The diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance spectroscopy and enhanced magnetic resonance imaging techniques in aiding the localisation of prostate abnormalities for biopsy : a systematic review and economic evaluation

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

A provisional database for the silicon content of foods in the United Kingdom

Si may play an important role in bone formation and connective tissue metabolism. Although biological interest in this element has recently increased, limited literature exists on the Si content of foods. To further our knowledge and understanding of the relationship between dietary Si and human health, a reliable food composition database, relevant for the UK population, is required. A total of 207 foods and beverages, commonly consumed in the UK, were analysed for Si content. Composite samples were analysed using inductively coupled plasma&ndash;optical emission spectrometry following microwave-assisted digestion with nitric acid and H2O2. The highest concentrations of Si were found in cereals and cereal products, especially less refined cereals and oat-based products. Fruit and vegetables were highly variable sources of Si with substantial amounts present in Kenyan beans, French beans, runner beans, spinach, dried fruit, bananas and red lentils, but undetectable amounts in tomatoes, oranges and onions. Of the beverages, beer, a macerated whole-grain cereal product, contained the greatest level of Si, whilst drinking water was a variable source with some mineral waters relatively high in Si. The present study provides a provisional database for the Si content of UK foods, which will allow the estimation of dietary intakes of Si in the UK population and investigation into the role of dietary Si in human health.<br /

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of imatinib dose escalation for the treatment of unresectable and/or metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumours that have progressed on treatment at a dose of 400 mg/day : a systematic review and economic evaluation

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Chapter 3: Choosing the Important Outcomes for a Systematic Review of a Medical Test

In this chapter of the Evidence-based Practice Centers Methods Guide for Medical Tests, we describe how the decision to use a medical test generates a broad range of outcomes and that each of these outcomes should be considered for inclusion in a systematic review. Awareness of these varied outcomes affects how a decision maker balances the benefits and risks of the test; therefore, a systematic review should present the evidence on these diverse outcomes. The key outcome categories include clinical management outcomes and direct health effects; emotional, social, cognitive, and behavioral responses to testing; legal and ethical outcomes, and costs. We describe the challenges of incorporating these outcomes in a systematic review, suggest a framework for generating potential outcomes for inclusion, and describe the role of stakeholders in choosing the outcomes for study. Finally, we give examples of systematic reviews that either included a range of outcomes or that might have done so. The following are the key messages in this chapter: Consider both the outcomes that are relevant to the process of testing and those that are relevant to the results of the test.Consider inclusion of outcomes in all five domains: clinical management effects, direct test effects; emotional, social, cognitive and behavioral effects; legal and ethical effects, and costs.Consider to which group the outcomes of testing are most relevant.Given resource limitations, prioritize which outcomes to include. This decision depends on the needs of the stakeholder(s), who should be assisted in prioritizing the outcomes for inclusion

Measuring co-authorship and networking-adjusted scientific impact

Appraisal of the scientific impact of researchers, teams and institutions with productivity and citation metrics has major repercussions. Funding and promotion of individuals and survival of teams and institutions depend on publications and citations. In this competitive environment, the number of authors per paper is increasing and apparently some co-authors don't satisfy authorship criteria. Listing of individual contributions is still sporadic and also open to manipulation. Metrics are needed to measure the networking intensity for a single scientist or group of scientists accounting for patterns of co-authorship. Here, I define I1 for a single scientist as the number of authors who appear in at least I1 papers of the specific scientist. For a group of scientists or institution, In is defined as the number of authors who appear in at least In papers that bear the affiliation of the group or institution. I1 depends on the number of papers authored Np. The power exponent R of the relationship between I1 and Np categorizes scientists as solitary (R>2.5), nuclear (R=2.25-2.5), networked (R=2-2.25), extensively networked (R=1.75-2) or collaborators (R<1.75). R may be used to adjust for co-authorship networking the citation impact of a scientist. In similarly provides a simple measure of the effective networking size to adjust the citation impact of groups or institutions. Empirical data are provided for single scientists and institutions for the proposed metrics. Cautious adoption of adjustments for co-authorship and networking in scientific appraisals may offer incentives for more accountable co-authorship behaviour in published articles.Comment: 25 pages, 5 figure

From theory to 'measurement' in complex interventions: methodological lessons from the development of an e-health normalisation instrument

&lt;b&gt;Background&lt;/b&gt; Although empirical and theoretical understanding of processes of implementation in health care is advancing, translation of theory into structured measures that capture the complex interplay between interventions, individuals and context remain limited. This paper aimed to (1) describe the process and outcome of a project to develop a theory-based instrument for measuring implementation processes relating to e-health interventions; and (2) identify key issues and methodological challenges for advancing work in this field.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Methods&lt;/b&gt; A 30-item instrument (Technology Adoption Readiness Scale (TARS)) for measuring normalisation processes in the context of e-health service interventions was developed on the basis on Normalization Process Theory (NPT). NPT focuses on how new practices become routinely embedded within social contexts. The instrument was pre-tested in two health care settings in which e-health (electronic facilitation of healthcare decision-making and practice) was used by health care professionals.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Results&lt;/b&gt; The developed instrument was pre-tested in two professional samples (N = 46; N = 231). Ratings of items representing normalisation 'processes' were significantly related to staff members' perceptions of whether or not e-health had become 'routine'. Key methodological challenges are discussed in relation to: translating multi-component theoretical constructs into simple questions; developing and choosing appropriate outcome measures; conducting multiple-stakeholder assessments; instrument and question framing; and more general issues for instrument development in practice contexts.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Conclusions&lt;/b&gt; To develop theory-derived measures of implementation process for progressing research in this field, four key recommendations are made relating to (1) greater attention to underlying theoretical assumptions and extent of translation work required; (2) the need for appropriate but flexible approaches to outcomes measurement; (3) representation of multiple perspectives and collaborative nature of work; and (4) emphasis on generic measurement approaches that can be flexibly tailored to particular contexts of study

What Should Be Done To Tackle Ghostwriting in the Medical Literature?

Background to the debate: Ghostwriting occurs when someone makes substantial contributions to a manuscript without attribution or disclosure. It is considered bad publication practice in the medical sciences, and some argue it is scientific misconduct. At its extreme, medical ghostwriting involves pharmaceutical companies hiring professional writers to produce papers promoting their products but hiding those contributions and instead naming academic physicians or scientists as the authors. To improve transparency, many editors' associations and journals allow professional medical writers to contribute to the writing of papers without being listed as authors provided their role is acknowledged. This debate examines how best to tackle ghostwriting in the medical literature from the perspectives of a researcher, an editor, and the professional medical writer

The challenges faced in the design, conduct and analysis of surgical randomised controlled trials

Randomised evaluations of surgical interventions are rare; some interventions have been widely adopted without rigorous evaluation. Unlike other medical areas, the randomised controlled trial (RCT) design has not become the default study design for the evaluation of surgical interventions. Surgical trials are difficult to successfully undertake and pose particular practical and methodological challenges. However, RCTs have played a role in the assessment of surgical innovations and there is scope and need for greater use. This article will consider the design, conduct and analysis of an RCT of a surgical intervention. The issues will be reviewed under three headings: the timing of the evaluation, defining the research question and trial design issues. Recommendations on the conduct of future surgical RCTs are made. Collaboration between research and surgical communities is needed to address the distinct issues raised by the assessmentof surgical interventions and enable the conduct of appropriate and well-designed trials.The Health Services Research Unit is funded by the Scottish Government Health DirectoratesPeer reviewedPublisher PD

Dark Heritage

Peer reviewe

Systematic review and economic modelling of the relative clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery for removal of the prostate in men with localised prostate cancer

PMID: 23127367 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Free full text Funding for this study was provided by the Health Technology Assessment programme of the National Institute for Health Research.Peer reviewedPublisher PD