BLOOM: A 176B-Parameter Open-Access Multilingual Language Model

Large language models (LLMs) have been shown to be able to perform new tasks based on a few demonstrations or natural language instructions. While these capabilities have led to widespread adoption, most LLMs are developed by resource-rich organizations and are frequently kept from the public. As a step towards democratizing this powerful technology, we present BLOOM, a 176B-parameter open-access language model designed and built thanks to a collaboration of hundreds of researchers. BLOOM is a decoder-only Transformer language model that was trained on the ROOTS corpus, a dataset comprising hundreds of sources in 46 natural and 13 programming languages (59 in total). We find that BLOOM achieves competitive performance on a wide variety of benchmarks, with stronger results after undergoing multitask prompted finetuning. To facilitate future research and applications using LLMs, we publicly release our models and code under the Responsible AI License

Patient-reported & Health Economic Outcomes for Low-value Medications in Patients Living with Dementia

Background This study aimed to analyze the impact of low-value medications (Lvm), that is, medications unlikely to benefit patients but to cause harm, on patient-centered outcomes over 24 months. Methods This analysis was based on longitudinal data of patients with dementia. The impact of Lvm on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), hospitalizations, and health care costs were assessed using multiple regression models. Results Over 24 months, Lvm was highly prevalent and significantly increased the risk of hospitalization, increased health care costs, and reduced patients' HRQoL. Conclusion More than every second patient received Lvm, negatively impacting patient-reported HRQoL, hospitalizations, and costs. Innovative approaches are needed to encourage prescribers to avoid and replace Lvm in dementia care

The long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary and specialized care provision and disease recognition in Germany

Background The COVID-19 pandemic and the imposed lockdowns severely affected routine care in general and specialized physician practices. Objective To describe the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the physician services provision and disease recognition in German physician practices and perceived causes for the observed changes. Design Observational study based on medical record data and survey data of general practitioners and specialists' practices. Participants 996 general practitioners (GPs) and 798 specialist practices, who documented 6.1 million treatment cases for medical record data analyses and 645 physicians for survey data analyses. Main measures Within the medical record data, consultations, specialist referrals, hospital admissions, and documented diagnoses were extracted for the pandemic (March 2020–September 2021) and compared to corresponding pre-pandemic months in 2019. The additional online survey was used to assess changes in practice management during the COVID-19 pandemic and physicians' perceived main causes of affected primary and specialized care provision. Main results Hospital admissions (GPs: −22% vs. specialists: −16%), specialist referrals (−6 vs. −3%) and recognized diseases (−9 vs. −8%) significantly decreased over the pandemic. GPs consultations initially decreased (2020: −7%) but compensated at the end of 2021 (+3%), while specialists' consultation did not (−2%). Physicians saw changes in patient behavior, like appointment cancellation, as the main cause of the decrease. Contrary to this, they also mentioned substantial modifications of practice management, like reduced (nursing) home visits (41%) and opening hours (40%), suspended checkups (43%), and delayed consultations for high-risk patients (71%). Conclusion The pandemic left its mark on primary and specialized healthcare provision and its utilization. Both patient behavior and organizational changes in practice management may have caused decreased and non-compensation of services. Evaluating the long-term effect on patient outcomes and identifying potential improvements are vital to better prepare for future pandemic waves

Development of a Quantitative Instrument to Elicit Patient Preferences for Person-Centered Dementia Care Stage 1: A Formative Qualitative Study to Identify Patient Relevant Criteria for Experimental Design of an Analytic Hierarchy Process

Background: Person-centered care (PCC) requires knowledge about patient preferences. This formative qualitative study aimed to identify (sub)criteria of PCC for the design of a quantitative, choice-based instrument to elicit patient preferences for person-centered dementia care. Method: Interviews were conducted with n = 2 dementia care managers, n = 10 People living with Dementia (PlwD), and n = 3 caregivers (CGs), which followed a semi-structured interview guide including a card game with PCC criteria identified from the literature. Criteria cards were shown to explore the PlwD’s conception. PlwD were asked to rank the cards to identify patient-relevant criteria of PCC. Audios were verbatim-transcribed and analyzed with qualitative content analysis. Card game results were coded on a 10-point-scale, and sums and means for criteria were calculated. Results: Six criteria with two sub-criteria emerged from the analysis; social relationships (indirect contact, direct contact), cognitive training (passive, active), organization of care (decentralized structures and no shared decision making, centralized structures and shared decision making), assistance with daily activities (professional, family member), characteristics of care professionals (empathy, education and work experience) and physical activities (alone, group). Dementia-sensitive wording and balance between comprehensibility vs. completeness of the (sub)criteria emerged as additional themes. Conclusions: Our formative study provides initial data about patient-relevant criteria of PCC to design a quantitative patient preference instrument. Future research may want to consider the balance between (sub)criteria comprehensibility vs. completeness

Development of a Quantitative Preference Instrument for Person-Centered Dementia Care—Stage 2: Insights from a Formative Qualitative Study to Design and Pretest a Dementia-Friendly Analytic Hierarchy Process Survey

Person-centered care (PCC) requires knowledge about patient preferences. An analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is one approach to quantify, weigh and rank patient preferences suitable for People living with Dementia (PlwD), due to simple pairwise comparisons of individual criteria from a complex decision problem. The objective of the present study was to design and pretest a dementia-friendly AHP survey. Methods: Two expert panels consisting of n = 4 Dementia Care Managers and n = 4 physicians to ensure content-validity, and “thinking-aloud” interviews with n = 11 PlwD and n = 3 family caregivers to ensure the face validity of the AHP survey. Following a semi-structured interview guide, PlwD were asked to assess appropriateness and comprehensibility. Data, field notes and partial interview transcripts were analyzed with a constant comparative approach, and feedback was incorporated continuously until PlwD had no further comments or struggles with survey completion. Consistency ratios (CRs) were calculated with Microsoft® Excel and ExpertChoice Comparion®. Results: Three main categories with sub-categories emerged: (1) Content: clear task introduction, (sub)criteria description, criteria homogeneity, (sub)criteria appropriateness, retest questions and sociodemography for heterogeneity; (2) Format: survey structure, pairwise comparison sequence, survey length, graphical design (incl. AHP scale), survey procedure explanation, survey assistance and response perspective; and (3) Layout: easy wording, short sentences and visual aids. Individual CRs ranged from 0.08 to 0.859, and the consolidated CR was 0.37 (0.038). Conclusions: Our formative qualitative study provides initial data for the design of a dementia-friendly AHP survey. Consideration of our findings may contribute to face and content validity in future quantitative preference research in dementia

Key Intervention Categories to Provide Person-Centered Dementia Care : A Systematic Review of Person-Centered Interventions

Background: Person-centered care (PCC) is an important concept in many countries' national guidelines and dementia plans. Key intervention categories, i.e., a taxonomy of person-centered (PC)-interventions, to provide person-centered dementia care, are difficult to identify from literature. Objective: This systematic review aimed to identify and categorize published PC-interventions into key intervention categories to guide the provision of person-centered dementia care. Methods: Conduct of this systematic review followed Cochrane guidelines. A search of the dimensions 'Dementia', 'Person-Centered Care', and 'Intervention' combined was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Study selection was based on 2-stage screening against eligibility criteria, limited to controlled study designs. Information about interventions and outcomes was extracted into an 'Effects Table'. The identified PC-interventions were categorized in intervention categories to provide person-centered dementia care. Results: Searches identified 1,806 records. 19 studies were included. These covered a range of psychosocial interventions, oftentimes multi-component interventions, which followed heterogeneous approaches. Studies were conducted in long-term care/hospital settings. Nine key intervention categories were identified: social contact, physical activities, cognitive training, sensory enhancement, daily living assistance, life history oriented emotional support, training and support for professional caregivers, environmental adjustments, and care organization. Conclusion: Our findings provide a current overview of published PC-interventions in dementia, which followed heterogeneous approaches under the PCC-concept. The heterogeneity made it challenging to identify a well-defined concept of PCC and common key intervention categories. An effectiveness-evaluation of 'PC' - including 'relationship-centered'-interventions may be valuable, to assess whether an explicit focus on relationships around PCC-interventions yields an added benefit. PROSPERO-ID: CRD42021225084

Data_Sheet_1_Medical care services provision and stress experience in urologists during all waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany.docx

PurposeUrologists’ practices reported decreasing medical care provision and increasing stress experience in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, long-term effects of the pandemic are unknown.MethodsMedical record data of n = 127 urologists were used to assess changes in healthcare provision, comparing the pandemic with the pre-pandemic period. An online survey among n = 101 urologists was conducted to assess the physicians’ perceptions of the identified healthcare provision and organizational changes and experiences of anxiety, stress, and support needs during the pandemic waves. Urologists consultations, specialists’ referrals, hospital admissions, documented cancer diagnoses, urologists’ perceptions of causes for these changes and experienced stress, anxiety and support needs. Results were demonstrated using descriptive statistics.ResultsOver the first two years of the pandemic, there was a slight decline in consultations (−0,94%), but more intensive reduction in hospital admissions (−13,6%) and identified cancer diagnoses (−6,2%). Although patients’ behavior was seen as the main reason for the changes, 71 and 61% of consultations of high-risk patients or urgent surgeries were canceled. Telemedical approaches were implemented by 58% of urologists, and 88% stated that the reduced cancer detection rate would negatively affect patients’ outcomes. Urologists reported higher anxiety, stress, and need for support during all waves of the pandemic than other disciplines, especially females.ConclusionThe pandemic tremendously affects urologists’ health care provision and stress experience, possibly causing long-term consequences for patients and physicians.</p

Fluctuations of health states in dementia diseases and their impact on the assessment of health today using the EQ-5D-5L: Protocol of a mixed-methods study

IntroductionThe EQ-5D is a widely used health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instrument. The recall period “today” may miss out on recurrent health fluctuations often observed in people with dementia (PlwD). Thus, this study aims to assess the frequency of health fluctuations, affected HRQoL dimensions and the impact of the health fluctuations on the assessment of health today using the EQ-5D-5L.Methods and analysisThis mixed-methods study will base on n=50 patient and caregiver dyads and four main study phases: (1) Baseline assessment of patients' socio-demographic and clinical characteristics; (2) caregivers self-completion of a daily diary for 14 days, documenting patient's today's health compared to yesterday, the affected HRQoL dimensions, and events that could have caused the fluctuations; (3) administration of the EQ-5D-5L as self- and proxy-rating at baseline, day seven and day 14; (4) interviewing caregivers on patient's health fluctuation, the consideration of past fluctuations in the assessment of health today using the EQ-5D-5L, and the appropriateness of recall periods to capture health fluctuations on day 14. Qualitative semi-structured interview data will be analyzed thematically. Quantitative analyses will be used to describe the frequency and intensity of health fluctuations, affected dimensions, and the association between health fluctuation and its consideration in the assessment of health today.DiscussionThis study aims to reveal insights into the health fluctuation in dementia, the affected dimensions, and underlying health events, as well as whether individuals adhere to the recall period of health today using the EQ-5D-5L. This study will also provide information about more appropriate recall periods that could better capture health fluctuations.Trial registrationThis study is registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00027956)

Advanced nursing practice and interprofessional dementia care (InDePendent): study protocol for a multi-center, cluster-randomized, controlled, interventional trial

Background A redistribution of tasks between specialized nurses and primary care physicians, i.e., models of advanced nursing practice, has the potential to improve the treatment and care of the growing number of people with dementia (PwD). Especially in rural areas with limited access to primary care physicians and specialists, these models might improve PwD’s quality of life and well-being. However, such care models are not available in Germany in regular healthcare. This study examines the acceptance, safety, efficacy, and health economic efficiency of an advanced nursing practice model for PwD in the primary care setting in Germany. Methods InDePendent is a two-arm, multi-center, cluster-randomized controlled intervention study. Inclusion criteria are age ≥70 years, cognitively impaired (DemTect ≤8) or formally diagnosed with dementia, and living in the own home. Patients will be recruited by general practitioners or specialists. Randomization is carried out at the physicians’ level in a ratio of 1:2 (intervention vs. waiting-control group). After study inclusion, all participants will receive a baseline assessment and a follow-up assessment after 6 months. Patients of the intervention group will receive advanced dementia care management for 6 months, carried out by specialized nurses, who will conduct certain tasks, usually carried out by primary care physicians. This includes a standardized assessment of the patients’ unmet needs, the generation and implementation of an individualized care plan to address the patients’ needs in close coordination with the GP. PwD in the waiting-control group will receive routine care for 6 months and subsequently become part of the intervention group. The primary outcome is the number of unmet needs after 6 months measured by the Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (CANE). The primary analysis after 6 months is carried out using multilevel models and will be based on the intention-to-treat principle. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, caregiver burden, acceptance, and cost-effectiveness. In total, n=465 participants are needed to assess significant differences in the number of unmet needs between the intervention and control groups. Discussion The study will provide evidence about the acceptance, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of an innovative interprofessional concept based on advanced nursing care. Results will contribute to the implementation of such models in the German healthcare system. The goal is to improve the current treatment and care situation for PwD and their caregivers and to expand nursing roles