Mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach for colorectal cancer screening: Summary of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-sponsored Summit.

Uptake of colorectal cancer screening remains suboptimal. Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) offers promise for increasing screening rates, but optimal strategies for implementation have not been well synthesized. In June 2019, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention convened a meeting of subject matter experts and stakeholders to answer key questions regarding mailed FIT implementation in the United States. Points of agreement included: 1) primers, such as texts, telephone calls, and printed mailings before mailed FIT, appear to contribute to effectiveness; 2) invitation letters should be brief and easy to read, and the signatory should be tailored based on setting; 3) instructions for FIT completion should be simple and address challenges that may lead to failed laboratory processing, such as notation of collection date; 4) reminders delivered to initial noncompleters should be used to increase the FIT return rate; 5) data infrastructure should identify eligible patients and track each step in the outreach process, from primer delivery through abnormal FIT follow-up; 6) protocols and procedures such as navigation should be in place to promote colonoscopy after abnormal FIT; 7) a high-quality, 1-sample FIT should be used; 8) sustainability requires a program champion and organizational support for the work, including sufficient funding and external policies (such as quality reporting requirements) to drive commitment to program investment; and 9) the cost effectiveness of mailed FIT has been established. Participants concluded that mailed FIT is an effective and efficient strategy with great potential for increasing colorectal cancer screening in diverse health care settings if more widely implemented.

Follow the trail: Using insights from the growth of palliative care to propose a roadmap for cancer rehabilitation.

Despite research explicating the benefits of cancer rehabilitation interventions to optimize physical, social, emotional, and vocational functioning, many reports document low rates of referral to and uptake of rehabilitation in oncology. Cancer rehabilitation clinicians, researchers, and policy makers could learn from the multidisciplinary specialty of palliative care, which has benefited from a growth strategy and has garnered national recognition as an important and necessary aspect of oncology care. The purpose of this article is to explore the actions that have increased the uptake and integration of palliative care to yield insights and multimodal strategies for the development and growth of cancer rehabilitation. After examining the history of palliative care and its growth, the authors highlight 5 key strategies that may benefit the field of cancer rehabilitation: 1) stimulating the science in specific gap areas; 2) creating clinical practice guidelines; 3) building clinical capacity; 4) ascertaining and responding to public opinion; and 5) advocating for public policy change. Coordinated and simultaneous advances on these 5 strategies may catalyze the growth, utilization, and effectiveness of patient screening, timely referrals, and delivery of appropriate cancer rehabilitation care that reduces disability and improves quality of life for cancer survivors who need these services.

Equitably improving outcomes for cancer survivors and supporting caregivers: A blueprint for care delivery, research, education, and policy.

Cancer care delivery is being shaped by growing numbers of cancer survivors coupled with provider shortages, rising costs of primary treatment and follow-up care, significant survivorship health disparities, increased reliance on informal caregivers, and the transition to value-based care. These factors create a compelling need to provide coordinated, comprehensive, personalized care for cancer survivors in ways that meet survivors' and caregivers' unique needs while minimizing the impact of provider shortages and controlling costs for health care systems, survivors, and families. The authors reviewed research identifying and addressing the needs of cancer survivors and caregivers and used this synthesis to create a set of critical priorities for care delivery, research, education, and policy to equitably improve survivor outcomes and support caregivers. Efforts are needed in 3 priority areas: 1) implementing routine assessment of survivors' needs and functioning and caregivers' needs; 2) facilitating personalized, tailored, information and referrals from diagnosis onward for both survivors and caregivers, shifting services from point of care to point of need wherever possible; and 3) disseminating and supporting the implementation of new care methods and interventions.

Implementing personalized pathways for cancer follow-up care in the United States: Proceedings from an American Cancer Society-American Society of Clinical Oncology summit.

A new approach to cancer follow-up care is necessary to meet the needs of cancer survivors while dealing with increasing volume and provider shortages, knowledge gaps, and costs to both health care systems and patients. An approach that triages patients to personalized follow-up care pathways, depending on the type(s) and level(s) of resources needed for patients' long-term care, is in use in the United Kingdom and other countries and has been shown to meet patients' needs, more efficiently use the health care system, and reduce costs. Recognizing that testing and implementing a similar personalized approach to cancer follow-up care in the United States will require a multipronged strategy, the American Cancer Society and the American Society of Clinical Oncology convened a summit in January 2018 to identify the needed steps to move this work from concept to implementation. The summit identified 4 key strategies going forward: 1) developing a candidate model (or models) of care delivery; 2) building the case for implementation by conducting studies modeling the effects of personalized pathways of follow-up care on patient outcomes, workforce and health care resources, and utilization and costs; 3) creating consensus-based guidelines to guide the delivery of personalized care pathways; and 4) identifying and filling research gaps to develop and implement needed care changes. While these national strategies are pursued, oncology and primary care providers can lay the groundwork for implementation by assessing their patients' risk of recurrence and the chronic and late effects of cancer as well as other health care needs and resources available for care and by considering triaging patients accordingly, referring patients to appropriate specialized survivorship clinics as these are developed, helping to support patients who are capable of self-managing their health, setting expectations with patients from diagnosis onward for the need for follow-up in primary care and/or a survivorship clinic, and improving coordination of care between oncology and primary care.

Brachytherapy: An overview for clinicians.

Brachytherapy is a specific form of radiotherapy consisting of the precise placement of radioactive sources directly into or next to the tumor. This technique is indicated for patients affected by various types of cancers. It is an optimal tool for delivering very high doses to the tumor focally while minimizing the probability of normal tissue complications. Physicians from a wide range of specialties may be involved in either the referral to or the placement of brachytherapy. Many patients require brachytherapy as either primary treatment or as part of their oncologic care. On the basis of high-level evidence from randomized controlled trials, brachytherapy is mainly indicated: 1) as standard in combination with chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer; 2) in surgically treated patients with uterine endometrial cancer for decreasing the risk of vaginal vault recurrence; 3) in patients with high-risk prostate cancer to perform dose escalation and improve progression-free survival; and 4) in patients with breast cancer as adjuvant, accelerated partial breast irradiation or to boost the tumor bed. In this review, the authors discuss the clinical relevance of brachytherapy with a focus on indications, levels of evidence, and results in the overall context of radiation use for patients with cancer.

The American Society for Microbiology collaboration with the CDC Laboratory Medicine Best Practices initiative for evidence-based laboratory medicine.

SUMMARYClinical medicine has embraced the use of evidence for patient treatment decisions; however, the evaluation strategy for evidence in laboratory medicine practices has lagged. It was not until the end of the 20th century that the Institute of Medicine (IOM), now the National Academy of Medicine, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Laboratory Systems (CDC DLS), focused on laboratory tests and how testing processes can be designed to benefit patient care. In collaboration with CDC DLS, the American Society for Microbiology (ASM) used an evidence review method developed by the CDC DLS to develop a program for creating laboratory testing guidelines and practices. The CDC DLS method is called the Laboratory Medicine Best Practices (LMBP) initiative and uses the A-6 cycle method. Adaptations made by ASM are called Evidence-based Laboratory Medicine Practice Guidelines (EBLMPG). This review details how the ASM Systematic Review (SR) Processes were developed and executed collaboratively with CDC's DLS. The review also describes the ASM transition from LMBP to the organization's current EBLMPG, maintaining a commitment to working with agencies in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and other partners to ensure that EBLMPG evidence is readily understood and consistently used.

Implementation of Obesity Science Into Clinical Practice: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Obesity is a recognized public health epidemic with a prevalence that continues to increase dramatically in nearly all populations, impeding progress in reducing incidence rates of cardiovascular disease. Over the past decade, obesity science has evolved to improve knowledge of its multifactorial causes, identifying important biological causes and sociological determinants of obesity. Treatments for obesity have also continued to develop, with more evidence-based programs for lifestyle modification, new pharmacotherapies, and robust data to support bariatric surgery. Despite these advancements, there continues to be a substantial gap between the scientific evidence and the implementation of research into clinical practice for effective obesity management. Addressing barriers to obesity science implementation requires adopting feasible methodologies and targeting multiple levels (eg, clinician, community, system, policy) to facilitate the delivery of obesity-targeted therapies and maximize the effectiveness of guideline-driven care to at-need patient populations. This scientific statement (1) describes strategies shown to be effective or promising for enhancing translation and clinical application of obesity-based research; (2) identifies key gaps in the implementation of obesity science into clinical practice; and (3) provides guidance and resources for health care professionals, health care systems, and other stakeholders to promote broader implementation and uptake of obesity science for improved population-level obesity management. In addition, advances in implementation science that hold promise to bridge the know-do gap in obesity prevention and treatment are discussed. Last, this scientific statement highlights implications for health research policy and future research to improve patient care models and optimize the delivery and sustainability of equitable obesity-related care.

Effects of an Intervention to Improve Evidence-Based Care for People With Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease Across Sex, Race, and Ethnicity Subgroups: Insights From the COORDINATE-Diabetes Trial.

BACKGROUND: Results from the COORDINATE-Diabetes trial (Coordinating Cardiology Clinics Randomized Trial of Interventions to Improve Outcomes - Diabetes) demonstrated that a multifaceted, clinic-based intervention increased prescription of evidence-based medical therapies to participants with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. This secondary analysis assessed whether intervention success was consistent across sex, race, and ethnicity. METHODS: COORDINATE-Diabetes, a cluster randomized trial, recruited participants from 43 US cardiology clinics (20 randomized to intervention and 23 randomized to usual care). The primary outcome was the proportion of participants prescribed all 3 groups of evidence-based therapy (high-intensity statin, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist) at last trial assessment (6 to 12 months). In this prespecified analysis, mixed-effects logistic regression models were used to assess the outcome by self-reported sex, race, and ethnicity in the intervention and usual care groups, with adjustment for baseline characteristics, medications, comorbidities, and site location. RESULTS: Among 1045 participants with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, the median age was 70 years, 32% were female, 16% were Black, and 9% were Hispanic. At the last trial assessment, there was an absolute increase in the proportion of participants prescribed all 3 groups of evidence-based therapy in women (36% versus 15%), Black participants (41% versus 18%), and Hispanic participants (46% versus 18%) with the intervention compared with usual care, with consistent benefit across sex (male versus female; Pinteraction=0.44), race (Black versus White; Pinteraction=0.59), and ethnicity (Hispanic versus Non-Hispanic; Pinteraction= 0.78). CONCLUSIONS: The COORDINATE-Diabetes intervention successfully improved delivery of evidence-based care, regardless of sex, race, or ethnicity. Widespread dissemination of this intervention could improve equitable health care quality, particularly among women and minority communities who are frequently underrepresented in clinical trials. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03936660.

Effect of Brain-Gut Behavioral Treatments on Abdominal Pain in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Some brain-gut behavioral treatments (BGBTs) are beneficial for global symptoms in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). United States management guidelines suggest their use in patients with persistent abdominal pain, but their specific effect on this symptom has not been assessed systematically. METHODS: We searched the literature through December 16, 2023, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing efficacy of BGBTs for adults with IBS, compared with each other or a control intervention. Trials provided an assessment of abdominal pain resolution or improvement at treatment completion. We extracted data as intention-to-treat analyses, assuming dropouts to be treatment failures and reporting pooled relative risks (RRs) of abdominal pain not improving with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), ranking therapies according to the P score. RESULTS: We identified 42 eligible randomized controlled trials comprising 5220 participants. After treatment completion, the BGBTs with the largest numbers of trials and patients recruited demonstrating efficacy for abdominal pain, specifically, included self-guided/minimal contact cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.54-0.95; P score, 0.58), face-to-face multicomponent behavioral therapy (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54-0.97; P score, 0.56), and face-to-face gut-directed hypnotherapy (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.96; P score, 0.49). Among trials recruiting only patients with refractory global IBS symptoms, group CBT was more efficacious than routine care for abdominal pain, but no other significant differences were detected. No trials were low risk of bias across all domains, and there was evidence of funnel plot asymmetry. CONCLUSIONS: Several BGBTs, including self-guided/minimal contact CBT, face-to-face multicomponent behavioral therapy, and face-to-face gut-directed hypnotherapy may be efficacious for abdominal pain in IBS, although none was superior to another.

A methodological framework for rigorous systematic reviews: Tailoring comprehensive analyses to clinicians and healthcare professionals.

Systematic reviews represent a fundamental study design, providing the highest level of evidence across diverse research inquiries, encompassing both public health and clinical research and practice. However, for healthcare professionals, the process of selecting, synthesizing, and interpreting evidence can be challenging, and requires specialized skills. Therefore, it is imperative to explore innovative solutions aimed at simplifying and making the traditional systematic review process more accessible while ensuring the validity and reliability of results. In this perspective, our research objective is to develop a systematic review framework that, while maintaining a rigorous methodological approach, streamlines the process for healthcare professionals. This study describes such approach in every phase, from the collection of evidence to the writing of the text, creating a guide for the healthcare professional who approaches this type of research. The qualitative and organizational analysis tools are also described, providing useful information for the use of non-paid programs. This systematic review aims to develop a framework with a rigorous methodological approach that allows simplify the process for clinicians and healthcare professionals. The implementation of this methodology in clinical practice offers new perspectives to ensure a thoughtful consideration and application of scientific evidence and opens the way to innovative and easily accessible solutions to facilitate the conduct of systematic reviews in the clinical care setting.

Shift-Level Team Familiarity Is Associated with Improved Outcomes in Mechanically Ventilated Adults.

Rationale: Organizing ICU interprofessional teams is a high priority because of workforce needs, but the role of interprofessional familiarity remains unexplored. Objectives: Determine if mechanically ventilated patients cared for by teams with greater familiarity have improved outcomes, such as lower mortality, shorter duration of mechanical ventilation (MV), and greater spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) implementation. Methods: We used electronic health records data of five ICUs in an academic medical center to map interprofessional teams and their ICU networks, measuring team familiarity as network coreness and mean team value. We used patient-level regression models to link team familiarity with patient outcomes, accounting for patient and unit factors. We also performed a split-sample analysis by using 2018 team familiarity data to predict 2019 outcomes. Measurements and Main Results: Team familiarity was measured as the average number of patients shared by each clinician with all other clinicians in the ICU (i.e., coreness) and the average number of patients shared by any two members of the team (i.e., mean team value). Among 4,485 encounters, unadjusted mortality was 12.9%, average duration of MV was 2.32 days, and SBT implementation was 89%; average team coreness was 467.2 (standard deviation [SD], 96.15), and average mean team value was 87.02 (SD, 42.42). A 1-SD increase in team coreness was significantly associated with a 4.5% greater probability of SBT implementation, 23% shorter MV duration, and 3.8% lower probability of dying; the mean team value was significantly associated with lower mortality. Split-sample results were attenuated but congruent in direction and interpretation. Conclusions: Interprofessional familiarity was associated with improved outcomes; assignment models that prioritize familiarity might be a novel solution.

Simultaneous multidimensional impacts of active learning revealed in a first implementation in the MENA region.

Enhancing science education in developing countries has been a focal point of many studies and efforts, but reform has mainly been driven by top-down approaches that often face impediments. A shift to active learning pedagogies can potentially address these challenges, but it has thus far been predominantly implemented and understood in developed countries. Thanks to the growing accessibility of open education resources and ubiquitous technologies, education reform can now be carried out from the bottom up. Here, we present the results of a two-year implementation of active learning in five core physics and astronomy courses comprising 2,145 students from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. Simultaneous improvements are observed in both students' performance and their perception of the quality of learning; means improved by 9% (0.5 SD) and 25% (1.5 SD), respectively. The performance gap between students in the bottom quartile and those in the top quartiles was narrowed by 17%. The failure rate was reduced to a third of that in traditional classes; this is 36% better than the results in developed countries, indicating a greater need for active pedagogies by MENA students. Our findings reveal a multidimensional positive influence of active learning, the viability of its grassroots implementation with open resources, and its sustainability and reproducibility. We suggest that wider implementation can boost education-driven economic growth by 1% in per capita gross domestic product [GDP], substantially cut costs of repeating courses, and produce a more competent STEM workforce-all of which are urgently needed to stimulate development and growth.

Bending the curve: Simple but massive conservation action leads to landscape-scale recovery of amphibians.

Success stories are rare in conservation science, hindered also by the research-implementation gap, where scientific insights rarely inform practice and practical implementation is rarely evaluated scientifically. Amphibian population declines, driven by multiple stressors, are emblematic of the freshwater biodiversity crisis. Habitat creation is a straightforward conservation action that has been shown to locally benefit amphibians, as well as other taxa, but does it benefit entire amphibian communities at large spatial scales? Here, we evaluate a landscape-scale pond-construction program by fitting dynamic occupancy models to 20 y of monitoring data for 12 pond-breeding amphibian species in the Swiss state Aargau, a densely populated area of the Swiss lowlands with intensive land use. After decades of population declines, the number of occupied ponds increased statewide for 10 out of 12 species, while one species remained stable and one species further declined between 1999 and 2019. Despite regional differences, in 77% of all 43 regional metapopulations, the colonization and subsequent occupation of new ponds stabilized (14%) or increased (63%) metapopulation size. Likely mechanisms include increased habitat availability, restoration of habitat dynamics, and increased connectivity between ponds. Colonization probabilities reflected species-specific preferences for characteristics of ponds and their surroundings, which provides evidence-based information for future pond construction targeting specific species. The relatively simple but landscape-scale and persistent conservation action of constructing hundreds of new ponds halted declines and stabilized or increased the state-wide population size of all but one species, despite ongoing pressures from other stressors in a human-dominated landscape.

Applying the dissemination and implementation sciences to allergy and immunology: A Work Group Report from the AAAAI Quality, Adherence, and Outcomes Committee.

Translating evidence-based practice (EBP) into real-world clinical settings often takes a considerable amount of time and resources. In allergy and immunology, the dissemination and implementation (D&I) sciences facilitate the study of how variations in knowledge, resources, patient populations, and staffing models lead to differences in the clinical care of asthma, allergic disease, and primary immunodeficiency. Despite the need for validated approaches to study how to best apply EBP in the real world, the D&I sciences are underutilized. To address this gap, an American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI) work group was convened to provide an overview for the role of the D&I sciences in clinical care and future research within the field. For the D&I sciences to be leveraged effectively, teams should be multidisciplinary and inclusive of community and clinical partners, and multimethods approaches to data collection and analyses should be used. Used appropriately, the D&I sciences provide important tools to promote EBP and health equity as well as optimization of clinical practice in allergy and immunology.

Adherence to melanoma screening and surveillance skin check schedules tailored to personal risk.

Population-wide skin cancer screening is not currently recommended in most countries. Instead, most clinical guidelines incorporate risk-based recommendations for skin checks, despite limited evidence around implementation and adherence to recommendations in practice. We aimed to determine adherence to personal risk-tailored melanoma skin check schedules and explore reasons influencing adherence. Patients (with/without a previous melanoma) attending tertiary dermatology clinics at the Melanoma Institute Australia, Sydney, Australia, were invited to complete a melanoma risk assessment questionnaire via iPad and provided with personal risk information alongside a risk-tailored skin check schedule. Data were collected from the risk tool, clinician-recorded data on schedule deviations, and appointment booking system. Post-consultation, we conducted semi-structured interviews with patients and clinic staff. We used a convergent segregated mixed methods approach for analysis. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and data were analysed thematically. Participant data were analysed from clinic records (n = 247) and interviews (n = 29 patients, 11 staff). Overall, there was 62% adherence to risk-tailored skin check schedules. In cases of non-adherence, skin checks tended to occur more frequently than recommended. Decisions to deviate were similarly influenced by patients (44%) and clinicians (56%). Themes driving non-adherence among patients included anxiety and wanting autonomy around decision-making, and among clinicians included concerns around specific lesions and risk estimate accuracy. There was moderate adherence to a clinical service program of personal risk-tailored skin check recommendations. Further adherence may be gained by incorporating strategies to identify and assist patients with high levels of anxiety and supporting clinicians to communicate risk-based recommendations with patients.

Deimplementation of Ineffective and Harmful Medical Practices: A Data-Driven Commentary.

Deimplementation is the discontinuation or abandonment of medical practices that are ineffective or of unclear effectiveness, ranging from simply unhelpful to harmful. With epidemiology expanding to include more translational sciences, epidemiologists can contribute to deimplementation through defining evidence, establishing causality, and advising on study design. An estimated 10-30% of healthcare practices have minimal to no benefit to patients and should be targeted for deimplementation. The steps in deimplementation are: 1) identify low-value clinical practices, 2) facilitate the deimplementation process, 3) evaluate deimplementation outcomes, and 4) sustain deimplementation, each of which is a complex project. Deimplementation science involves researchers, healthcare and clinical stakeholders, and patient and community partners affected by the medical practice. Increasing collaboration between epidemiologists and implementation scientists is important to optimizing health care delivery.

Toward evidence-based communication on overweight body mass index and mortality.

BACKGROUND: Reducing overweight and obesity has been a longstanding focus of public health messaging and physician-patient interactions. Clinical guidelines by major public health organizations describe both overweight and obesity as risk factors for mortality and other health conditions. Accordingly, a majority of primary care physicians believe that overweight BMI (even without obesity) strongly increases mortality risk. MAIN POINTS: The current evidence base suggests that although both obese BMI and underweight BMI are consistently associated with increased all-cause mortality, overweight BMI (without obesity) is not meaningfully associated with increased mortality. In fact, a number of studies suggest modest protective, rather than detrimental, associations of overweight BMI with all-cause mortality. Given this current evidence base, clinical guidelines and physician perceptions substantially overstate all-cause mortality risks associated with the range of BMIs classified as "overweight" but not "obese." Discrepancies between evidence and communication regarding mortality raise the question of whether similar discrepancies exist for other health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Health communication that inaccurately conveys current evidence may do more harm than good; this applies to communication from health authorities to health practitioners as well as to communication from health practitioners to individual patients. We give three recommendations to better align health communication with the current evidence. First, recommendations to the public and health practitioners should distinguish overweight from obese BMI and at this time should not describe overweight BMI as a risk factor for all-cause mortality. Second, primary care physicians' widespread misconceptions about overweight BMI should be rectified. Third, the evidence basis for other potential risks or benefits of overweight BMI should be rigorously examined and incorporated appropriately into health communication.

The quality of care delivered to residents in long-term care in Australia: an indicator-based review of resident records (CareTrack Aged study).

BACKGROUND: This study estimated the prevalence of evidence-based care received by a population-based sample of Australian residents in long-term care (LTC) aged ≥ 65 years in 2021, measured by adherence to clinical practice guideline (CPG) recommendations. METHODS: Sixteen conditions/processes of care amendable to estimating evidence-based care at a population level were identified from prevalence data and CPGs. Candidate recommendations (n = 5609) were extracted from 139 CPGs which were converted to indicators. National experts in each condition rated the indicators via the RAND-UCLA Delphi process. For the 16 conditions, 236 evidence-based care indicators were ratified. A multi-stage sampling of LTC facilities and residents was undertaken. Trained aged-care nurses then undertook manual structured record reviews of care delivered between 1 March and 31 May 2021 (our record review period) to assess adherence with the indicators. RESULTS: Care received by 294 residents with 27,585 care encounters in 25 LTC facilities was evaluated. Residents received care for one to thirteen separate clinical conditions/processes of care (median = 10, mean = 9.7). Adherence to evidence-based care indicators was estimated at 53.2% (95% CI: 48.6, 57.7) ranging from a high of 81.3% (95% CI: 75.6, 86.3) for Bladder and Bowel to a low of 12.2% (95% CI: 1.6, 36.8) for Depression. Six conditions (skin integrity, end-of-life care, infection, sleep, medication, and depression) had less than 50% adherence with indicators. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study of adherence to evidence-based care for people in LTC using multiple conditions and a standardised method. Vulnerable older people are not receiving evidence-based care for many physical problems, nor care to support their mental health nor for end-of-life care. The six conditions in which adherence with indicators was less than 50% could be the focus of improvement efforts.

Identifying psychosocial and contextual markers considered by physicians to personalize care.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the study was to identify the psychosocial and contextual markers considered by physicians to personalize care. METHODS: An online questionnaire with one open-ended question, asking physicians to describe clinical situations in which they personalized care, was used. Physicians were recruited from March 31, 2023, to August 10, 2023, from three hospitals, five university departments of general practice and six physician organizations in France. Recruitment was conducted through email invitations, with participants encouraged to invite their colleagues via a snowball sampling method. The participants were a diverse sample of French general practitioners and other medical specialists who see patients in consultations or in hospital wards. We extracted the psychosocial and contextual markers considered by physicians to personalize care in each clinical situation. The analysis involved both manual and AI-assisted content analysis using GPT3.5-Turbo (OpenAI). Mathematical models to assess data saturation were used to ensure that a comprehensive list of markers was identified. RESULTS: In total, 1340 people connected to the survey platform and 1004 (75.0%) physicians were eligible for the study (median age 39 years old, IQR 34 to 50; 60.5% women; 67.0% working in outpatient settings), among whom 290 answered the open-ended question. The participants reported 317 clinical situations during which they personalized care. Personalization was based on the consideration of 40 markers: 27 were related to patients' psychosocial characteristics (e.g., patient capacity, psychological state, beliefs), and 13 were related to circumstances (e.g., competing activities, support network, living environment). The data saturation models showed that at least 97.0% of the potential markers were identified. Manual and AI-assisted content analysis using GPT3.5-Turbo were concordant for 89.9% of clinical situations. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians personalize care to patients' contexts and lives using a broad range of psychosocial and contextual markers. The effect of these markers on treatment engagement and effectiveness needs to be evaluated in clinical studies and integrated as tailoring variables in personalized interventions to build evidence-based personalization.

Learning together for better health using an evidence-based Learning Health System framework: a case study in stroke.

BACKGROUND: In the context of expanding digital health tools, the health system is ready for Learning Health System (LHS) models. These models, with proper governance and stakeholder engagement, enable the integration of digital infrastructure to provide feedback to all relevant parties including clinicians and consumers on performance against best practice standards, as well as fostering innovation and aligning healthcare with patient needs. The LHS literature primarily includes opinion or consensus-based frameworks and lacks validation or evidence of benefit. Our aim was to outline a rigorously codesigned, evidence-based LHS framework and present a national case study of an LHS-aligned national stroke program that has delivered clinical benefit. MAIN TEXT: Current core components of a LHS involve capturing evidence from communities and stakeholders (quadrant 1), integrating evidence from research findings (quadrant 2), leveraging evidence from data and practice (quadrant 3), and generating evidence from implementation (quadrant 4) for iterative system-level improvement. The Australian Stroke program was selected as the case study as it provides an exemplar of how an iterative LHS works in practice at a national level encompassing and integrating evidence from all four LHS quadrants. Using this case study, we demonstrate how to apply evidence-based processes to healthcare improvement and embed real-world research for optimising healthcare improvement. We emphasize the transition from research as an endpoint, to research as an enabler and a solution for impact in healthcare improvement. CONCLUSIONS: The Australian Stroke program has nationally improved stroke care since 2007, showcasing the value of integrated LHS-aligned approaches for tangible impact on outcomes. This LHS case study is a practical example for other health conditions and settings to follow suit.