Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research.Peer reviewe

Instrumenten ter beoordeling van pijn : een overzicht

Contains fulltext : 24140___.PDF (publisher's version ) (Open Access

Prevalence, prevention, and treatment of pressure ulcers: descriptive study in 89 institutions in the Netherlands.

Item does not contain fulltextThe purpose of the present study was to assess the prevalence of pressure ulcers and the use of Dutch guidelines for the prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers. A survey of 16,344 patients in 89 health care institutions on 1 day showed a mean prevalence of pressure ulcers of 23.1%. It was found that Dutch guidelines on some aspects of prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers were not being followed. Only 53% of the patients who should have been positioned on a support surface were positioned on such a device. Fewer than one-third of the patients who should have been repositioned, should have received nutritional support, or should have been educated received these interventions, and only 33.6% of all pressure ulcers were dressed as recommended. More attention to the dissemination and implementation of the guidelines is needed to reduce this high prevalence of pressure ulcers

A pressure ulcer audit and feedback project across multi-hospital settings in the Netherlands.

Contains fulltext : 57106.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)OBJECTIVE: To examine whether participating in a pressure ulcer prevalence survey and receiving feedback results in an improvement in quality of care. DESIGN: Cross-sectional studies from 1998 to 2002 were compared over time. SETTING: Sixty-two acute care hospitals in the Netherlands. STUDY PARTICIPANTS: Patients hospitalized at the moment of the surveys. INTERVENTIONS: Each hospital was given hospital-specific performance data and national aggregate data, and peer comparisons to improve the quality of care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The case-mix-adjusted prevalence of pressure ulcers of grade >or=2, the percentage of high-risk patients receiving adequate prevention, and the total number of enabling conditions present were compared between successive surveys using multi-level analysis, in order to estimate a linear trend model and trend differences for each hospital. RESULTS: The case-mix-adjusted prevalence of pressure ulcers decreased over the 5-year period, while the percentage of patients receiving adequate prevention and the total number of enabling conditions present increased. The total number of enabling conditions had a significant effect on the decrease in case-mix-adjusted prevalence: more enabling conditions led to a lower case-mix-adjusted prevalence (chi(2) = 125; degrees of freedom = 1; P < 0.00). The percentage of patients receiving adequate prevention also had an effect on the change in case-mix-adjusted prevalence, with a higher percentage leading to a lower case-mix-adjusted prevalence. This effect, however, was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Monitoring prevalence and giving feedback results in an improvement in quality of care in terms of pressure ulcer prevention. It is very important to continue conducting surveys to avoid attention moving away from this topic, which may in turn lead to a deterioration in the quality of pressure ulcer care. Further research to find the most effective feedback approach is needed

Development of a model for case-mix adjustment of pressure ulcer prevalence rates.

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Acute care hospitals participating in the Dutch national pressure ulcer prevalence survey use the results of this survey to compare their outcomes and assess their quality of care regarding pressure ulcer prevention. The development of a model for case-mix adjustment is essential for the use of these prevalence rates as an outcome measure. OBJECTIVE: The development of a valid model for case-mix adjustment to compare the prevalence rates in the acute care hospitals that participated in the 1998 Dutch pressure ulcer prevalence survey, for the purpose of performance comparisons among the hospitals. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design. SUBJECTS: Subjects were patients residing in the 43 acute care hospitals that participated in the national pressure ulcer prevalence survey on May 26, 1998. MEASURES: The study examined the validity of a model for case-mix adjustment of pressure ulcer prevalence rates and compared hospitals to evaluate the impact of adjusted prevalence rates on their performance. RESULTS: A logistic model was developed for case-mix adjustment, using age, malnutrition, incontinence, activity, mobility, sensory perception, friction and shear, and ward specialty. This model was found to have content, construct, and internal validity. Case-mix adjustment influenced the hospitals' performance. CONCLUSION: The data of the national pressure ulcer prevalence survey can be used to develop a valid model for case-mix adjustment. Conclusions about the quality of care were influenced by the use of case-mix adjusted outcomes as a measure of this quality

Prevalence and characteristics of headache in Dutch schoolchildren.

The aim of this study was to determine whether there has been an increase in headache prevalence in Dutch children and to compare headache characteristics of children with low, medium and high headache severity.A sample of 2358 schoolchildren between the ages of 10 and 17 years filled out Waters' Headache Questionnaire and the Paediatric Pain Assessment Tool. Results showed that 21% of the boys and 26% of the girls at elementary school, and 14% of the boys and 28% of the girls at high school reported weekly headaches. When compared to figures from a previous study in the Netherlands published in 1985, the prevalence of weekly headaches in 10-17-year-olds has increased by 6%. In boys at elementary school, the prevalence of headaches with a frequency of a few times a week has doubled.Children with low, medium and high headache severity differed with respect to all headache characteristics, i.e. pain quality, accompanying symptoms, warning signals, location, onset, impact of headache, family occurrence, perceived cause, medical consultation, and school absence