Social Determinants of Health and What Mothers Say They Need and Want After Release From Jail.

Identifying the biopsychosocial needs of mothers who have been released from jail is critical to understanding the best ways to support their health and stability after release. In May through August 2014, we interviewed 15 mothers who had been released from an urban jail about their reentry experiences, and we analyzed transcripts for themes. Eight domains of community reentry emerged through analysis: behavioral health services, education, employment, housing, material resources, medical care, relationships with children, and social support. Participants defined barriers to successful reentry, which paralleled the social determinants of health, and shared suggestions that could be used to mitigate these barriers

Promoting equity, diversity, and inclusion in surveys: insights from a patient-engaged study to assess long COVID health-care needs in Brazil

Background and Objective Long COVID (LC) refers to persistent symptoms after acute COVID-19 infection, which may persist for months or years. LC affects millions of people globally, with substantial impacts on quality of life, employment, and social participation. Ensuring access to effective, patient-centered care for LC demands evidence, grounded in inclusive representation of those affected by the condition. Yet survey studies frequently under-represent people with the most disabling disease presentations and racially and socioeconomically marginalized groups. We aimed to describe a patient-engaged approach to developing a survey to inform public LC health care and to assess its implementation in terms of enabling participation by diverse LC patients in Brazil. Methods Survey development was iterative, achieved through an interdisciplinary collaboration among researchers including people living with LC, and grounded in 3 guiding principles: (1) evidence-based; (2) inclusive, intersectional, and patient-centered understanding of chronic illness and research participation; and (3) sensitivity to the context of health-care access. Results The product of our collaboration was a longitudinal survey using a questionnaire assessing: LC symptoms; their clinical and functional evolution; and impacts on quality of life, household income, health service access, utilization, and out-of-pocket expenses. We illustrate how we operationalized our 3 principles through survey content, instrument design, and administration. Six hundred fifty-one participants with diverse LC symptoms, demography, and socioeconomic status completed the survey. We successfully included participants experiencing disabling symptoms, Black and mixed race participants, and those with lower education and income. Conclusion By centering patient experience, our novel, principles-based approach succeeded in promoting equity, diversity, and inclusion in LC survey research. These principles guiding patient-engaged collaboration have broad transferability. We encourage survey researchers working on chronic illness and in other contexts of marginalization and inequality to adopt them

Characterising Long Covid: a living systematic review update with controlled studies

The authors have withdrawn their manuscript owing to a reporting error that we have identified in the conduct of this updated systematic review

Consensus agreement to rename burning mouth syndrome and improve ICD-11 disease criteria

The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) proposes revisions in the nomenclature, disease definition, and diagnostic criteria for “burning mouth syndrome” (BMS). This process could benefit from additional systematically collected expert input. Thus, the purpose of this study was to use the Delphi method to (1) determine whether revision in nomenclature and alternative names for “BMS” are warranted and (2) identify areas of consensus among experts for changes to the disease description and proposed diagnostic criteria of “BMS,” as described in the ICD-11 (World Health Organization). From 31 international invited experts, 23 who expressed interest were sent the survey. The study used 4 iterative surveys, each with a response rate of ≥82%. Consensus was predefined as 70% of participants in agreement. Data were summarized using both descriptive statistics and qualitative thematic analysis. Consensus indicated that BMS should not be classified as a syndrome and recommended instead renaming to “burning mouth disorder.” Consensus included deletion of 2 diagnostic criteria: (1) emotional distress or functional disability and (2) the number of hours symptoms occur per day. Additional items that reached consensus clarified the disease definition and proposed more separate diagnostic criteria, including a list of local and systemic factors to evaluate as potential secondary causes of oral burning. Experts in this study recommended and came to consensus on select revisions to the proposed ICD-11 BMS nomenclature, diagnostic criteria, and disease definition. The revisions recommended have the potential to improve clarity, consistency, and accuracy of diagnosis for this disorder

Reply to Currie et al.

[Extract] We would like to thank Currie et al.3 for initiating a discussion on our recent publication to rename and improve the International Classification of Diseases-11 disease criteria for burning mouth syndrome.4 In this article, we presented the results of a consensus reached by an international group of experts using the Delphi methodology.2 As Currie et al. pointed out, there are many overlapping and complementary aspects between the betaversion of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Burning Mouth Syndrome (RDC/BMS) and our work, strengthening and increasing the validity of each.2–4 We agree with most of what Currie et al. have written in their letter.3 However, regarding nomenclature, we would like to encourage using the term burning mouth disorder in the beta version of the RDC/BMS until there is additional evidence for the cause(s) of oral burning symptoms at which time an ontological approach to the name may be substituted. In our previous publication, our team also highlighted a number of reasons why the word syndrome could be replaced with the word disorder.6 The adoption of the term temporomandibular disorders and creation of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMDs) is not without ontological flaws, as noted by Ceusters et al.1 However, it has provided a standardized nomenclature and robust framework for research into the etiology, pathophysiology, classification, and treatment of the disorders.8 By using the term burning mouth disorder, the beta version of the RDC/BMS could serve as a model framework for future research

Consensus agreement to rename burning mouth syndrome and improve International Classification of Diseases-11 disease criteria:an international Delphi study

The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) proposes revisions in the nomenclature, disease definition, and diagnostic criteria for “burning mouth syndrome” (BMS). This process could benefit from additional systematically collected expert input. Thus, the purpose of this study was to use the Delphi method to (1) determine whether revision in nomenclature and alternative names for “BMS” are warranted and (2) identify areas of consensus among experts for changes to the disease description and proposed diagnostic criteria of “BMS,” as described in the ICD-11 (World Health Organization). From 31 international invited experts, 23 who expressed interest were sent the survey. The study used 4 iterative surveys, each with a response rate of ≥82%. Consensus was predefined as 70% of participants in agreement. Data were summarized using both descriptive statistics and qualitative thematic analysis. Consensus indicated that BMS should not be classified as a syndrome and recommended instead renaming to “burning mouth disorder.” Consensus included deletion of 2 diagnostic criteria: (1) emotional distress or functional disability and (2) the number of hours symptoms occur per day. Additional items that reached consensus clarified the disease definition and proposed more separate diagnostic criteria, including a list of local and systemic factors to evaluate as potential secondary causes of oral burning. Experts in this study recommended and came to consensus on select revisions to the proposed ICD-11 BMS nomenclature, diagnostic criteria, and disease definition. The revisions recommended have the potential to improve clarity, consistency, and accuracy of diagnosis for this disorder