FashionBrain Project: A Vision for Understanding Europe's Fashion Data Universe

A core business in the fashion industry is the understanding and prediction of customer needs and trends. Search engines and social networks are at the same time a fundamental bridge and a costly middleman between the customer’s purchase intention and the retailer. To better exploit Europe’s distinctive characteristics e.g., multiple languages, fashion and cultural differences, it is pivotal to reduce retailers’ dependence to search engines. This goal can be achieved by harnessing various data channels (manufacturers and distribution networks, online shops, large retailers, social media, market observers, call centers, press/magazines etc.) that retailers can leverage in order to gain more insight about potential buyers, and on the industry trends as a whole. This can enable the creation of novel on-line shopping experiences, the detection of influencers, and the prediction of upcoming fashion trends. In this paper, we provide an overview of the main research challenges and an analysis of the most promising technological solutions that we are investigating in the FashionBrain project

No Added Value of Duloxetine in Patients With Chronic Pain due to Hip or Knee Osteoarthritis:A Cluster-Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of duloxetine in addition to usual care in patients with chronic osteoarthritis (OA) pain. The cost‐effectiveness and whether the presence of symptoms of centralized pain alters the response to duloxetine were secondary objectives. METHODS: We conducted an open‐label, cluster‐randomized trial. Patients with chronic hip or knee OA pain who had an insufficient response to acetaminophen and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs were included. Randomization took place at the general practice level, and patients received duloxetine (60 mg/day) in addition to usual care or usual care alone. The presence of centralized pain was defined as a modified PainDETECT Questionnaire score >12. The primary outcome measure was Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain scores (scale 0–20) at 3 months after the initiation of treatment. Our aim was to detect a difference between the groups of a clinically relevant effect of 1.9 points (effect size 0.4). We used a linear mixed model with repeated measurements to analyze the data. RESULTS: In total, 133 patients were included, and 132 patients were randomized into treatment groups. A total of 66 patients (at 31 practices) were randomized to receive duloxetine in addition to usual care, and 66 patients (at 35 practices) were randomized to receive usual care alone. We found no differences in WOMAC pain scores between the groups at 3 months (adjusted difference –0.58 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) –1.80, 0.63]) or at 12 months (adjusted difference –0.26 [95% CI –1.86, 1.34]). In the subgroup of patients with centralized pain symptoms, we also found no effect of duloxetine compared to usual care alone (adjusted difference –0.32 [95% CI –2.32, 1.67]). CONCLUSION: We found no effect of duloxetine added to usual care compared to usual care alone in patients with chronic knee or hip OA pain. Another trial including patients with centralized pain symptoms should be conducted to validate our results

The PEX study – Exercise therapy for patellofemoral pain syndrome: design of a randomized clinical trial in general practice and sports medicine [ISRCTN83938749]

BACKGROUND: Patellofemoral complaints are frequently seen in younger and active patients. Clinical strategy is usually based on decreasing provoking activities as sports and demanding knee activities during work and leisure and reassuring the patient on the presumed good outcome. Exercise therapy is also often prescribed although evidence on effectiveness is lacking. The objective of this article is to present the design of a randomized clinical trial that examines the outcome of exercise therapy supervised by a physical therapist versus a clinically accepted "wait and see" approach (information and advice about the complaints only). The research will address to both effectiveness and cost effectiveness of supervised exercise therapy in patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS). METHODS/DESIGN: 136 patients (adolescents and young adults) with patellofemoral pain syndrome are recruited in general practices and sport medicine centers. They will be randomly allocated receiving either 3 months of exercise therapy (or usual care. The primary outcome measures are pain, knee function and perception of recovery after 3 months and 12 months of follow up and will be measured by self reporting. Measurements will take place at baseline, 6 weeks, and 3 monthly until 1 year after inclusion in the study. Secondary outcome measurements include an economic evaluation. A cost-utility analysis will be performed that expresses health improvements in Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and incorporates direct medical costs and productivity costs DISCUSSION: This study has been designed after reviewing the literature on exercise therapy for patellofemoral pain syndrome. It was concluded that to merit the effect of exercise therapy a trial based on correct methodological concept needed to be executed. The PEX study is a randomized clinical trial where exercise therapy is compared to usual care. This trial started in April 2005 and will finish in June 2007. The first results will be available around December 2007

Patient and public involvement: how much do we spend and what are the benefits?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patient and public involvement (PPI) is seen as a way of helping to shape health policy and ensure a patient-focused health-care system. While evidence indicates that PPI can improve health-care decision making, it also consumes monetary and non-monetary resources. Given the financial climate, it is important to start thinking about the costs and benefits of PPI and how to evaluate it in economic terms. DESIGN: We conducted a literature review to assess the potential benefits and costs of involvement and the challenges in carrying out an economic evaluation of PPI. RESULTS: The benefits of PPI include effects on the design of new projects or services, on NHS governance, on research design and implementation and on citizenship and equity. Economic evaluation of PPI activities is limited. The lack of an appropriate analytical framework, data recording and understanding of the potential costs and benefits of PPI, especially from participants' perspectives, represent serious constraints on the full evaluation of PPI. CONCLUSIONS: By recognizing the value of PPI, health-care providers and commissioners can embed it more effectively within their organizations. Better knowledge of costs may prompt organizations to effectively plan, execute, evaluate and target resources. This should increase the likelihood of more meaningful activity, avoid tokenism and enhance organizational efficiency and reputation

Design of an internet-based health economic evaluation of a preventive group-intervention for children of parents with mental illness or substance use disorders

Background Preventive interventions are developed for children of parents with mental and substance use disorders (COPMI), because these children have a higher risk of developing a psychological or behavioral disorder in the future. Mental health and substance use disorders contribute significantly to the global burden of disease. Although the exact number of parents with a mental illness is unclear, the subject of mentally ill parents is gaining attention. Moreover there is a lack of interventions for COPMI-children, as well of (cost-) effectiveness studies evaluating COPMI interventions. Innovative interventions such as e-health provide a new field for exploration. There is no knowledge about the opportunities for using the internet to prevent problems in children at risk. In the current study we will focus on the (cost-) effectiveness of an online health prevention program for COPMI-children. Methods/Design We designed a randomized controlled trial to examine the (cost-) effectiveness of the Kopstoring intervention. Kopstoring is an online intervention for COPMI-children to strengthen their coping skills and prevent behavioral and psychological problems. We will compare the Kopstoring intervention with (waiting list) care as usual. This trial will be conducted entirely over the internet. An economic evaluation, from a societal perspective will be conducted, to examine the trial's cost-effectiveness. Power calculations show that 214 participants are needed, aged 16-25. Possible participants will be recruited via media announcements and banners on the internet. After screening and completing informed consent procedures, participants will be randomized. The main outcome is internalizing and externalizing symptoms as measured by the Youth Self Report. For the economic evaluation, healthcare costs and costs outside the healthcare sector will be measured at the same time as the clinical measures, at baseline, 3, 6 and 9 months. An extended measure for the intervention group will be provided at 12 months, to examine the long-term effects. In addition, a process evaluation will be conducted. Discussion Recent developments, such as international conferences and policy discussions, show the pressing need to study the (cost-) effectiveness of interventions for vulnerable groups of children. This study will shed light on the (cost-) effectiveness of an online preventive intervention

The importance of job control for workers with decreased work ability to remain productive at work

Purpose: Workers with decreased work ability are at greater risk of reduced productivity at work. We hypothesized that work-related characteristics play an important role in supporting workers to remain productive despite decreased work ability. Methods: The study population consisted of 10,542 workers in 49 different companies in the Netherlands in 2005-2009. Productivity loss at work was defined on a 10-point scale by asking how much work was actually performed during regular hours on the last regular workday when compared with normal. Independent variables in the logistic regression analysis were individual characteristics, work-related factors, and the work ability index. Additive interactions between work-related factors and decreased work ability were evaluated by the relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI). Results: The odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the likelihood of productivity loss at work were 2.03 (1.85-2.22), 3.50 (3.10-3.95), and 5.54 (4.37-7.03) for a good, moderate, and poor work ability, compared with an excellent work ability (reference group). Productivity loss at work was associated with lack of job control, poor skill discretion, and high work demands. There was a significant interaction between decreased work ability and lack of job control (RERI = 0.63 95% CI 0.11-1.16) with productivity loss at work. Conclusion: The negative effects on work performance of decreased work ability may be partly counterbalanced by increased job control. This suggests that interventions among workers with (chronic) disease that cause a decreased work ability should include enlargement of possibilities to plan and pace their own activities at work

Study protocol of cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of a biopsychosocial multidisciplinary intervention in the evolution of non-specific sub-acute low back pain in the working population: cluster randomised trial.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.Background: Low back pain (LBP), with high incidence and prevalence rate, is one of the most common reasons to consult the health system and is responsible for a significant amount of sick leave, leading to high health and social costs. The objective of the study is to assess the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis of a multidisciplinary biopsychosocial educational group intervention (MBEGI) of non-specific sub-acute LBP in comparison with the usual care in the working population recruited in primary healthcare centres. Methods/design: The study design is a cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis of a MBEGI in comparison with the usual care of non-specific sub-acute LBP.Measures on effectiveness and costs of both interventions will be obtained from a cluster randomised controlled clinical trial carried out in 38 Catalan primary health care centres, enrolling 932 patients between 18 and 65 years old with a diagnosis of non-specific sub-acute LBP. Effectiveness measures are: pharmaceutical treatments, work sick leave (% and duration in days), Roland Morris disability, McGill pain intensity, Fear Avoidance Beliefs (FAB) and Golberg Questionnaires. Utility measures will be calculated from the SF-12. The analysis will be performed from a social perspective. The temporal horizon is at 3 months (change to chronic LBP) and 12 months (evaluate the outcomes at long term. Assessment of outcomes will be blinded and will follow the intention-to-treat principle. Discussion: We hope to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of MBEGI, see an improvement in the patients' quality of life, achieve a reduction in the duration of episodes and the chronicity of non-specific low back pain, and be able to report a decrease in the social costs. If the intervention is cost-effectiveness and cost-utility, it could be applied to Primary Health Care Centres. Trial registration: ISRCTN: ISRCTN5871969

Cost-effectiveness of exercise therapy versus general practitioner care for osteoarthritis of the hip: design of a randomised clinical trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common joint disease, causing pain and functional impairments. According to international guidelines, exercise therapy has a short-term effect in reducing pain/functional impairments in knee OA and is therefore also generally recommended for hip OA. Because of its high prevalence and clinical implications, OA is associated with considerable (healthcare) costs. However, studies evaluating cost-effectiveness of common exercise therapy in hip OA are lacking. Therefore, this randomised controlled trial is designed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of exercise therapy in conjunction with the general practitioner's (GP) care, compared to GP care alone, for patients with hip OA.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>Patients aged ≥ 45 years with OA of the hip, who consulted the GP during the past year for hip complaints and who comply with the American College of Rheumatology criteria, are included. Patients are randomly assigned to either exercise therapy in addition to GP care, or to GP care alone. Exercise therapy consists of (maximally) 12 treatment sessions with a physiotherapist, and home exercises. These are followed by three additional treatment sessions in the 5th, 7th and 9th month after the first treatment session. GP care consists of usual care for hip OA, such as general advice or prescribing pain medication. Primary outcomes are hip pain and hip-related activity limitations (measured with the Hip disability Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [HOOS]), direct costs, and productivity costs (measured with the PROductivity and DISease Questionnaire). These parameters are measured at baseline, at 6 weeks, and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months follow-up. To detect a 25% clinical difference in the HOOS pain score, with a power of 80% and an alpha 5%, 210 patients are required. Data are analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Effectiveness is evaluated using linear regression models with repeated measurements. An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis and an incremental cost-utility analysis will also be performed.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The results of this trial will provide insight into the cost-effectiveness of adding exercise therapy to GPs' care in the treatment of OA of the hip. This trial is registered in the Dutch trial registry <url>http://www.trialregister.nl</url>: trial number <a href="http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=1462">NTR1462</a>.</p