Impact of rapid near-patient STI testing on service delivery outcomes in an integrated sexual health service in the United Kingdom:a controlled interrupted time series study

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of a new clinic-based rapid sexually transmitted infection testing, diagnosis and treatment service on healthcare delivery and resource needs in an integrated sexual health service. DESIGN: Controlled interrupted time series study. SETTING: Two integrated sexual health services (SHS) in UK: Unity Sexual Health in Bristol, UK (intervention site) and Croydon Sexual Health in London (control site). PARTICIPANTS: Electronic patient records for all 58 418 attendances during the period 1 year before and 1 year after the intervention. INTERVENTION: Introduction of an in-clinic rapid testing system for gonorrhoea and chlamydia in combination with revised treatment pathways. OUTCOME MEASURES: Time-to-test notification, staff capacity, cost per episode of care and overall service costs. We also assessed rates of gonorrhoea culture swabs, follow-up attendances and examinations. RESULTS: Time-to-notification and the rate of gonorrhoea swabs significantly decreased following implementation of the new system. There was no evidence of change in follow-up visits or examination rates for patients seen in clinic related to the new system. Staff capacity in clinics appeared to be maintained across the study period. Overall, the number of episodes per week was unchanged in the intervention site, and the mean cost per episode decreased by 7.5% (95% CI 5.7% to 9.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The clear improvement in time-to-notification, while maintaining activity at a lower overall cost, suggests that the implementation of clinic-based testing had the intended impact, which bolsters the case for more widespread rollout in sexual health services

Identification of risk factors associated with prolonged hospital stay following primary knee replacement surgery: a retrospective, longitudinal observational study

Objectives To identify risk factors associated with prolonged length of hospital stay and staying in hospital longer than medically necessary following primary knee replacement surgery. Design Retrospective, longitudinal observational study. Setting Elective knee replacement surgeries between 2016 and 2019 were identified using routinely collected data from an NHS Trust in England. Participants There were 2295 knee replacement patients with complete data included in analysis. The mean age was 68 (SD 11) and 60% were female. Outcome measures We assessed a binary length of stay outcome (>7 days), a continuous length of stay outcome (≤30 days) and a binary measure of whether patients remained in hospital when they were medically fit for discharge. Results The mean length of stay was 5.0 days (SD 3.9), 15.4% of patients were in hospital for >7 days and 7.1% remained in hospital when they were medically fit for discharge. Longer length of stay was associated with older age (b=0.08, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.09), female sex (b=0.36, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.67), high deprivation (b=0.98, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.48) and more comorbidities (b=2.48, 95% CI 0.15 to 4.81). Remaining in hospital beyond being medically fit for discharge was associated with older age (OR=1.07, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.09), female sex (OR=1.71, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.47) and high deprivation (OR=2.27, 95% CI 1.27 to 4.06). Conclusions The regression models could be used to identify which patients are likely to occupy hospital beds for longer. This could be helpful in scheduling operations to aid hospital efficiency by planning these patients’ operations for when the hospital is less busy

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

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 science. © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press

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 science. © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press