164 research outputs found
Are publicly available internet resources enabling women to make informed fertility preservation decisions before starting cancer treatment: an environmental scan?
Background To identify publicly available internet resources and assess their likelihood to support women making informed decisions about, and between, fertility preservation procedures before starting their cancer treatment. Methods A survey of publically available internet resources utilising an environmental scan method. Inclusion criteria were applied to hits from searches of three data sources (November 2015; repeated June 2017): Google (Chrome) for patient resources; repositories for clinical guidelines and projects; distribution email lists to contact patient decision aid experts. The Data Extraction Sheet applied to eligible resources elicited: resource characteristics; informed and shared decision making components; engagement health services. Results Four thousand eight hundred fifty one records were identified; 24 patient resources and 0 clinical guidelines met scan inclusion criteria. Most resources aimed to inform women with cancer about fertility preservation procedures and infertility treatment options, but not decision making between options. There was a lack of consistency about how health conditions, decision problems and treatment options were described, and resources were difficult to understand. Conclusions Unless developed as part of a patient decision aid project, resources did not include components to support proactively women’s fertility preservation decisions. Current guidelines help people deliver information relevant to treatment options within a single disease pathway; we identified five additional components for patient decision aid checklists to support more effectively people’s treatment decision making across health pathways, linking current with future health problems
Recommended from our members
Targeting medication non-adherence behavior in selected autoimmune diseases: a systematic approach to digital health program development
Background
29 autoimmune diseases, including Rheumatoid Arthritis, gout, Crohn’s Disease, and Systematic Lupus Erythematosus affect 7.6-9.4% of the population. While effective therapy is available, many patients do not follow treatment or use medications as directed. Digital health and Web 2.0 interventions have demonstrated much promise in increasing medication and treatment adherence, but to date many Internet tools have proven disappointing. In fact, most digital interventions continue to suffer from high attrition in patient populations, are burdensome for healthcare professionals, and have relatively short life spans.
Objective
Digital health tools have traditionally centered on the transformation of existing interventions (such as diaries, trackers, stage-based or cognitive behavioral therapy programs, coupons, or symptom checklists) to electronic format. Advanced digital interventions have also incorporated attributes of Web 2.0 such as social networking, text messaging, and the use of video. Despite these efforts, there has not been little measurable impact in non-adherence for illnesses that require medical interventions, and research must look to other strategies or development methodologies. As a first step in investigating the feasibility of developing such a tool, the objective of the current study is to systematically rate factors of non-adherence that have been reported in past research studies.
Methods
Grounded Theory, recognized as a rigorous method that facilitates the emergence of new themes through systematic analysis, data collection and coding, was used to analyze quantitative, qualitative and mixed method studies addressing the following autoimmune diseases: Rheumatoid Arthritis, gout, Crohn’s Disease, Systematic Lupus Erythematosus, and inflammatory bowel disease. Studies were only included if they contained primary data addressing the relationship with non-adherence.
Results
Out of the 27 studies, four non-modifiable and 11 modifiable risk factors were discovered. Over one third of articles identified the following risk factors as common contributors to medication non-adherence (percent of studies reporting): patients not understanding treatment (44%), side effects (41%), age (37%), dose regimen (33%), and perceived medication ineffectiveness (33%). An unanticipated finding that emerged was the need for risk stratification tools (81%) with patient-centric approaches (67%).
Conclusions
This study systematically identifies and categorizes medication non-adherence risk factors in select autoimmune diseases. Findings indicate that patients understanding of their disease and the role of medication are paramount. An unexpected finding was that the majority of research articles called for the creation of tailored, patient-centric interventions that dispel personal misconceptions about disease, pharmacotherapy, and how the body responds to treatment. To our knowledge, these interventions do not yet exist in digital format. Rather than adopting a systems level approach, digital health programs should focus on cohorts with heterogeneous needs, and develop tailored interventions based on individual non-adherence patterns
Genome-wide association study identifies multiple risk loci for renal cell carcinoma
Previous genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified six risk loci for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). We conducted a meta-analysis of two new scans of 5,198 cases and 7,331 controls together with four existing scans, totalling 10,784 cases and 20,406 controls of European ancestry. Twenty-four loci were tested in an additional 3,182 cases and 6,301 controls. We confirm the six known RCC risk loci and identify seven new loci at 1p32.3 (rs4381241, P=3.1 × 10−10), 3p22.1 (rs67311347, P=2.5 × 10−8), 3q26.2 (rs10936602, P=8.8 × 10−9), 8p21.3 (rs2241261, P=5.8 × 10−9), 10q24.33-q25.1 (rs11813268, P=3.9 × 10−8), 11q22.3 (rs74911261, P=2.1 × 10−10) and 14q24.2 (rs4903064, P=2.2 × 10−24). Expression quantitative trait analyses suggest plausible candidate genes at these regions that may contribute to RCC susceptibility
Serum aminoacylase-1 is a novel biomarker with potential prognostic utility for long-term outcome in patients with delayed graft function following renal transplantation.
Early identification and prognostic stratification of delayed graft function following renal transplantation has significant potential to improve outcome. Mass spectrometry analysis of serum samples, before and on day 2 post transplant from five patients with delayed graft function and five with an uncomplicated transplant, identified aminoacylase-1 (ACY-1) as a potential outcome biomarker. Following assay development, analysis of longitudinal samples from an initial validation cohort of 55 patients confirmed that the ACY-1 level on day 1 or 2 was a moderate predictor of delayed graft function, similar to serum creatinine, complementing the strongest predictor cystatin C. A further validation cohort of 194 patients confirmed this association with area under ROC curves (95% CI) for day 1 serum (138 patients) of 0.74 (0.67–0.85) for ACY-1, 0.9 (0.84–0.95) for cystatin C, and 0.93 (0.88–0.97) for both combined. Significant differences in serum ACY-1 levels were apparent between delayed, slow, and immediate graft function. Analysis of long-term follow-up for 54 patients with delayed graft function showed a highly significant association between day 1 or 3 serum ACY-1 and dialysis-free survival, mainly associated with the donor–brain–dead transplant type. Thus, proteomic analysis provides novel insights into the potential clinical utility of serum ACY-1 levels immediately post transplantation, enabling subdivision of patients with delayed graft function in terms of long-term outcome. Our study requires independent confirmation
Social problems in oncology
A study was undertaken to describe, evaluate and categorise the social problems experienced by cancer patients. Ninety-six adult cancer patients at all stages of disease participated in either a telephone focus group discussion, a face to face focus group or an individual interview which were tape recorded and transcribed. Six experts analysed the transcripts. A total of 32 social problems were identified categorized under eight headings plus four single items. The categories were: problems with (1) managing in the home, (2) health and welfare services, (3) finances, (4) employment, (5) legal matters, (6) relationships, (7) sexuality and body image and (8) recreation. Problems with relationships and communication were the most frequently reported with financial, employment, body image and domestic problems also being widely endorsed. Female groups, younger patient groups and groups where the aim of treatment was palliative reported more social problems than other groups. Social problems are common and important to cancer patients. The social problems identified in this study will contribute to an item pool generated for developing a Social Problems Inventory that may be included in patient centred assessment as part of routine oncology practice
Clinical phenotypes of asthma in childhood and adolescence: clustering analysis from the paediatric u-biopred cohorts
Generational status and duration of residence predict diabetes prevalence among Latinos: the California Men's Health Study
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Diabetes disproportionately affects Latinos. However, examining Latinos as one group obscures important intra-group differences. This study examined how generational status, duration of US residence, and language preference are associated with diabetes prevalence and to what extent these explain the higher prevalence among Latinos.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We determined nativity, duration of US residence, language preference, and diabetes prevalence among 11 817 Latino, 6109 black, and 52 184 white participants in the California Men's Health Study. We combined generational status and residence duration into a single migration status variable with levels: ≥ third generation; second generation; and immigrant living in the US for > 25, 16-25, 11-15, or ≤ 10 years. Language preference was defined as language in which the participant took the survey. Logistic regression models were specified to assess the associations of dependent variables with prevalent diabetes.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Diabetes prevalence was 22%, 23%, and 11% among Latinos, blacks, and whites, respectively. In age-adjusted models, we observed a gradient of risk of diabetes by migration status among Latinos. Further adjustment for socioeconomic status, obesity and health behaviors only partially attenuated this gradient. Language preference was a weak predictor of prevalent diabetes in some models and not significant in others. In multivariate models, we found that odds of diabetes were higher among US-born Latinos than US-born blacks.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Generational status and residence duration were associated with diabetes prevalence among middle-aged Latino men in California. As the Latino population grows, the burden of diabetes-associated disease is likely to increase and demands public health attention.</p
Survival from breast cancer among South Asian and non-South Asian women resident in South East England
Ethnic differences in breast cancer survival have been observed in the USA but have not been examined in Britain. We aimed to investigate such differences between South Asian (i.e. those with family roots in the Indian subcontinent) and non-South Asian (essentially British-native) women in England. Primary breast cancer cases incident in 1986 -1993 and resident in South East England were ascertained through the Thames Cancer and Registry and followed up to the end of 1997. Cases of South Asian ethnicity were identified on the basis of their names by using a previously validated computer algorithm. A total of 1037 South Asian and 50 201 non-South Asian breast cancer cases were included in the analysis; 30% of the South Asian (n=312) and 44% (n=22 201) of the non-South Asian cases died during follow-up. South Asian cases had a higher relative survival than non-South Asians throughout the follow-up period. The 10-year relative survival rates were 72.6% (95% confidence interval: 69.0, 75.9%) and 65.2% (64.5, 65.8%) for South Asians and non-South Asians, respectively. The excess mortality rates experienced by South Asians were 82% (72, 94%) of those experienced by non-South Asians (P=0.004). The magnitude of this effect was slightly reduced with adjustment for differences in age at diagnosis, but was strengthened with further adjustment for differences in stage at presentation and socioeconomic deprivation (excess mortality rates in South Asians relative to non-South Asians=72% (63, 82%), P&<0.001). These findings indicate that the higher survival from breast cancer in the first 10 years after diagnosis among South Asian was not due to differences in age at diagnosis, socioeconomic deprivation or disease stage at presentation
Barriers to colorectal cancer screening in community health centers: A qualitative study
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Colorectal cancer screening rates are low among disadvantaged patients; few studies have explored barriers to screening in community health centers. The purpose of this study was to describe barriers to/facilitators of colorectal cancer screening among diverse patients served by community health centers.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We identified twenty-three outpatients who were eligible for colorectal cancer screening and their 10 primary care physicians. Using in-depth semi-structured interviews, we asked patients to describe factors influencing their screening decisions. For each unscreened patient, we asked his or her physician to describe barriers to screening. We conducted patient interviews in English (n = 8), Spanish (n = 2), Portuguese (n = 5), Portuguese Creole (n = 1), and Haitian Creole (n = 7). We audiotaped and transcribed the interviews, and then identified major themes in the interviews.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Four themes emerged: 1) Unscreened patients cited lack of trust in doctors as a barrier to screening whereas few physicians identified this barrier; 2) Unscreened patients identified lack of symptoms as the reason they had not been screened; 3) A doctor's recommendation, or lack thereof, significantly influenced patients' decisions to be screened; 4) Patients, but not their physicians, cited fatalistic views about cancer as a barrier. Conversely, physicians identified competing priorities, such as psychosocial stressors or comorbid medical illness, as barriers to screening. In this culturally diverse group of patients seen at community health centers, similar barriers to screening were reported by patients of different backgrounds, but physicians perceived other factors as more important.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Further study of these barriers is warranted.</p
- …
