36 research outputs found

    Association between Patient Characteristics and HPV Vaccination Recommendation for Postpartum Patients: A National Survey of Obstetrician/Gynecologists

    Get PDF
    Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates in the U.S. are relatively low. Provider recommendation rates for HPV vaccination often vary by patient age and relationship status. Obstetrician/gynecologists (OB/GYNs) represent a key provider group that can recommend the HPV vaccine. This study examined differences in OB/ GYN recommendation of HPV vaccination for inpatient postpartum patients by age, parity, and marital status. Data were collected from OB/GYNs nationally via a cross-sectional survey. Participants were randomized to two vignette groups (23-year-old patient or 33-year-old patient). Within each group, participants received 4 vignettes that were identical except for patient marital status (married/not in a committed relationship) and number of children (first/third child), and were asked to indicate HPV vaccination recommendation likelihood on a scale of 0 (definitely would not) to 100 (definitely would). A 2 × 2 × 2 general linear model with repeated measures was used to examine main and interaction effects of patient age, relationship status, and parity. 207 OB/GYNs were included in the final analyses. Recommendation was high for 23-year-old patients (range: 64.5–84.6 out of 100). When marital status and parity were held constant, recommendation likelihood was higher for the younger vs. older patient and was also higher for patients not in a committed relationship, compared to married patients (all p-values \u3c 0.001). Differences in recommendation exist when considering age and relationship status, which provides insight into OB/GYN clinical decision-making. Findings highlight the need to address barriers to HPV vaccination recommendation, including awareness of risk factors to consider when recommending the vaccine

    Florida physicians' reported use of AFIX-based strategies for human papillomavirus vaccination

    Get PDF
    HPV vaccination rates in Florida are low. To increase rates, the CDC recommends clinics adhere to components of their evidence-based quality improvement program, AFIX (Assessment, Feedback, Incentives, and eXchange of information). We explored factors associated with engaging in HPV-specific AFIX-related activities. In 2016, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of a representative sample of 770 pediatric and family medicine physicians in Florida and assessed vaccination practices, clinic characteristics, and HPV-related knowledge. Data were analyzed in 2017. The primary outcome was whether physicians' clinics engaged in ≥1 AFIX activity. We stratified by physician specialty and developed multivariable models using a backward selection approach. Of the participants in the analytic sample (n = 340), 52% were male, 60% were White of any ethnicity, and 55% were non-Hispanic. Pediatricians and family medicine physicians differed on: years practicing medicine (p < 0.001), HPV-related knowledge (p < 0.001), and VFC provider status (p < 0.001), among others. Only 39% of physicians reported engaging in ≥1 AFIX activity. In the stratified multivariable model for pediatricians, AFIX activity was significantly associated with HPV-related knowledge (aOR = 1.33;95%CI = 1.08–1.63) and provider use of vaccine reminder prompts (aOR = 3.61;95%CI = 1.02–12.77). For family medicine physicians, HPV-related knowledge was significant (aOR = 1.57;95%CI = 1.20–2.05) as was majority race of patient population (non-Hispanic White vs. Other: aOR = 3.02;95%CI = 1.08–8.43), daily patient load (<20 vs. 20–24: aOR = 9.05;95%CI = 2.72–30.10), and vaccine administration to male patients (aOR = 2.98;95%CI = 1.11–8.02). Fewer than half of Florida pediatric and family medicine physicians engaged in any AFIX activities. Future interventions to increase AFIX engagement should focus on implementing and evaluating AFIX activities in groups identified as having low engagement in AFIX activities

    Introduction: Shakespeare's public spheres

    Get PDF
    Habermas’ sense of a “cultural Public Sphere” is a notoriously complex term and, when applied to Early Modern cultures, needs careful definition. This essay both introduces the variety of methods by which we might approach playtexts with a view to their public – auditory – impact and contributes to a debate about an audience's understanding of Shakespeare's plays. By selecting two words and their spread of use in one play, Twelfth Night, we might appreciate the potential for meaningful ambiguity latent in how we hear the language of live performance. If we search for how certain terms (in this case, the cluster of semes derived from repetitions of “fancy” and “play”), we might find at times incompatible senses, yet we get near to appreciating the range of Early Modern dramatic language

    AI is a viable alternative to high throughput screening: a 318-target study

    Get PDF
    : High throughput screening (HTS) is routinely used to identify bioactive small molecules. This requires physical compounds, which limits coverage of accessible chemical space. Computational approaches combined with vast on-demand chemical libraries can access far greater chemical space, provided that the predictive accuracy is sufficient to identify useful molecules. Through the largest and most diverse virtual HTS campaign reported to date, comprising 318 individual projects, we demonstrate that our AtomNet® convolutional neural network successfully finds novel hits across every major therapeutic area and protein class. We address historical limitations of computational screening by demonstrating success for target proteins without known binders, high-quality X-ray crystal structures, or manual cherry-picking of compounds. We show that the molecules selected by the AtomNet® model are novel drug-like scaffolds rather than minor modifications to known bioactive compounds. Our empirical results suggest that computational methods can substantially replace HTS as the first step of small-molecule drug discovery

    Primary Care Team Perspectives on the Suitability of Telehealth Modality (Phone vs Video) at the Veterans Health Administration

    No full text
    Introduction: Telehealth has the potential to improve access and timeliness of care, enabling primary care teams to deliver hybrid (virtual/in-person) services that will likely extend beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. To optimize its use and sustainability, it is imperative to understand how primary care teams perceive the suitability of telehealth services, including appropriate choice of mode (telephone or video). However, there is limited research on providers’ decision-making processes surrounding telehealth use in primary care, including whether to use telephone or video, which this VA-focused study addresses. We examined how primary care (PC) team members determine whether to use telehealth and the mode of delivery, in the care of patients. Methods: Qualitative case study that included 15 semi-structured interviews with employees who provided or supported telehealth care at primary care clinics at the Veterans Health Administration. We used a team-based rapid analysis approach to identify experiences using telehealth soon after COVID-19’s emergence, consisting of the creation of structured summaries of each transcribed interview. The lead author then identified and compiled themes and sub-themes related to the suitability of telehealth in primary care, as well as associated quotes from transcripts. Resulting themes and quotes were reviewed and validated by 2 members of the project team. Results: Primary care team members considered several factors when assessing both the suitability of telehealth for appointments, and mode of use. They were largely guided by patient-related factors including patient preferences, specific health issues, and access to technology. Additional considerations centered on team members’ personal preferences and factors that supported the wellbeing of the team, such as the flexibility to work from home (work-life balance) and protection from infection. Generally, participants viewed the option of both telephone and video telehealth modalities as useful tools in the care of patients although a few respondents emphasized its inferiority to in-person care. Conclusions: Determining the suitability of telehealth services, including appropriate choice of mode is complex. Its suitability is tied to a variety of factors related to multilevel resources, preferences, and timing. When appropriate, telehealth should be considered a useful tool in the care of patients and for employee well-being

    Incorporating PROMIS Symptom Measures into Primary Care Practice-a Randomized Clinical Trial

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Symptoms account for more than 400 million clinic visits annually in the USA. The SPADE symptoms (sleep, pain, anxiety, depression, and low energy/fatigue) are particularly prevalent and undertreated. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of providing PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Information System) symptom scores to clinicians on symptom outcomes. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial conducted from March 2015 through May 2016 in general internal medicine and family practice clinics in an academic healthcare system. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care patients who screened positive for at least one SPADE symptom. INTERVENTIONS: After completing the PROMIS symptom measures electronically immediately prior to their visit, the 300 study participants were randomized to a feedback group in which their clinician received a visual display of symptom scores or a control group in which scores were not provided to clinicians. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was the 3-month change in composite SPADE score. Secondary outcomes were individual symptom scores, symptom documentation in the clinic note, symptom-specific clinician actions, and patient satisfaction. KEY RESULTS: Most patients (84%) had multiple clinically significant (T-score ≥ 55) SPADE symptoms. Both groups demonstrated moderate symptom improvement with a non-significant trend favoring the feedback compared to control group (between-group difference in composite T-score improvement, 1.1; P = 0.17). Symptoms present at baseline resolved at 3-month follow-up only one third of the time, and patients frequently still desired treatment. Except for pain, clinically significant symptoms were documented less than half the time. Neither symptom documentation, symptom-specific clinician actions, nor patient satisfaction differed between treatment arms. Predictors of greater symptom improvement included female sex, black race, fewer medical conditions, and receiving care in a family medicine clinic. CONCLUSIONS: Simple feedback of symptom scores to primary care clinicians in the absence of additional systems support or incentives is not superior to usual care in improving symptom outcomes

    HPV vaccine recommendations by age: A survey of providers in federally qualified health centers

    No full text
    Clinician recommendation remains a critical factor in improving HPV vaccine uptake. Clinicians practicing in federally qualified health centers were surveyed between October 2021 and July 2022. Clinicians were asked how they recommended HPV vaccination for patients aged 9–10, 11–12, 13–18, 19–26, and 27–45 y (strongly recommend, offer but do not recommend strongly, discuss only if the patient initiates the conversation, or recommend against). Descriptive statistics were assessed, and exact binomial logistic regression analyses were utilized to examine factors associated with HPV vaccination recommendation in 9–10-y-old patients. Respondents (n = 148) were primarily female (85%), between the ages of 30–39 (38%), white, non-Hispanic (62%), advanced practice providers (55%), family medicine specialty (70%), and practicing in the Northeast (63%). Strong recommendations for HPV vaccination varied by age: 65% strongly recommended for ages 9–10, 94% for ages 11–12, 96% for ages 13–18, 82% for age 19–26, and 26% for ages 27–45 y. Compared to Women’s Health/OBGYN specialty, family medicine clinicians were less likely to recommend HPV vaccination at ages 9–10 (p = .03). Approximately two-thirds of clinicians practicing in federally qualified health centers or safety net settings strongly recommend HPV vaccine series initiation at ages 9–10. Additional research is needed to improve recommendations in younger age groups
    corecore