Race, Ethnicity, Language, Social Class, and Health Communication Inequalities: A Nationally-Representative Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND: While mass media communications can be an important source of health information, there are substantial social disparities in health knowledge that may be related to media use. The purpose of this study is to investigate how the use of cancer-related health communications is patterned by race, ethnicity, language, and social class. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In a nationally-representative cross-sectional telephone survey, 5,187 U.S. adults provided information about demographic characteristics, cancer information seeking, and attention to and trust in health information from television, radio, newspaper, magazines, and the Internet. Cancer information seeking was lowest among Spanish-speaking Hispanics (odds ratio: 0.42; 95% confidence interval: 0.28-0.63) compared to non-Hispanic whites. Spanish-speaking Hispanics were more likely than non-Hispanic whites to pay attention to (odds ratio: 3.10; 95% confidence interval: 2.07-4.66) and trust (odds ratio: 2.61; 95% confidence interval: 1.53-4.47) health messages from the radio. Non-Hispanic blacks were more likely than non-Hispanic whites to pay attention to (odds ratio: 2.39; 95% confidence interval: 1.88-3.04) and trust (odds ratio: 2.16; 95% confidence interval: 1.61-2.90) health messages on television. Those who were college graduates tended to pay more attention to health information from newspapers (odds ratio: 1.98; 95% confidence interval: 1.42-2.75), magazines (odds ratio: 1.86; 95% confidence interval: 1.32-2.60), and the Internet (odds ratio: 4.74; 95% confidence interval: 2.70-8.31) and had less trust in cancer-related health information from television (odds ratio: 0.44; 95% confidence interval: 0.32-0.62) and radio (odds ratio: 0.54; 95% confidence interval: 0.34-0.86) compared to those who were not high school graduates. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Health media use is patterned by race, ethnicity, language and social class. Providing greater access to and enhancing the quality of health media by taking into account factors associated with social determinants may contribute to addressing social disparities in health

Planning and reporting of quality-of-life outcomes in cancer trials

BACKGROUND Information about the impact of cancer treatments on patients' quality of life (QoL) is of paramount importance to patients and treating oncologists. Cancer trials that do not specify QoL as an outcome or fail to report collected QoL data, omit crucial information for decision making. To estimate the magnitude of these problems, we investigated how frequently QoL outcomes were specified in protocols of cancer trials and subsequently reported. DESIGN Retrospective cohort study of RCT protocols approved by six research ethics committees in Switzerland, Germany, and Canada between 2000 and 2003. We compared protocols to corresponding publications, which were identified through literature searches and investigator surveys. RESULTS Of the 173 cancer trials, 90 (52%) specified QoL outcomes in their protocol, 2 (1%) as primary and 88 (51%) as secondary outcome. Of the 173 trials, 35 (20%) reported QoL outcomes in a corresponding publication (4 modified from the protocol), 18 (10%) were published but failed to report QoL outcomes in the primary or a secondary publication, and 37 (21%) were not published at all. Of the 83 (48%) trials that did not specify QoL outcomes in their protocol, none subsequently reported QoL outcomes. Failure to report pre-specified QoL outcomes was not associated with industry sponsorship (versus non-industry), sample size, and multicentre (versus single centre) status but possibly with trial discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS About half of cancer trials specified QoL outcomes in their protocols. However, only 20% reported any QoL data in associated publications. Highly relevant information for decision making is often unavailable to patients, oncologists, and health policymaker

Systematic review finds that study data not published in full text articles have unclear impact on meta-analyses results in medical research.

A meta-analysis as part of a systematic review aims to provide a thorough, comprehensive and unbiased statistical summary of data from the literature. However, relevant study results could be missing from a meta-analysis because of selective publication and inadequate dissemination. If missing outcome data differ systematically from published ones, a meta-analysis will be biased with an inaccurate assessment of the intervention effect. As part of the EU-funded OPEN project (www.open-project.eu) we conducted a systematic review that assessed whether the inclusion of data that were not published at all and/or published only in the grey literature influences pooled effect estimates in meta-analyses and leads to different interpretation. Systematic review of published literature (methodological research projects). Four bibliographic databases were searched up to February 2016 without restriction of publication year or language. Methodological research projects were considered eligible for inclusion if they reviewed a cohort of meta-analyses which (i) compared pooled effect estimates of meta-analyses of health care interventions according to publication status of data or (ii) examined whether the inclusion of unpublished or grey literature data impacts the result of a meta-analysis. Seven methodological research projects including 187 meta-analyses comparing pooled treatment effect estimates according to different publication status were identified. Two research projects showed that published data showed larger pooled treatment effects in favour of the intervention than unpublished or grey literature data (Ratio of ORs 1.15, 95% CI 1.04-1.28 and 1.34, 95% CI 1.09-1.66). In the remaining research projects pooled effect estimates and/or overall findings were not significantly changed by the inclusion of unpublished and/or grey literature data. The precision of the pooled estimate was increased with narrower 95% confidence interval. Although we may anticipate that systematic reviews and meta-analyses not including unpublished or grey literature study results are likely to overestimate the treatment effects, current empirical research shows that this is only the case in a minority of reviews. Therefore, currently, a meta-analyst should particularly consider time, effort and costs when adding such data to their analysis. Future research is needed to identify which reviews may benefit most from including unpublished or grey data

Das RECORD-Statement zum Berichten von Beobachtungsstudien, die routinemäßig gesammelte Gesundheitsdaten verwenden [The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) statement]

Routinely collected health data, obtained for administrative and clinical purposes without specific a priori research goals, are increasingly used for research. The rapid evolution and availability of these data have revealed issues not addressed by existing reporting guidelines, such as Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE). The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely collected health Data (RECORD) statement was created to fill these gaps. RECORD was created as an extension to the STROBE statement to address reporting items specific to observational studies using routinely collected health data. RECORD consists of a checklist of 13 items related to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion section of articles, and other information required for inclusion in such research reports. This document contains the checklist as well as explanatory and elaboration information to enhance the use of the checklist. Examples of good reporting for each RECORD checklist item are also included. This document, as well as the accompanying website and message board (http://www.record-statement.org), will improve the implementation and understanding of RECORD. By implementing RECORD, authors, journals editors, and peer reviewers can enhance transparency of research reporting

The timing of death in patients with tuberculosis who die during anti-tuberculosis treatment in Andhra Pradesh, South India

Background: India has 2.0 million estimated tuberculosis (TB) cases per annum with an estimated 280,000 TBrelated deaths per year. Understanding when in the course of TB treatment patients die is important for determining the type of intervention to be offered and crucially when this intervention should be given. The objectives of the current study were to determine in a large cohort of TB patients in India:- i) treatment outcomes including the number who died while on treatment, ii) the month of death and iii) characteristics associated with “early” death, occurring in the initial 8 weeks of treatment. Methods: This was a retrospective study in 16 selected Designated Microscopy Centres (DMCs) in Hyderabad, Krishna and Adilabad districts of Andhra Pradesh, South India. A review was performed of treatment cards and medical records of all TB patients (adults and children) registered and placed on standardized anti-tuberculosis treatment from January 2005 to September 2009. Results: There were 8,240 TB patients (5183 males) of whom 492 (6%) were known to have died during treatment. Case-fatality was higher in those previously treated (12%) and lower in those with extra-pulmonary TB (2%). There was an even distribution of deaths during anti-tuberculosis treatment, with 28% of all patients dying in the first 8 weeks of treatment. Increasing age and new as compared to recurrent TB disease were significantly associated with “early death”. Conclusion: In this large cohort of TB patients, deaths occurred with an even frequency throughout anti-TB treatment. Reasons may relate to i) the treatment of the disease itself, raising concerns about drug adherence, quality of anti-tuberculosis drugs or the presence of undetected drug resistance and ii) co-morbidities, such as HIV/ AIDS and diabetes mellitus, which are known to influence mortality. More research in this area from prospective and retrospective studies is needed

Pioglitazone in early Parkinson\u27s disease: a phase 2, multicentre, double-blind, randomised trial

Background A systematic assessment of potential disease-modifying compounds for Parkinson\u27s disease concluded that pioglitazone could hold promise for the treatment of patients with this disease. We assessed the effect of pioglitazone on the progression of Parkinson\u27s disease in a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, futility clinical trial. Methods Participants with the diagnosis of early Parkinson\u27s disease on a stable regimen of 1 mg/day rasagiline or 10 mg/day selegiline were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to 15 mg/day pioglitazone, 45 mg/day pioglitazone, or placebo. Investigators were masked to the treatment assignment. Only the statistical centre and the central pharmacy knew the treatment name associated with the randomisation number. The primary outcome was the change in the total Unified Parkinson\u27s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) score between the baseline and 44 weeks, analysed by intention to treat. The primary null hypothesis for each dose group was that the mean change in UPDRS was 3 points less than the mean change in the placebo group. The alternative hypothesis (of futility) was that pioglitazone is not meaningfully different from placebo. We rejected the null if there was significant evidence of futility at the one-sided alpha level of 0.10. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01280123. Findings 210 patients from 35 sites in the USA were enrolled between May 10, 2011, and July 31, 2013. The primary analysis included 72 patients in the 15 mg group, 67 in the 45 mg group, and 71 in the placebo group. The mean total UPDRS change at 44 weeks was 4.42 (95% CI 2.55-6.28) for 15 mg pioglitazone, 5.13 (95% CI 3.17-7.08) for 45 mg pioglitazone, and 6.25 (95% CI 4.35-8.15) for placebo (higher change scores are worse). The mean difference between the 15 mg and placebo groups was -1.83 (80% CI -3.56 to -0.10) and the null hypothesis could not be rejected (p=0.19). The mean difference between the 45 mg and placebo groups was -1.12 (80% CI -2.93 to 0.69)and the null hypothesis was rejected in favour of futility (p=0.09). Planned sensitivity analyses of the primary outcome, using last value carried forward (LVCF) to handle missing data and using the completers\u27 only sample, suggested that the 15 mg dose is also futile (p=0.09 for LVCF, p= 0.09 for completers) but failed to reject the null hypothesis for the 45 mg dose (p=0.12 for LVCF, p=0.19 for completers). Six serious adverse events occurred in the 15 mg group, nine in the 45 mg group, and three in the placebo group; none were thought to be definitely or probably related to the study interventions. Interpretation These findings suggest that pioglitazone at the doses studied here is unlikely to modify progression in early Parkinson\u27s disease. Further study of pioglitazone in a larger trial in patients with Parkinson\u27s disease is not recommended

Introducing EMMIE: An evidence rating scale to encourage mixed-method crime prevention synthesis reviews

Objectives This short report describes the need for, and the development of, a coding system to distil the quality and coverage of systematic reviews of the evidence relating to crime prevention interventions. The starting point for the coding system concerns the evidence needs of policymakers and practitioners. Methods The coding scheme (EMMIE) proposed builds on previous scales that have been developed to assess the probity, coverage and utility of evidence both in health and criminal justice. It also draws on the principles of realist synthesis and review. Results The proposed EMMIE scale identifies five dimensions to which systematic reviews intended to inform crime prevention should speak. These are the Effect of intervention, the identification of the causal Mechanism(s) through which interventions are intended to work, the factors that Moderate their impact, the articulation of practical Implementation issues, and the Economic costs of intervention

Planning and reporting of quality-of-life outcomes in cancer trials

BACKGROUND Information about the impact of cancer treatments on patients' quality of life (QoL) is of paramount importance to patients and treating oncologists. Cancer trials that do not specify QoL as an outcome or fail to report collected QoL data, omit crucial information for decision making. To estimate the magnitude of these problems, we investigated how frequently QoL outcomes were specified in protocols of cancer trials and subsequently reported. DESIGN Retrospective cohort study of RCT protocols approved by six research ethics committees in Switzerland, Germany, and Canada between 2000 and 2003. We compared protocols to corresponding publications, which were identified through literature searches and investigator surveys. RESULTS Of the 173 cancer trials, 90 (52%) specified QoL outcomes in their protocol, 2 (1%) as primary and 88 (51%) as secondary outcome. Of the 173 trials, 35 (20%) reported QoL outcomes in a corresponding publication (4 modified from the protocol), 18 (10%) were published but failed to report QoL outcomes in the primary or a secondary publication, and 37 (21%) were not published at all. Of the 83 (48%) trials that did not specify QoL outcomes in their protocol, none subsequently reported QoL outcomes. Failure to report pre-specified QoL outcomes was not associated with industry sponsorship (versus non-industry), sample size, and multicentre (versus single centre) status but possibly with trial discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS About half of cancer trials specified QoL outcomes in their protocols. However, only 20% reported any QoL data in associated publications. Highly relevant information for decision making is often unavailable to patients, oncologists, and health policymakers

A systematic review investigating fatigue, psychological and cognitive impairment following TIA and minor stroke:protocol paper

Approximately 20,000 people have a transient ischemic attack (TIA) and 23,375 have a minor stroke in England each year. Fatigue, psychological and cognitive impairments are well documented post-stroke. Evidence suggests that TIA and minor stroke patients also experience these impairments; however, they are not routinely offered relevant treatment. This systematic review aims to: (1) establish the prevalence of fatigue, anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and cognitive impairment following TIA and minor stroke and to investigate the temporal course of these impairments; (2) explore impact on quality of life (QoL), change in emotions and return to work; (3) identify where further research is required and to potentially inform an intervention study