Cost-Effectiveness of Skin Surveillance Through a Specialized Clinic for Patients at High Risk of Melanoma

Purpose Clinical guidelines recommend that people at high risk of melanoma receive regular surveillance to improve survival through early detection. A specialized High Risk Clinic in Sydney, Australia was found to be effective for this purpose; however, wider implementation of this clinical service requires evidence of cost-effectiveness and data addressing potential overtreatment of suspicious skin lesions. Patients and Methods A decision-analytic model was built to compare the costs and benefits of specialized surveillance compared with standard care over a 10-year period, from a health system perspective. A high-risk standard care cohort was obtained using linked population data, comprising the Sax Institute’s 45 and Up cohort study, linked to Medicare Benefits Schedule claims data, the cancer registry, and hospital admissions data. Benefits were measured in quality-adjusted life-years gained. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken for all model parameters. Results Specialized surveillance through the High Risk Clinic was both less expensive and more effective than standard care. The mean saving was A$6,828 (95$5,564 to $8,092) per patient, and the mean quality-adjusted life-year gain was 0.31 (95% CI, 0.27 to 0.35). The main drivers of the differences were detection of melanoma at an earlier stage resulting in less extensive treatment and a lower annual mean excision rate for suspicious lesions in specialized surveillance (0.81; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.91) compared with standard care (2.55; 95% CI, 2.34 to 2.76). The results were robust when tested in sensitivity analyses. Conclusion Specialized surveillance was a cost-effective strategy for the management of individuals at high risk of melanoma. There were also fewer invasive procedures in specialized surveillance compared with standard care in the community

Improving subjective perception of personal cancer risk: systematic review and meta-analysis of educational interventions for people with cancer or at high risk of cancer

BACKGROUND: Newly diagnosed patients with cancer require education about the disease, the available treatments and potential consequences of treatment. Greater understanding of cancer risk has been found to be associated with greater health-related quality of life, improved psychological adjustment and greater health-related behaviours. The aim of this sytematic review was to assess the effectiveness of educational interventions in improving subjective cancer risk perception and to appraise the quality of the studies. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective observational studies. Eligible studies were identified via Medline, PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL and Embase databases. After screening titles and abstracts, two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility of 206 full-text articles. RESULTS: Forty papers were included in the review; the majority of studies were conducted among breast cancer patients (n = 29) and evaluated the effect of genetic counselling on personal perceived risk (n = 25). Pooled results from RCTs (n = 12) showed that, both in the short and long term, educational interventions did not significantly influence risk perception level (standardised mean difference 0.05, 95% CI -0.24-0.34; p = 0.74) or accuracy (odds ratio = 1.96, 95% CI: 0.61-6.25; p = 0.26). Only one RCT reported a short-term difference in risk ratings (p = 0.01). Of prospective observational studies (n = 28), many did demonstrate changes in the level of perceived risk and improved risk accuracy and risk ratings in both the short and long term. However, only one (of three) observational studies reported a short-term difference in risk ratings (p < = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Further development and investigation of educational interventions using good quality, RCTs are warranted

A low-investment, high-impact approach for training stronger and more confident graduate student science writers

Scientists in applied fields, including conservation biology, face increasing expectations to communicate their research across multiple audiences. As environmental issues become more complex, the need for scientists to clearly communicate with other scientists, managers, stakeholders, tribes, the public, and policy makers becomes ever critical. Despite this need, students in graduate science programs receive limited direct instruction in writing and little training in writing for audiences outside of academia or in different genres. To that end, we developed an interdisciplinary program that incorporates rhetorical theory and writing intensive pedagogy to train graduate science students to write more effectively across genres. During the pilot testing in the first year of this broader, multiyear program, we evaluated changes in the writing practices and confidence of participants as writers and scientists who completed a low-investment, two-workshop sequence that highlighted habitual writing, peer review, and writing for multiple audiences and multiple genres. In just six contact hours, we documented significant increases in students\u27 reporting maintaining a more consistent writing routine and writing environment, revising multiple drafts for writing projects, and being willing to have work reviewed by peers or mentors. Upon completion of both workshops, students reported an increase in their confidence as writers. The development of comprehensive graduate writing programs can be costly and time intensive, but our evaluation demonstrates that significant gains in writing capacity and confidence as writers were made by graduate science students with even a low level of investment. We urge graduate science faculty in all Science Technology Engineering Math disciplines to consider how they might offer this two-workshop sequence or similar low-investment interventions that will build writing capacity and confidence as writers and scientists in graduate students

Defining a Flexible Notion of “Good” STEM Writing Across Contexts: Lessons Learned From a Cross-Institutional Conversation

We respond to a surging interest in science communication training for graduate scientists by advocating for a focus on rhetorically informed approaches to STEM writing and its assessment. We argue that STEM communication initiatives would benefit by shifting from a strategic focus on products to a flexible understanding of writing as a practice worthy of attention and study. To do that, we use our experience across two universities and two distinct programmatic contexts to train STEM graduate students in writing and communication. We draw from cross-disciplinary conversations to identify four facets of “good” STEM writing: (1) connecting to the big picture; (2) explaining science; (3) adhering to genre conventions; and (4) choosing context-appropriate language. We then describe our ongoing conversations across contexts to develop and implement flexible rubrics that capture and foster conversations around “good” writing. In doing so, we argue for a notion of writing rubrics as boundary objects, capable of fostering cross-disciplinary, integrative conversations and collaborations that strengthen student writing, shift STEM students toward a rhetorically informed sense of “good” writing, and offer that kinds of assessment data that make for persuasive evidence of the power of writing-centric approaches for STEM administrators and funders

Trends in weight gain recorded in English primary care before and during the Coronavirus-19 pandemic: An observational cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform

Background: Obesity and rapid weight gain are established risk factors for noncommunicable diseases and have emerged as independent risk factors for severe disease following Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Restrictions imposed to reduce COVID-19 transmission resulted in profound societal changes that impacted many health behaviours, including physical activity and nutrition, associated with rate of weight gain. We investigated which clinical and sociodemographic characteristics were associated with rapid weight gain and the greatest acceleration in rate of weight gain during the pandemic among adults registered with an English National Health Service (NHS) general practitioner (GP) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods and findings: With the approval of NHS England, we used the OpenSAFELY platform inside TPP to conduct an observational cohort study of routinely collected electronic healthcare records. We investigated changes in body mass index (BMI) values recorded in English primary care between March 2015 and March 2022. We extracted data on 17,742,365 adults aged 18 to 90 years old (50.1% female, 76.1% white British) registered with an English primary care practice. We estimated individual rates of weight gain before (δ-prepandemic) and during (δ-pandemic) the pandemic and identified individuals with rapid weight gain (>0.5 kg/m2/year) in each period. We also estimated the change in rate of weight gain between the prepandemic and pandemic period (δ-change = δ-pandemic—δ-prepandemic) and defined extreme accelerators as the 10% of individuals with the greatest increase in their rate of weight gain (δ-change ≥1.84 kg/m2/year) between these periods. We estimated associations with these outcomes using multivariable logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, index of multiple deprivation (IMD), and ethnicity. P-values were generated in regression models. The median BMI of our study population was 27.8 kg/m2, interquartile range (IQR) [24.3, 32.1] in 2019 (March 2019 to February 2020) and 28.0 kg/m2, IQR [24.4, 32.6] in 2021. Rapid pandemic weight gain was associated with sex, age, and IMD. Male sex (male versus female: adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.76, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) [0.76, 0.76], p < 0.001), older age (e.g., 50 to 59 years versus 18 to 29 years: aOR 0.60, 95% CI [0.60, 0.61], p < 0.001]); and living in less deprived areas (least-deprived-IMD-quintile versus most-deprived: aOR 0.77, 95% CI [0.77, 0.78] p < 0.001) reduced the odds of rapid weight gain. Compared to white British individuals, all other ethnicities had lower odds of rapid pandemic weight gain (e.g., Indian versus white British: aOR 0.69, 95% CI [0.68, 0.70], p < 0.001). Long-term conditions (LTCs) increased the odds, with mental health conditions having the greatest effect (e.g., depression (aOR 1.18, 95% CI [1.17, 1.18], p < 0.001)). Similar characteristics increased odds of extreme acceleration in the rate of weight gain between the prepandemic and pandemic periods. However, changes in healthcare activity during the pandemic may have introduced new bias to the data. Conclusions: We found female sex, younger age, deprivation, white British ethnicity, and mental health conditions were associated with rapid pandemic weight gain and extreme acceleration in rate of weight gain between the prepandemic and pandemic periods. Our findings highlight the need to incorporate sociodemographic, physical, and mental health characteristics when formulating research, policies, and interventions targeting BMI in the period of post pandemic service restoration and in future pandemic planning

The medical student

The Medical Student was published from 1888-1921 by the students of Boston University School of Medicine

Ethnic differences in depression and anxiety among adults with atopic eczema: Population-based matched cohort studies within UK primary care.

BACKGROUND: Evidence demonstrates that individuals with atopic eczema (eczema) have increased depression and anxiety; however, the role of ethnicity in these associations is poorly understood. We aimed to investigate whether associations between eczema and depression or anxiety differed between adults from white and minority ethnic groups in the UK. METHODS: We used UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD to conduct matched cohort studies of adults (≥18 years) with ethnicity recorded in primary care electronic health records (April 2006-January 2020). We matched (age, sex, practice) adults with eczema to up to five adults without. We used stratified Cox regression with an interaction between eczema and ethnicity, to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for associations between eczema and incident depression and anxiety in individuals from white ethnic groups and a pooled minority ethnic group (adults from Black, South Asian, Mixed and Other groups). RESULTS: We identified separate cohorts for depression (215,073 with eczema matched to 646,539 without) and anxiety (242,598 with eczema matched to 774,113 without). After adjusting for matching variables and potential confounders (age, sex, practice, deprivation, calendar period), we found strong evidence (p < 0.01) of ethnic differences in associations between eczema and depression (minority ethnic groups: HR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.22,1.45; white ethnic groups: HR = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.12,1.17) and anxiety (minority ethnic groups: HR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.28,1.55; white ethnic groups: HR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.14,1.19). CONCLUSIONS: Adults with eczema from minority ethnic groups appear to be at increased depression and anxiety risk compared with their white counterparts. Culturally adapted mental health promotion and prevention strategies should be considered in individuals with eczema from minority ethnic groups

Coordination and resource-related difficulties encountered by Quebec's public health specialists and infectious diseases/medical microbiologists in the management of A (H1N1) - a mixed-method, exploratory survey

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In Quebec, the influenza A (H1N1) pandemic was managed using a top-down style that left many involved players with critical views and frustrations. We aimed to describe physicians' perceptions - infectious diseases specialists/medical microbiologists (IDMM) and public health/preventive medicine specialists (PHPMS) - in regards to issues encountered with the pandemics management at the physician level and highlight suggested improvements for future healthcare emergencies.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In April 2010, Quebec IDMM and PHPMS physicians were invited to anonymously complete a web-based learning needs assessment. The survey included both open-ended and multiple-choice questions. Descriptive statistics were used to report on the frequency distribution of multiple choice responses whereas thematic content analysis was used to analyse qualitative data generated from the survey and help understand respondents' experience and perceptions with the pandemics.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 102 respondents, 85.3% reported difficulties or frustrations in their practice during the pandemic. The thematic analysis revealed two core themes describing the problems experienced in the pandemic management: coordination and resource-related difficulties. Coordination issues included communication, clinical practice guidelines, decision-making, roles and responsibilities, epidemiological investigation, and public health expert advisory committees. Resources issues included laboratory resources, patient management, and vaccination process.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Together, the quantitative and qualitative data suggest a need for improved coordination, a better definition of roles and responsibilities, increased use of information technologies, merged communications, and transparency in the decisional process. Increased flexibility and less contradiction in clinical practice guidelines from different sources and increased laboratory/clinical capacity were felt critical to the proper management of infectious disease emergencies.</p

OpenSAFELY: A platform for analysing electronic health records designed for reproducible research

Electronic health records (EHRs) and other administrative health data are increasingly used in research to generate evidence on the effectiveness, safety, and utilisation of medical products and services, and to inform public health guidance and policy. Reproducibility is a fundamental step for research credibility and promotes trust in evidence generated from EHRs. At present, ensuring research using EHRs is reproducible can be challenging for researchers. Research software platforms can provide technical solutions to enhance the reproducibility of research conducted using EHRs. In response to the COVID‐19 pandemic, we developed the secure, transparent, analytic open‐source software platform OpenSAFELY designed with reproducible research in mind. OpenSAFELY mitigates common barriers to reproducible research by: standardising key workflows around data preparation; removing barriers to code‐sharing in secure analysis environments; enforcing public sharing of programming code and codelists; ensuring the same computational environment is used everywhere; integrating new and existing tools that encourage and enable the use of reproducible working practices; and providing an audit trail for all code that is run against the real data to increase transparency. This paper describes OpenSAFELY's reproducibility‐by‐design approach in detail

Impact of vaccination on the association of COVID-19 with cardiovascular diseases: An OpenSAFELY cohort study

Infection with SARS-CoV-2 is associated with an increased risk of arterial and venous thrombotic events, but the implications of vaccination for this increased risk are uncertain. With the approval of NHS England, we quantified associations between COVID-19 diagnosis and cardiovascular diseases in different vaccination and variant eras using linked electronic health records for ~40% of the English population. We defined a ‘pre-vaccination’ cohort (18,210,937 people) in the wild-type/Alpha variant eras (January 2020-June 2021), and ‘vaccinated’ and ‘unvaccinated’ cohorts (13,572,399 and 3,161,485 people respectively) in the Delta variant era (June-December 2021). We showed that the incidence of each arterial thrombotic, venous thrombotic and other cardiovascular outcomes was substantially elevated during weeks 1-4 after COVID-19, compared with before or without COVID-19, but less markedly elevated in time periods beyond week 4. Hazard ratios were higher after hospitalised than non-hospitalised COVID-19 and higher in the pre-vaccination and unvaccinated cohorts than the vaccinated cohort. COVID-19 vaccination reduces the risk of cardiovascular events after COVID-19 infection. People who had COVID-19 before or without being vaccinated are at higher risk of cardiovascular events for at least two years