHODS: We conducted a mixed studies literature review integrating qualitative and quantitative evidence with thematic analysis of the findings of 28 studies, followed by framework synthesis incorporating the derived themes. RESULTS: We explored 4 main themes: (1) characteristics of proxy seekers, (2) context of proxy OHI seeking, (3) use of OHI to provide social support, and (4) outcomes of proxy OHI seeking. Our conceptual framework incorporates these themes and builds on previous work. CONCLUSIONS: By better understanding how people use information together, information providers can adapt the information to meet all users' needs.

Proxy Information Seeking by Users of a Parenting Information Website: Quantitative Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: One of the largest groups of consumers who seek health information on the internet are parents of young children, as well as people in their social circle. The concept of proxy seeking (on behalf of others) has been explored in the literature, yet little is known about the outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study was to describe consumer health information outcomes reported by proxy seekers using a parenting website. METHODS: We conducted a 2-year quantitative observational study. Participants were parents of 0- to 8-year-old children and members of their entourage in Canada who had accessed Naître et Grandir through the website or through a weekly newsletter. For each Naître et Grandir webpage, participants' perceptions regarding the outcomes of seeking and using specific webpages were gathered using a content-validated Information Assessment Method questionnaire. We compared the outcomes reported by parents with those reported by members of their entourage after consulting a parenting information website and explored if the method of accessing the information by the proxy seekers (website or weekly newsletter) changed the outcomes reported. For key primary survey items, the chi-square test was conducted, and differences in relative frequencies of responses were computed along with confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 51,325 completed questionnaires were included in the analysis, pertaining to 1079 Naître et Grandir webpages (mean 48; range 1-637). Compared to parents, individuals in the entourage are more likely to report using the information in discussion with others (mean difference 0.166, 95% CI 0.155-0.176). Parents, on the other hand, were more likely than the entourage to report using the information to better understand (mean difference 0.084, 95% CI 0.073-0.094), to decide to do something (mean difference 0.156, 95% CI 0.146-0.166), or to do something in a different manner (mean difference 0.052, 95% CI 0.042-0.061). In addition, results suggest that the differences in perceived benefits of parenting information by the entourage depend on how they access the information. Respondents who were actively seeking the information (through the website) were more likely to report that the information would help them be less worried (mean difference 0.047; 95% CI 0.024-0.069), handle a problem (mean difference 0.083; 95% CI 0.062-0.104), and decide what to do with someone else (mean difference 0.040, 95% CI 0.020-0.058). Respondents who passively acquired the information (through the newsletter) were more likely to report that the information would help improve the health or well-being of a child (mean difference 0.090; 95% CI 0.067-0.112). CONCLUSIONS: By better understanding how consumers and their entourages use information, information providers can adapt information to meet both individual and group needs, and health care practitioners can target patients' entourages with web-based health information resources for dissemination and use.

Better understanding care transitions of adults with complex health and social care needs: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Adults with chronic conditions who also suffer from mental health comorbidities and/or social vulnerability require services from many providers across different sectors. They may have complex health and social care needs and experience poorer health indicators and high mortality rates while generating considerable costs to the health and social services system. In response, the literature has stressed the need for a collaborative approach amongst providers to facilitate the care transition process. A better understanding of care transitions is the next step towards the improvement of integrated care models. The aim of the study is to better understand care transitions of adults with complex health and social care needs across community, primary care, and hospital settings, combining the experiences of patients and their families, providers, and health managers. METHODS/DESIGN: We will conduct a two-phase mixed methods multiple case study (quantitative and qualitative). We will work with six cases in three Canadian provinces, each case being the actual care transitions across community, primary care, and hospital settings. Adult patients with complex needs will be identified by having visited the emergency department at least three times over the previous 12 months. To ensure they have complex needs, they will be invited to complete INTERMED Self-Assessment and invited to enroll if positive. For the quantitative phase, data will be obtained through questionnaires and multi-level regression analyses will be conducted. For the qualitative phase, semi-structured interviews and focus groups will be conducted with patients, family members, care providers, and managers, and thematic analysis will be performed. Quantitative and qualitative results will be compared and then merged. DISCUSSION: This study is one of the first to examine care transitions of adults with complex needs by adopting a comprehensive vision of care transitions and bringing together the experiences of patients and family members, providers, and health managers. By using an integrated knowledge translation approach with key knowledge users, the study's findings have the potential to inform the optimization of integrated care, to positively impact the health of adults with complex needs, and reduce the economic burden to the health and social care systems.

Evidence reversals in primary care research: a study of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-Based Medicine is built on the premise that clinicians can be more confident when their decisions are grounded in high-quality evidence. Furthermore, evidence from studies involving patient-oriented outcomes is preferred when making decisions about tests or treatments. Ideally, the findings of relevant and valid trials should be stable over time, that is, unlikely to be reversed in subsequent research. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the stability of evidence from trials relevant to primary healthcare and to identify study characteristics associated with their reversal. METHODS: We studied synopses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from 2002 to 2005 as "Daily POEMs" (Patient Oriented Evidence that Matters). The initial evidence (E1) from these POEMs (2002-2005) was compared with the updated evidence (E2) on that same topic in a summary resource (DynaMed 2019). Two physician-raters independently categorized each POEM-RCT as (i) reversed when E1 ≠ E2, or as (ii) not reversed, when E1 = E2. For all "Evidence Reversals" (E1 ≠ E2), we assessed the direction of change in the evidence. RESULTS: We evaluated 408 POEMs on RCTs. Of those, 35 (9%; 95% confidence interval [6-12]) were identified as reversed, 359 (88%) were identified as not reversed, and 14 (3%) were indeterminate. On average, this represents about 2 evidence reversals per annum for POEMs about RCTs. CONCLUSIONS: Over 12-17 years, 9% of RCTs summarized as POEMs are reversed. Information alerting services that apply strict criteria for relevance and validity of clinical information are likely to identify RCTs whose findings are stable over time.

We studied the extent to which evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) relevant to primary care is contradicted in subsequent research. When it was, we identified this event as an evidence reversal. In addition, we sought to identify characteristics of RCTs associated with their reversal. From 408 RCTs published during the period 2002­2005, study characteristics such as sample size were identified and extracted. Subsequently, we compared the evidence reported in each of these RCTs with the evidence on that same topic in an online summary resource in 2019. This allowed us to classify each RCT in one of the following 3 categories: evidence confirmed, reversed, or uncertain if this evidence is confirmed or reversed. Over 12­17 years of follow-up time, the findings of about 9 in 10 RCTs summarized as POEMs are stable. We found no statistically significant associations between trial characteristics and their subsequent reversal. This low rate of evidence reversal is good news for the RCTs that are used to inform decision-making.

Outcomes of searching for online health and parenting information on behalf of others: A mixed methods research study.

Context: Use of trustworthy online consumer health information (OCHI) is generally associated with benefits, yet barriers such as low health literacy may reduce these benefits. One of the largest groups of OCHI consumers is parents of young children. In addition to OCHI, parents reach out to their social circle for tailored advice, emotional support, and culturally relevant parenting information. However, little is known, about the use of parenting OCHI by the parents' social circle. Objective: To uncover OCHI outcomes when members of parents' social circle search for OCHI. Study Design: Convergent mixed methods study. Setting: Online parenting and child health information newsletter and magazine, available at naitreetgrandir.com (N&G). Population studied: Participants who completed a questionnaire about the information presented by N&G between April 13th, 2019 to March 30th, 2021. Instrument: The validated Information Assessment Method (IAM) questionnaire, implemented by N&G since 2015. Main outcome measures: IAM responses on OCHI outcomes by participants were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and responses compared between parents and their entourage (grandparents, family, friends and neighbours). Qualitative component: 14 parents' entourage members were interviewed to uncover perceived OCHI outcomes (up to saturation) and thematic analysis was conducted. Quantitative and qualitative components were conducted and analysed separately; results were compared using a joint display to provide a complete picture. Results: 51,320 completed IAM questionnaires (81% by parents) were included in the analysis, pertaining to 1079 N&G webpages (mean 47.6; range 1-637). Entourage members were more likely than parents to report using the information in a discussion with someone else and this led them to being better able to make a decision with those persons. Interviewees described sharing the information they found in some situations or not sharing it to avoid conflict. They used the information to provide support or do something for the parent(s) or child. Sharing information led to improved decision making, improved relationships, less worry and better health outcomes, or in some cases led to tensions. Conclusion: By better understanding how people use information together, health information can be adapted to meet both individual and group needs. Public health interventions aimed at supporting parents can do so by facilitating shared decision making.

Cannabis against chronic musculoskeletal pain: a scoping review on users and their perceptions.

BACKGROUND: Chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) may lead to reduced physical function and is the most common cause of chronic non-cancer pain. Currently, the pharmacotherapeutic options against CMP are limited and frequently consist of pain management with non-steroidal anti-inflammatories, gabapentinoids, or opioids, which carry major adverse effects. Although the effectiveness of medical cannabis (MC) for CMP still lacks solid evidence, several patients suffering from it are exploring this therapeutic option with their physicians. OBJECTIVES: Little is known about patients' perceptions of their MC treatment for CMP. We aimed to increase this knowledge, useful for healthcare professionals and patients considering this treatment, by conducting a scoping literature review, following guidance by Arksey and O'Malley, to describe the views and perceptions of adult patients who had consumed MC to relieve chronic CMP. METHODS: Databases (PUBMED, EMBASE, Web of Science) and websites were searched using combinations of controlled and free vocabulary. All studies and study designs reporting on patients' perceptions regarding MC against CMP were considered. Studies had to include adult patients reporting qualitatively or quantitatively, i.e., through questionnaires, on MC use to treat CMP or other non-cancer pain, since studies reporting exclusively on perceptions regarding CMP were very rare. Study characteristics were extracted and limitations of the study quality were assessed. The review includes patients' demographic characteristics, patterns of MC use, perceived positive and negative effects, use of alcohol or other drugs, reported barriers to CM use, and funding sources of the studies. RESULTS: Participants of the 49 included studies reported that MC use helped them to reduce CMP and other chronic non-cancer pain, with only minor adverse effects, and some reported improved psychological well-being. In the included studies, men represent between 18 and 88% of the subjects. The mean age of participants in these studies (42/49) varied between 28.4 and 62.8 years old. The most common route of administration is inhalation. CONCLUSION: MC users suffering from CMP or other chronic non-cancer pain perceived more benefits than harms. However, the information from these studies has several methodological limitations and results are exploratory. These user-reported experiences must thus be examined by well-designed and methodologically sound clinical or observational studies, particularly regarding CMP, where reports are very scarce.

An Overview of Reviews on Interprofessional Collaboration in Primary Care: Effectiveness.

INTRODUCTION: Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is increasingly used but diversely implemented in primary care. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of IPC in primary care settings. METHODS: An overview (review of systematic reviews) was carried out. We searched nine databases and employed a double selection and data extraction method. Patient-related outcomes were categorized, and results coded as improvement (+), worsening (-), mixed results (?) or no change (0). RESULTS: 34 reviews were included. Six types of IPC were identified: IPC in primary care (large scope) (n = 8), physician-nurse in primary care (n = 1), primary care physician (PCP)-specialty care provider (n = 5), PCP-pharmacist (n = 3), PCP-mental healthcare provider (n = 15), and intersectoral collaboration (n = 2). In general, IPC in primary care was beneficial for patients with variation between types of IPC. Whereas reviews about IPC in primary care (large scope) showed better processes of care and higher patient satisfaction, other types of IPC reported mixed results for clinical outcomes, healthcare use and patient-reported outcomes. Also, reviews focusing on interventions based on pre-existing and well-defined models, such as collaborative care, overall reported more benefits. However, heterogeneity between the included primary studies hindered comparison and often led to the report of mixed results. Finally, professional- and organizational-related outcomes were under-reported, and cost-related outcomes showed some promising results for IPC based on pre-existing models; results were lacking for other types. CONCLUSIONS: This overview suggests that interprofessional collaboration can be effective in primary care. Better understanding of the characteristics of IPC processes, their implementation, and the identification of effective elements, merits further attention.

An Overview of Reviews on Interprofessional Collaboration in Primary Care: Barriers and Facilitators.

INTRODUCTION: Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is becoming more widespread in primary care due to the increasing complex needs of patients. However, its implementation can be challenging. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators of IPC in primary care settings. METHODS: An overview of reviews was carried out. Nine databases were searched, and two independent reviewers took part in review selection, data extraction and quality assessment. A thematic synthesis was carried out to highlight the main barriers and facilitators, according to the type of IPC and their level of intervention (system, organizational, inter-individual and individual). RESULTS: Twenty-nine reviews were included, classified according to six types of IPC: IPC in primary care (large scope) (n = 11), primary care physician (PCP)-nurse in primary care (n = 2), PCP-specialty care provider (n = 3), PCP-pharmacist (n = 2), PCP-mental health care provider (n = 6), and intersectoral collaboration (n = 5). Most barriers and facilitators were reported at the organizational and inter-individual levels. Main barriers referred to lack of time and training, lack of clear roles, fears relating to professional identity and poor communication. Principal facilitators included tools to improve communication, co-location and recognition of other professionals' skills and contribution. CONCLUSIONS: The range of barriers and facilitators highlighted in this overview goes beyond specific local contexts and can prove useful for the development of tools or guidelines for successful implementation of IPC in primary care.

Factors associated with parents' experiences using a knowledge translation tool for vaccination pain management: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination is a common painful procedure for children. Parents' concern regarding vaccination pain is a significant driver of vaccine hesitancy. Despite the wealth of evidence-based practices available for managing vaccination pain, parents lack knowledge of, and access to, these strategies. Knowledge translation (KT) tools can communicate evidence-based information to parents, however little is known about what factors influence parents' use of these tools. A two-page, electronic KT tool on psychological, physical, and pharmacological vaccination pain management strategies for children, was shared with parents as part of a larger mixed methods study, using explanatory sequential design, exploring factors related to uptake of this KT tool. The aim of this qualitative study was to understand what influenced parents' perceptions of the relevance of the KT tool, as well as their decision as to whether to use the tool. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive design was used. A total of 20 parents of children aged 0-17 years (n = 19 mothers) reviewed the KT tool ahead of their child's upcoming vaccination and participated in a semi-structured interview at follow-up. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed with reflexive thematic analysis using an inductive approach. RESULTS: The analysis generated three interrelated themes which described factors related to parents' use of the KT tool: (1) Relevance to parents' needs and circumstances surrounding their child's vaccination; (2) Alignment with parents' personal values around, and experiences with, vaccination pain management (e.g., the importance of managing pain); and (3) Support from the clinical environment for implementing evidence-based strategies (e.g., physical clinical environment and quality of interactions with the health care provider). CONCLUSIONS: Several factors were identified as central to parents' use of the KT tool, including the information itself and the clinical environment. When the tool was perceived as relevant, aligned with parents' values, and was supported by health care providers, parents were more inclined to use the KT tool to manage their children's vaccination pain. Future research could explore other factors related to promoting engagement and uptake when creating parent-directed KT tools for a range of health-related contexts.