Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 45.292
Filtrar
1.
Med Educ Online ; 29(1): 2363006, 2024 Dec 31.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38845343

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Simulation-based education in healthcare encompasses a wide array of modalities aimed at providing realistic clinical experiences supported by meticulously designed scenarios. The French-speaking Society for Simulation in Healthcare (SoFraSimS) has developed guidelines to assist educators in the design of scenarios for manikin- or simulated participant- based immersive simulation and procedural simulation, the three mainly used modalities. METHODS: After establishing a French-speaking group of experts within the SoFraSimS network, we performed an extensive literature review with theory-informed practices and personal experiences. We used this approach identify the essential criteria for practice-based scenario design within the three simulation modalities. RESULTS: We present three comprehensive templates for creating innovative scenarios and simulation sessions, each tailored to the specific characteristics of a simulation modality. The SoFraSimS templates include five sections distributed between the three modalities. The first section contextualizes the scenario by describing the practicalities of the setting, the instructors and learners, and its connection to the educational program. The second section outlines the learning objectives. The third lists all the elements necessary during the preparation phase, describing the educational method used for procedural simulation (such as demonstration, discovery, mastery learning, and deliberate practice). The fourth section addresses the simulation phase, detailing the behaviors the instructor aims to analyze, the embedded triggers, and the anticipated impact on simulation proceedings (natural feedback). This ensures maximum control over the learning experience. Finally, the fifth section compiles elements for post-simulation modifications to enhance future iterations. CONCLUSION: We trust that these guidelines will prove valuable to educators seeking to implement simulation-based education and contribute to the standardization of scenarios for healthcare students and professionals. This standardization aims to facilitate communication, comparison of practices and collaboration across different learning and healthcare institutions.


'What this article adds'1. The SoFraSimS provides guidelines to facilitate the development of simulation-based activities.2. These guidelines are theory-informed as well as evidence and experience-based.3. A detailed approach to writing a complete activity or scenario for procedural and immersive simulation including manikins or simulated participants is provided (the 'SoFraSimS templates').4. This work aims at standardizing practices and exchanging scenarios between simulation centers.


Assuntos
Manequins , Treinamento por Simulação , Humanos , França , Competência Clínica , Guias como Assunto , Educação Médica/métodos
2.
Health Expect ; 27(3): e14058, 2024 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38855830

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Meaningful involvement of adolescents in health research is their fundamental human right and has many benefits. A lack of awareness among researchers on how to meaningfully involve adolescents in health research has been linked to adolescent under involvement in health research. To address this barrier, studies have reported the need for more guidance. To inform the development of better guidelines on adolescent involvement, there is a need to first consolidate the currently available guidance on adolescent involvement in health research and to identify the gaps in these guidelines. This review aims to systematically identify all the currently available guidelines on adolescent involvement in health research and evaluate their scope, content, context, and quality. METHODS: This rapid review was pre-registered with PROSPERO #CRD42021293586. It included documents that incorporated tangible recommendations on the involvement of adolescents in health research. We searched six databases for peer-reviewed literature: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and ERIC. We conducted a grey literature search in Google Scholar, Google, websites of 472 relevant organisations and sought expert input. The quality of the guidelines was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation (AGREE-II) Instrument. Data was analysed using descriptive analyses and narrative synthesis. RESULTS: We found that the current guidelines on adolescent involvement in health research are often narrow in scope, targeting specific users and populations while focusing on limited research areas. The guidelines individually fail to provide comprehensive coverage of recommendations across all topics related to adolescent research involvement, that are collectively addressed across all included guidelines. Furthermore, these guidelines tend to be context-specific and are generally of low quality, often due to inadequate stakeholder involvement and a lack of rigorous development methods. CONCLUSION: This review provides a consolidated list of guidelines on adolescent involvement in health research along with their quality scores as a resource for researchers to select the guidelines suitable for their research topic, context, and scope for adolescent involvement. There is a need to develop a set of guidelines on adolescent involvement in research, which are comprehensive in scope, cover all key aspects of adolescent involvement in health research, can be adapted for different contexts, and which are based on rigorous and systematic methods. PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: Adolescent co-researchers D. B. and C. W. were involved at different stages of the review process. D. B. screened 25% of the peer-reviewed articles at the title and abstract screening stage and 10% at full-text screening stage. C. W. extracted data from 10% of the included guidelines. Both co-researchers reviewed and shared their feedback on the article and are co-authors on this paper. They will also be invited to contribute to further dissemination of the findings from this review.


Assuntos
Guias como Assunto , Humanos , Adolescente , Participação do Paciente , Pesquisa Biomédica/normas
3.
Health Expect ; 27(1): e13970, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38865184

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: An integral aspect of patient engagement in research, also known as patient and public involvement, is appropriately recognising patient partners for their contributions through compensation (e.g., coauthorship, honoraria). Despite known benefits to compensating patient partners, our previous work suggested compensation is rarely reported and researchers perceive a lack of guidance on this issue. To address this gap, we identified and summarised available guidance and policy documents for patient partner compensation. METHODS: We conducted this scoping review in accordance with methods suggested by the JBI. We searched the grey literature (Google, Google Scholar) in March 2022 and Overton (an international database of policy documents) in April 2022. We included articles, guidance or policy documents regarding the compensation of patient partners for their research contributions. Two reviewers independently extracted and synthesised document characteristics and recommendations. RESULTS: We identified 65 guidance or policy documents. Most documents were published in Canada (57%, n = 37) or the United Kingdom (26%, n = 17). The most common recommended methods of nonfinancial compensation were offering training opportunities to patient partners (40%, n = 26) and facilitating patient partner attendance at conferences (38%, n = 25). The majority of guidance documents (95%) suggested financially compensating (i.e., offering something of monetary value) patient partners for their research contributions. Across guidance documents, the recommended monetary value of financial compensation was relatively consistent and associated with the role played by patient partners and/or specific engagement activities. For instance, the median monetary value for obtaining patient partner feedback (i.e., consultation) was $19/h (USD) (range of $12-$50/h). We identified several documents that guide the compensation of specific populations, including youth and Indigenous peoples. CONCLUSION: Multiple publicly available resources exist to guide researchers, patient partners and institutions in developing tailored patient partner compensation strategies. Our findings challenge the perception that a lack of guidance hinders patient partner financial compensation. Future efforts should prioritise the effective implementation of these compensation strategies to ensure that patient partners are appropriately recognised. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTIONS: The patient partner coauthor informed protocol development, identified data items, and interpreted findings.


Assuntos
Participação do Paciente , Humanos , Guias como Assunto , Compensação e Reparação
5.
Ugeskr Laeger ; 186(21)2024 May 20.
Artigo em Dinamarquês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38847313

RESUMO

There is an increasing number of PhD students in health sciences, but no formal reporting guideline for writing a thesis exists. This review provides a practical guide with an overview of the article-based/synopsis PhD thesis that consists of eight parts: 1) initial formalities, 2) introduction, 3) methodological considerations, 4) study presentations, 5) discussion, 6) conclusion, 7) perspectives, and 8) concluding formalities. It is elaborated with detailed information, practical advice, and a template, so the thesis complies with the demands of the Danish Graduate Schools of Health Sciences.


Assuntos
Dissertações Acadêmicas como Assunto , Redação , Redação/normas , Humanos , Educação de Pós-Graduação/normas , Guias como Assunto , Projetos de Pesquisa/normas , Dinamarca
6.
Zhonghua Bing Li Xue Za Zhi ; 53(6): 528-534, 2024 Jun 08.
Artigo em Chinês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38825895

RESUMO

The STAR tool was used to evaluate and analyze the science, transparency, and applicability of Chinese pathology guidelines and consensus published in medical journals in 2022. There were a total of 18 pathology guidelines and consensuses published in 2022, including 1 guideline and 17 consensuses. The results showed that the guideline score was 21.83 points, lower than the overall guideline average (43.4 points). Consensus ratings scored an average of 27.87 points, on par with the overall consensus level (28.3 points). Areas that scored above the overall level were "conflict of interest" and "working groups", while areas that scored below the overall level were "proposals", "funding", "evidence", "consensus approaches" and "accessibility". To sum up, the formulation of pathology guidelines and consensuses in 2022 is not standardized, and the evidence retrieval process, evidence evaluation methods and grading criteria for recommendations on clinical issues are not provided in the formulation process; the process and method for reaching consensus are not provided, the plan is lacking, and registration is not carried out. It is therefore suggested that guidelines/consensus makers in the field of pathology should attach importance to evidence-based medical evidence, strictly follow guideline formulation methods and processes, further improve the scientific, applicable and transparent guidelines/consensuses in the field, and better provide support for clinicians and patients.


Assuntos
Consenso , Patologia , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto , Humanos , China , Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Patologia/normas , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto/normas , Guias como Assunto
7.
BMJ Open ; 14(6): e071136, 2024 Jun 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38889936

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Observational studies are fraught with several biases including reverse causation and residual confounding. Overview of reviews of observational studies (ie, umbrella reviews) synthesise systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses of cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies, and may also aid in the grading of the credibility of reported associations. The number of published umbrella reviews has been increasing. Recently, a reporting guideline for overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions (Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews (PRIOR)) was published, but the field lacks reporting guidelines for umbrella reviews of observational studies. Our aim is to develop a reporting guideline for umbrella reviews on cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies assessing epidemiological associations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will adhere to established guidance and prepare a PRIOR extension for systematic reviews of cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies testing epidemiological associations between an exposure and an outcome, namely Preferred Reporting Items for Umbrella Reviews of Cross-sectional, Case-control and Cohort studies (PRIUR-CCC). Step 1 will be the project launch to identify stakeholders. Step 2 will be a literature review of available guidance to conduct umbrella reviews. Step 3 will be an online Delphi study sampling 100 participants among authors and editors of umbrella reviews. Step 4 will encompass the finalisation of PRIUR-CCC statement, including a checklist, a flow diagram, explanation and elaboration document. Deliverables will be (i) identifying stakeholders to involve according to relevant expertise and end-user groups, with an equity, diversity and inclusion lens; (ii) completing a narrative review of methodological guidance on how to conduct umbrella reviews, a narrative review of methodology and reporting in published umbrella reviews and preparing an initial PRIUR-CCC checklist for Delphi study round 1; (iii) preparing a PRIUR-CCC checklist with guidance after Delphi study; (iv) publishing and disseminating PRIUR-CCC statement. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: PRIUR-CCC has been approved by The Ottawa Health Science Network Research Ethics Board and has obtained consent (20220639-01H). Participants to step 3 will give informed consent. PRIUR-CCC steps will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will guide reporting of umbrella reviews on epidemiological associations.


Assuntos
Guias como Assunto , Humanos , Estudos Transversais , Estudos de Coortes , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Projetos de Pesquisa/normas , Revisões Sistemáticas como Assunto , Lista de Checagem , Estudos Observacionais como Assunto
8.
BMJ Open ; 14(6): e086603, 2024 Jun 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38851235

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To map the available methodological guidelines and documents for conducting and reporting benefit-risk assessment (BRA) during health technologies' life cycle; and to identify methodological guidelines for BRA that could serve as the basis for the development of a BRA guideline for the context of health technology assessment (HTA) in Brazil. DESIGN: Scoping review. METHODS: Searches were conducted in three main sources up to March 2023: (1) electronic databases; (2) grey literature (48 HTA and regulatory organisations) and (3) manual search and contacting experts. We included methodological guidelines or publications presenting methods for conducting or reporting BRA of any type of health technologies in any context of the technology's life cycle. Selection process and data charting were conducted by independent reviewers. We provided a structured narrative synthesis of the findings. RESULTS: From the 83 eligible documents, six were produced in the HTA context, 30 in the regulatory and 35 involved guidance for BRA throughout the technology's life cycle. We identified 129 methodological approaches for BRA in the documents. The most commonly referred to descriptive frameworks were the Problem, Objectives, Alternatives, Consequences, Trade-offs, Uncertainty, Risk and Linked decisions and the Benefit-Risk Action Team. Multicriteria decision analysis was the most commonly cited quantitative framework. We also identified the most cited metric indices, estimation and utility survey techniques that could be used for BRA. CONCLUSIONS: Methods for BRA in HTA are less established. The findings of this review, however, will support and inform the elaboration of the Brazilian methodological guideline on BRA for HTA. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/69T3V.


Assuntos
Avaliação da Tecnologia Biomédica , Avaliação da Tecnologia Biomédica/métodos , Humanos , Medição de Risco/métodos , Guias como Assunto , Brasil
10.
Curr Protoc ; 4(6): e1055, 2024 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38837690

RESUMO

Data harmonization involves combining data from multiple independent sources and processing the data to produce one uniform dataset. Merging separate genotypes or whole-genome sequencing datasets has been proposed as a strategy to increase the statistical power of association tests by increasing the effective sample size. However, data harmonization is not a widely adopted strategy due to the difficulties with merging data (including confounding produced by batch effects and population stratification). Detailed data harmonization protocols are scarce and are often conflicting. Moreover, data harmonization protocols that accommodate samples of admixed ancestry are practically non-existent. Existing data harmonization procedures must be modified to ensure the heterogeneous ancestry of admixed individuals is incorporated into additional downstream analyses without confounding results. Here, we propose a set of guidelines for merging multi-platform genetic data from admixed samples that can be adopted by any investigator with elementary bioinformatics experience. We have applied these guidelines to aggregate 1544 tuberculosis (TB) case-control samples from six separate in-house datasets and conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of TB susceptibility. The GWAS performed on the merged dataset had improved power over analyzing the datasets individually and produced summary statistics free from bias introduced by batch effects and population stratification. © 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC. Basic Protocol 1: Processing separate datasets comprising array genotype data Alternate Protocol 1: Processing separate datasets comprising array genotype and whole-genome sequencing data Alternate Protocol 2: Performing imputation using a local reference panel Basic Protocol 2: Merging separate datasets Basic Protocol 3: Ancestry inference using ADMIXTURE and RFMix Basic Protocol 4: Batch effect correction using pseudo-case-control comparisons.


Assuntos
Estudo de Associação Genômica Ampla , Humanos , Estudo de Associação Genômica Ampla/métodos , Estudo de Associação Genômica Ampla/normas , Genômica/métodos , Genômica/normas , Tuberculose/genética , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Guias como Assunto , Predisposição Genética para Doença
11.
Sci Eng Ethics ; 30(3): 24, 2024 Jun 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38833207

RESUMO

While the technologies that enable Artificial Intelligence (AI) continue to advance rapidly, there are increasing promises regarding AI's beneficial outputs and concerns about the challenges of human-computer interaction in healthcare. To address these concerns, institutions have increasingly resorted to publishing AI guidelines for healthcare, aiming to align AI with ethical practices. However, guidelines as a form of written language can be analyzed to recognize the reciprocal links between its textual communication and underlying societal ideas. From this perspective, we conducted a discourse analysis to understand how these guidelines construct, articulate, and frame ethics for AI in healthcare. We included eight guidelines and identified three prevalent and interwoven discourses: (1) AI is unavoidable and desirable; (2) AI needs to be guided with (some forms of) principles (3) trust in AI is instrumental and primary. These discourses signal an over-spillage of technical ideals to AI ethics, such as over-optimism and resulting hyper-criticism. This research provides insights into the underlying ideas present in AI guidelines and how guidelines influence the practice and alignment of AI with ethical, legal, and societal values expected to shape AI in healthcare.


Assuntos
Inteligência Artificial , Atenção à Saúde , Guias como Assunto , Confiança , Inteligência Artificial/ética , Humanos , Atenção à Saúde/ética , Princípios Morais
15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38743471

RESUMO

Rhizobia are bacteria that form nitrogen-fixing nodules in legume plants. The sets of genes responsible for both nodulation and nitrogen fixation are carried in plasmids or genomic islands that are often mobile. Different strains within a species sometimes have different host specificities, while very similar symbiosis genes may be found in strains of different species. These specificity variants are known as symbiovars, and many of them have been given names, but there are no established guidelines for defining or naming them. Here, we discuss the requirements for guidelines to describe symbiovars, propose a set of guidelines, provide a list of all symbiovars for which descriptions have been published so far, and offer a mechanism to maintain a list in the future.


Assuntos
Rhizobium , Simbiose , Rhizobium/genética , Rhizobium/classificação , Fabaceae/microbiologia , Fixação de Nitrogênio , Nódulos Radiculares de Plantas/microbiologia , Guias como Assunto
17.
Arch Toxicol ; 98(7): 1967-1973, 2024 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38806718

RESUMO

Since 2006, the responsible regulatory bodies have proposed five health-based guidance values (HBGV) for bisphenol A (BPA) that differ by a factor of 250,000. This range of HBGVs covers a considerable part of the range from highly toxic to relatively non-toxic substances. As such heterogeneity of regulatory opinions is a challenge not only for scientific risk assessment but also for all stakeholders, the Senate Commission on Food Safety (SKLM) of the German Research Foundation (DFG) analyzed the reasons for the current discrepancy and used this example to suggest improvements for the process of HBGV recommendations. A key aspect for deriving a HBGV is the selection of appropriate studies that allow the identification of a point of departure (PoD) for risk assessment. In the case of BPA, the HBGV derived in the 2023 EFSA assessment was based on a study that reported an increase of Th17 cells in mice with a benchmark dose lower bound (BMDL40) of 0.53 µg/kg bw/day. However, this study does not comply with several criteria that are important for scientific risk assessment: (1) the selected end-point, Th17 cell frequency in the spleen of mice, is insufficiently understood with respect to health outcomes. (2) It is unclear, by which mechanism BPA may cause an increase in Th17 cell frequency. (3) It is unknown, if an increase of Th17 cell frequency in rodents is comparably observed in humans. (4) Toxicokinetics were not addressed. (5) Neither the raw data nor the experimental protocols are available. A further particularly important criterion (6) is independent data confirmation which is not available in the present case. Previous studies using other readouts did not observe immune-related adverse effects such as inflammation, even at doses orders of magnitude higher than in the Th17 cell-based study. The SKLM not only provides here key criteria for the use of such studies, but also suggests that the use of such a "checklist" requires a careful and comprehensive scientific judgement of each item. It is concluded that the Th17 cell-based study data do not represent an adequate basis for risk assessment of BPA.


Assuntos
Compostos Benzidrílicos , Fenóis , Compostos Benzidrílicos/toxicidade , Fenóis/toxicidade , Medição de Risco/métodos , Animais , Humanos , Camundongos , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Guias como Assunto
18.
Contemp Clin Trials ; 142: 107575, 2024 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38750951

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Inadequate reporting of fidelity to interventions in trials limits the transparency and interpretation of trial findings. Despite this, most trials of non-drug, non-surgical interventions lack comprehensive reporting of fidelity. If fidelity is poorly reported, it is unclear which intervention components were tested or implemented within the trial, which also hinders research reproducibility. This protocol describes the development process of a reporting guideline for fidelity of non-drug, non-surgical interventions (ReFiND) in the context of trials. METHODS: The ReFiND guideline will be developed in six stages. Stage one: a guideline development group has been formed to oversee the guideline methodology. Stage two: a scoping review will be conducted to identify and summarize existing guidance documents on the fidelity of non-drug, non-surgical interventions. Stage three: a Delphi study will be conducted to reach consensus on reporting items. Stage four: a consensus meeting will be held to consolidate the reporting items and discuss the wording and structure of the guideline. Stage five: a guidance statement, an elaboration and explanation document, and a reporting checklist will be developed. Stage six: different strategies will be used to disseminate and implement the ReFiND guideline. DISCUSSION: The ReFiND guideline will provide a set of items developed through international consensus to improve the reporting of intervention fidelity in trials of non-drug, non-surgical interventions. This reporting guideline will enhance transparency and reproducibility in future non-drug, non-surgical intervention research.


Assuntos
Consenso , Técnica Delphi , Projetos de Pesquisa , Humanos , Projetos de Pesquisa/normas , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Lista de Checagem , Guias como Assunto , Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto/normas , Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto/métodos
20.
Drug Saf ; 47(6): 575-584, 2024 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38713346

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Disproportionality analyses using reports of suspected adverse drug reactions are the most commonly used quantitative methods for detecting safety signals in pharmacovigilance. However, their methods and results are generally poorly reported in published articles and existing guidelines do not capture the specific features of disproportionality analyses. We here describe the development of a guideline (REporting of A Disproportionality analysis for drUg Safety signal detection using individual case safety reports in PharmacoVigilance [READUS-PV]) for reporting the results of disproportionality analyses in articles and abstracts. METHODS: We established a group of 34 international experts from universities, the pharmaceutical industry, and regulatory agencies, with expertise in pharmacovigilance, disproportionality analyses, and assessment of safety signals. We followed a three-step process to develop the checklist: (1) an open-text survey to generate a first list of items; (2) an online Delphi method to select and rephrase the most important items; (3) a final online consensus meeting. RESULTS: Among the panel members, 33 experts responded to round 1 and 30 to round 2 of the Delphi and 25 participated to the consensus meeting. Overall, 60 recommendations for the main body of the manuscript and 13 recommendations for the abstracts were retained by participants after the Delphi method. After merging of some items together and the online consensus meeting, the READUS-PV guidelines comprise a checklist of 32 recommendations, in 14 items, for the reporting of disproportionality analyses in the main body text and four items, comprising 12 recommendations, for abstracts. CONCLUSIONS: The READUS-PV guidelines will support authors, editors, peer-reviewers, and users of disproportionality analyses using individual case safety report databases. Adopting these guidelines will lead to more transparent, comprehensive, and accurate reporting and interpretation of disproportionality analyses, facilitating the integration with other sources of evidence.


Assuntos
Sistemas de Notificação de Reações Adversas a Medicamentos , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos , Farmacovigilância , Humanos , Sistemas de Notificação de Reações Adversas a Medicamentos/normas , Sistemas de Notificação de Reações Adversas a Medicamentos/estatística & dados numéricos , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/epidemiologia , Técnica Delphi , Lista de Checagem , Consenso , Guias como Assunto
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...