6 research outputs found

    Accuracy of self-reported medicines use compared to pharmaceutical claims data amongst a national sample of older Australian women

    No full text
    This study assessed agreement between two measures of medicine use, self-report by mail and pharmaceutical claims data, for a national sample (N=4,687) of older women aged 79 to 84 in 2005, from the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health. Medicines used for common chronic diseases in older people were selected, with pharmaceutical claims data retrieval periods of three and six months. Proportion of observed agreement between self-report and six month retrieval period ranged between 44% (nervous system medicines) and 94% (glucose lowering medicines). For three month retrieval, aspirin (35%) and folic acid (48%) had lowest agreement. Women were least able to accurately report use of nervous system medicines (sensitivity 80%). Specificity was consistently high across all classes, suggesting women could accurately report using a medicine. Pharmaceutical claims data can assist evaluation of judicious medicines use, changes to availability and uptake of medicines, and track medicine expenditure for chronic conditions. Over-the-counter medicines, medicines not covered by pharmaceutical subsidies and those used on an as needed basis may be best measured by self-report, as use may be underestimated using pharmaceutical claims data

    Use and costs of medications and other health care resources : findings from the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health

    No full text
    The Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health (ALSWH) is a longitudinal population-basedsurvey funded by the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. Theproject began in 1996 and involves three large, nationally representative, cohorts of Australianwomen representing three generations:• Younger women, aged 18 to 23 years when first recruited in 1996 (n=14,247) and now aged 30 to 35 years;• Mid-age women, aged 45 to 50 years in 1996 (n=13,716), now aged 57 to 62 years;• Older women, aged 70 to 75 years in 1996 (n=12,432), now aged 82 to 87 years.The women have now been surveyed at least four times over the past 12 years providing alarge amount of data on the women’s lifestyles, use of health services and health outcomes

    The effectiveness of spinal manipulative therapy procedures for spine pain: Protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

    No full text
    Background: Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is a guideline-recommended treatment option for spinal pain. The recommendation is based on multiple systematic reviews. However, these reviews fail to consider that clinical effects may depend on SMT “application procedures” (i.e., how and where SMT is applied). Using network meta-analyses, we aim to investigate which SMT “application procedures” have the greatest magnitude of clinical effectiveness for reducing pain and disability, for any spinal complaint, at short-term and long-term follow-up. We will compare application procedural parameters by classifying the thrust application technique and the application site (patient positioning, assisted, vertebral target, region target, Technique name, forces, and vectors, application site selection approach and rationale) against: 1. Waiting list/no treatment; 2. Sham interventions not resembling SMT (e.g., detuned ultrasound); 3. Sham interventions resembling SMT; 4. Other therapies not recommended in clinical practice guidelines; and 5. Other therapies recommended in clinical practice guidelines. Secondly, we will examine how contextual elements, including procedural fidelity (whether the SMT was delivered as planned) and clinical applicability (whether the SMT is similar to clinical practice) of the SMT. Methods: We will include randomized controlled trials (RCT) found through three search strategies, (i) exploratory, (ii) systematic, and (iii) other known sources. We define SMT as a high-velocity low-amplitude thrust or grade V mobilization. Eligibility is any RCT assessing SMT against any other type of SMT, any other active or sham intervention, or no treatment control on adult patients with pain in any spinal region. The RCTs must report on continuous pain intensity and/or disability outcomes. Two authors will independently review title and abstract screening, full-text screening, and data extraction. Spinal manipulative therapy techniques will be classified according to the technique application and choice of application sites. We will conduct a network-meta analysis using a frequentist approach and multiple subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Discussion: This will be the most extensive review of thrust SMT to date, and will allow us to estimate the importance of different SMT application procedures used in clinical practice and taught across educational settings. Thus, the results are applicable to clinical practice, educational settings, and research studies. PROSPERO registration: CRD42022375836

    Protocol for the development of SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions for randomised controlled trials with surrogate primary endpoints: SPIRIT-SURROGATE and CONSORT-SURROGATE

    No full text
    INTRODUCTION: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) may use surrogate endpoints as substitutes and predictors of patient-relevant/participant-relevant final outcomes (eg, survival, health-related quality of life). Translation of effects measured on a surrogate endpoint into health benefits for patients/participants is dependent on the validity of the surrogate; hence, more accurate and transparent reporting on surrogate endpoints is needed to limit misleading interpretation of trial findings. However, there is currently no explicit guidance for the reporting of such trials. Therefore, we aim to develop extensions to the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) and CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) reporting guidelines to improve the design and completeness of reporting of RCTs and their protocols using a surrogate endpoint as a primary outcome.  METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The project will have four phases: phase 1 (literature reviews) to identify candidate reporting items to be rated in a Delphi study; phase 2 (Delphi study) to rate the importance of items identified in phase 1 and receive suggestions for additional items; phase 3 (consensus meeting) to agree on final set of items for inclusion in the extensions and phase 4 (knowledge translation) to engage stakeholders and disseminate the project outputs through various strategies including peer-reviewed publications. Patient and public involvement will be embedded into all project phases.  ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received ethical approval from the University of Glasgow College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences Ethics Committee (project no: 200210051). The findings will be published in open-access peer-reviewed publications and presented in conferences, meetings and relevant forums.</p
    corecore