7 research outputs found
Assessment of Regional Variability in COVID-19 Outcomes Among Patients With Cancer in the United States.
Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a distinct spatiotemporal pattern in the United States. Patients with cancer are at higher risk of severe complications from COVID-19, but it is not well known whether COVID-19 outcomes in this patient population were associated with geography.
Objective: To quantify spatiotemporal variation in COVID-19 outcomes among patients with cancer.
Design, Setting, and Participants: This registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients with a historical diagnosis of invasive malignant neoplasm and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March and November 2020. Data were collected from cancer care delivery centers in the United States.
Exposures: Patient residence was categorized into 9 US census divisions. Cancer center characteristics included academic or community classification, rural-urban continuum code (RUCC), and social vulnerability index.
Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. The secondary composite outcome consisted of receipt of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit admission, and all-cause death. Multilevel mixed-effects models estimated associations of center-level and census division-level exposures with outcomes after adjustment for patient-level risk factors and quantified variation in adjusted outcomes across centers, census divisions, and calendar time.
Results: Data for 4749 patients (median [IQR] age, 66 [56-76] years; 2439 [51.4%] female individuals, 1079 [22.7%] non-Hispanic Black individuals, and 690 [14.5%] Hispanic individuals) were reported from 83 centers in the Northeast (1564 patients [32.9%]), Midwest (1638 [34.5%]), South (894 [18.8%]), and West (653 [13.8%]). After adjustment for patient characteristics, including month of COVID-19 diagnosis, estimated 30-day mortality rates ranged from 5.2% to 26.6% across centers. Patients from centers located in metropolitan areas with population less than 250 000 (RUCC 3) had lower odds of 30-day mortality compared with patients from centers in metropolitan areas with population at least 1 million (RUCC 1) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11-0.84). The type of center was not significantly associated with primary or secondary outcomes. There were no statistically significant differences in outcome rates across the 9 census divisions, but adjusted mortality rates significantly improved over time (eg, September to November vs March to May: aOR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.17-0.58).
Conclusions and Relevance: In this registry-based cohort study, significant differences in COVID-19 outcomes across US census divisions were not observed. However, substantial heterogeneity in COVID-19 outcomes across cancer care delivery centers was found. Attention to implementing standardized guidelines for the care of patients with cancer and COVID-19 could improve outcomes for these vulnerable patients
Above all, do no harm: educating the ethical practitioner using research pedagogy in an osteopathic master’s course
Post-graduate students of osteopathic medicine are required to engage in research-based work-integrated learning as educational preparation for clinical practice. This requires students to develop research projects related to clinical practice, and engage the principles and practice of the University’s Human Research Ethics Committee protocols. However, students who enrol in osteopathic courses may not appreciate or engage with research projects. The aim of this paper was to undertake an initial evaluation of pedagogical processes that attempt to bridge the gap between students’ research projects and clinical practice. Responses (n = 34) from an online student survey were analysed using descriptive statistics. Open ended-survey responses, transcriptions from two focus groups and written reflections from academics supervising student-led research projects were thematically analysed. Results suggested that research-based projects were a useful pedagogical tool for students’ learning about ethical clinical practice. We recommend 1) making the connection between ethical behaviour in research and in clinical practice explicit from the outset; 2) conducting clinically relevant projects; and 3) providing opportunities for students to reflect on their experiences as researchers
Recommended from our members
A Systematic Framework to Rapidly Obtain Data on Patients with Cancer and COVID-19: CCC19 Governance, Protocol, and Quality Assurance
When the COVID-19 pandemic began, formal frameworks to collect data about affected patients were lacking. The COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) was formed to collect granular data on patients with cancer and COVID-19 at scale and as rapidly as possible. CCC19 has grown from five initial institutions to 125 institutions with >400 collaborators. More than 5,000 cases with complete baseline data have been accrued. Future directions include increased electronic health record integration for direct data ingestion, expansion to additional domestic and international sites, more intentional patient involvement, and granular analyses of still-unanswered questions related to cancer subtypes and treatments.
When the COVID-19 pandemic began, formal frameworks to collect data about affected patients were lacking. The COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) was formed to collect granular data on patients with cancer and COVID-19 at scale and as rapidly as possible. CCC19 has grown from five initial institutions to 125 institutions with >400 collaborators. More than 5,000 cases with complete baseline data have been accrued. Future directions include increased electronic health record integration for direct data ingestion, expansion to additional domestic and international sites, more intentional patient involvement, and granular analyses of still-unanswered questions related to cancer subtypes and treatments