On positive solutions of some pairs of differential equations, II

Background. Lung cancer (LC) is often diagnosed late when curative intervention is no longer viable. However, current referral guidelines (e.g. UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines) for suspected LC are based on a weak evidence base. Aim. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify symptoms that are independently associated with LC and to identify the key methodological issues relating to symptomatic diagnosis research in LC. Methods. Medline, Ovid and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were searched for the period between 1946 and 2012 using the MeSH terms ‘lung cancer’ and ‘symptom*’. Quality of each paper was assessed using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network and Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research Checklists and checked by a second and third reviewer. Results. Evidence regarding the diagnostic values of most symptoms was inconclusive; haemoptysis was the only symptom consistently indicated as a predictor of LC. Generally, evidence was weakened by methodological issues such as the lack of standardized data collection (recording bias) and the lack of comparability of findings across the different studies that extend beyond the spectrum of disease. Qualitative studies indicated that patients with LC experienced symptoms months before diagnosis but did not interpret them as serious enough to seek health care. Therefore, early LC symptoms might be under-represented in primary care clinical notes. Conclusion. Current evidence is insufficient to suggest a symptom profile for LC across the disease stages, nor can it be concluded that classical LC symptoms are predictors of LC apart from, perhaps, haemoptysis. Prospective studies are now needed that systematically record symptoms and explore their predictive values for LC diagnosis

What CBA-informed interventions currently exist to support prehabilitation? Scoping review protocol. [Protocol]

Prehabilitation or pre-operative services vary extensively in content and accessibility, as there are currently no nationwide standards in place for providing and evaluating prehabilitation. Furthermore, there has been a lack of consideration of the impact of psychological and behavioural factors within prehabilitative practice. In this paper, we outline our scoping review protocol to systematically review published and unpublished literature on psychological interventions in prehabilitation that have been implemented and evaluated across various care settings. The JBI scoping review methodology framework will guide the conduct of this scoping review

The prevalence of fibromyalgia in axial spondyloarthritis

Open access via Springer Compact Agreement ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS SIRAS was funded by unrestricted educational grants from AbbVie and Pfzer. BM was funded by the Ministry of Health, Sri Lanka. We thank all the clinicians and research nurses who facilitated recruitment and data collection to the SIRAS study. We are indebted to the SIRAS steering committee, especially Professor Roger Sturrock (chair) and Dr David Marshall (vice-chair). We also thank staf from the SIRAS coordinating centre, in particular: Elizabeth Ferguson-Jones, Giles O’Donovan, Nabi Moaven-Hashemi and Flora Joyce. We would also like to acknowledge the Post Graduate Institute of Medicine, Sri LankaPeer reviewedPublisher PD

Impact of biological therapy on work outcomes in patients with axial spondyloarthritis : results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register (BSRBR-AS) and meta-analysis

Funding The BSRBR-AS is funded by the British Society for Rheumatology who have received funding for this from Pfizer, AbbVie and UCB. These companies receive advance copies of manuscripts for comments. This work was conducted within the Arthritis Research UK/Medical Research Council Centre for Musculoskeletal Work and Health (Grant No: 20665) Acknowledgements We are grateful to the staff of the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register in Axial Spondyloarthritis register who are currently Claudia Zabke, Maureen Heddle, Nafeesa Nazlee and Barry Morris, and to the recruiting staff at the clinical centres, details of which are available at: https://www.abdn.ac.uk/iahs/research/epidemiology/spondyloarthritis.php#panel1011. We would like to thank Dr Atul Deodhar, Benjamin Hsu and Chenglong Han for providing additional data relating to one of the studies, to allow it be included in the meta-analysis.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Pathological response post neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer is an independent predictor of survival

The data that support this study are available from the corresponding author (JO) upon reasonable request.Peer reviewedPostprin

Quantifying and predicting the effect of anti-TNF therapy on axSpA-related fatigue : Results from the BSRBR-AS registry and meta-analysis

We are grateful to the staff of the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register in Axial Spondyloarthritis register and to the recruiting staff at the clinical centres, details of which are available at: https://www.abdn.ac.uk/iahs/research/epidemiology/spondyloarthritis.php#panel1011. Funding: This work was supported by the British Society for Rheumatology (BSR) who have funded the BSRBR-AS. The BSR received funding for this from Pfizer, AbbVie and UCB. These companies receive advance copies of manuscripts for comments but have no input in to the topics for analysis in the register nor the work involved in undertaking analysis. Analysis of data was supported by the Versus Arthritis/Medical Research Council Centre for Musculoskeletal Health and Work [grant number 20665].Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Identifying Persons with Axial Spondyloarthritis At Risk of Poor Work Outcome : Results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register

MRC/Arthritis Research UK Centre for Musculoskeletal Health and Work (grant no: 20665 CI KW-B). The BSRBR-AS is funded by the British Society for Rheumatology who have received funding for this from Pfizer, AbbVie and UCB. These companies receive advance copies of manuscripts for comments. They have no input in determining the topics for analysis or work involved in undertaking it.Peer reviewedPostprin

Perceptions and experiences of different Long COVID community rehabilitation service models from the perspectives of people living with Long COVID and healthcare professionals

Objectives: To explore the perceptions and experiences of barriers and facilitators to accessing Long COVID community rehabilitation.Design: We used a qualitative descriptive design over two rounds of data collection with three participant groups: i) people with experience of rehabilitation for Long COVID (PwLC), ii) NHS staff delivering and/or managing community rehabilitation services (allied health professionals (AHPs)), and iii) NHS staff involved in strategic planning around Long COVID in their health board (Long COVID leads).Setting: Four NHS Scotland territorial health boards. Participants: 51 interviews: eight Long COVID leads (11 interviews), 15 AHPs (25 interviews), and 15 PwLC (15 interviews).Results: Three key themes were identified: i) Accessing care for PwLC, ii) Understanding Long COVID and its management, and iii) Strengths and limitations of existing Long COVID rehabilitation services.Conclusions: Organisational delivery of Long COVID community rehabilitation is complex and presents multiple challenges. In addition, access to Long COVID community rehabilitation can be challenging. When accessed, these services are valued by PwLC but require adequate planning, publicity, and resource. The findings presented here can be used by those developing and delivering services for people with Long COVID

Perceptions and experiences of different Long COVID community rehabilitation service models from the perspectives of people living with Long COVID and healthcare professionals.

To explore the perceptions and experiences of barriers and facilitators to accessing Long COVID community rehabilitation. We used a qualitative descriptive design over two rounds of data collection with three participant groups: i) people with experience of rehabilitation for Long COVID (PwLC), ii) NHS staff delivering and/or managing community rehabilitation services (allied health professionals (AHPs)), and iii) NHS staff involved in strategic planning around Long COVID in their health board (Long COVID leads). Four NHS Scotland territorial health boards. 51 interviews were undertaken, eight Long COVID leads (11 interviews), 15 AHPs (25 interviews), and 15 PwLC (15 interviews). Three key themes were identified: i) Accessing care for PwLC, ii) Understanding Long COVID and its management, and iii) Strengths and limitations of existing Long COVID rehabilitation services. Organisational delivery of Long COVID community rehabilitation is complex and presents multiple challenges. In addition, access to Long COVID community rehabilitation can be challenging. When accessed, these services are valued by PwLC but require adequate planning, publicity, and resource. The findings presented here can be used by those developing and delivering services for people with Long COVID