8 research outputs found

    The “Regulatory Fog” of Opioid Treatment

    Get PDF
    Over 300,000 Americans depend on opioid treatment programs (OTPs), commonly known as methadone clinics, as the sole source of substances used to reduce their addictive cravings for prescription opioid and heroin. Though considered creatures of the federal regulatory process, OTPs are also regulated by state and local authorities and are required to maintain accreditation. The result of this complex and multi-layered regulation is a focus on rule and process, not on client outcomes or program performance. This research explores the effectiveness of state regulation within the context of “regulatory fog” in which the very regulations intended to standardize provision of services may obscure the true value of policies

    The Ethics of Place: Differences in Ethical Perspectives Among Urban, Suburban, and Rural Physicians in Georgia

    Get PDF
    A debate continues between two camps: those who see “ethics as ethics” regardless of place and others who believe that ethical challenges are somehow different for rural physicians than for their more urban counterparts. This research examines the ethical perspectives of urban, suburban, and rural physicians to identify differences based on practice location. Over 3000 Georgia physicians responded to questions concerning their experiences with ethical dilemmas in eight domains: payment /conflict of interest; patient access; truth telling/professional conduct; boundary/dual role issues; patient autonomy; sociological/cultural issues; stress/burnout; and ethics training/leadership. Descriptive statistics and contingency tables were used for statistical analysis. Higher proportions of physicians in rural practice reported experiencing ethical issues related to patient access to acute and specialty care and quality care, stress and burnout, and lack of anonymity, the same group with the least access to resources for ethical decision-making

    D. Die einzelnen romanischen Sprachen und Literaturen.

    No full text

    Validation and utility of ARDS subphenotypes identified by machine-learning models using clinical data: an observational, multicohort, retrospective analysis

    No full text
    International audienceTwo acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) subphenotypes (hyperinflammatory and hypoinflammatory) with distinct clinical and biological features and differential treatment responses have been identified using latent class analysis (LCA) in seven individual cohorts. To facilitate bedside identification of subphenotypes, clinical classifier models using readily available clinical variables have been described in four randomised controlled trials. We aimed to assess the performance of these models in observational cohorts of ARDS. Methods: In this observational, multicohort, retrospective study, we validated two machine-learning clinical classifier models for assigning ARDS subphenotypes in two observational cohorts of patients with ARDS: Early Assessment of Renal and Lung Injury (EARLI; n=335) and Validating Acute Lung Injury Markers for Diagnosis (VALID; n=452), with LCA-derived subphenotypes as the gold standard. The primary model comprised only vital signs and laboratory variables, and the secondary model comprised all predictors in the primary model, with the addition of ventilatory variables and demographics. Model performance was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and calibration plots, and assigning subphenotypes using a probability cutoff value of 0·5 to determine sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the assignments. We also assessed the performance of the primary model in EARLI using data automatically extracted from an electronic health record (EHR; EHR-derived EARLI cohort). In Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure (LUNG SAFE; n=2813), a multinational, observational ARDS cohort, we applied a custom classifier model (with fewer variables than the primary model) to determine the prognostic value of the subphenotypes and tested their interaction with the positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) strategy, with 90-day mortality as the dependent variable. Findings: The primary clinical classifier model had an area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0·92 (95% CI 0·90–0·95) in EARLI and 0·88 (0·84–0·91) in VALID. Performance of the primary model was similar when using exclusively EHR-derived predictors compared with manually curated predictors (AUC=0·88 [95% CI 0·81–0·94] vs 0·92 [0·88–0·97]). In LUNG SAFE, 90-day mortality was higher in patients assigned the hyperinflammatory subphenotype than in those with the hypoinflammatory phenotype (414 [57%] of 725 vs 694 [33%] of 2088; p<0·0001). There was a significant treatment interaction with PEEP strategy and ARDS subphenotype (p=0·041), with lower 90-day mortality in the high PEEP group of patients with the hyperinflammatory subphenotype (hyperinflammatory subphenotype: 169 [54%] of 313 patients in the high PEEP group vs 127 [62%] of 205 patients in the low PEEP group; hypoinflammatory subphenotype: 231 [34%] of 675 patients in the high PEEP group vs 233 [32%] of 734 patients in the low PEEP group). Interpretation: Classifier models using clinical variables alone can accurately assign ARDS subphenotypes in observational cohorts. Application of these models can provide valuable prognostic information and could inform management strategies for personalised treatment, including application of PEEP, once prospectively validated. Funding: US National Institutes of Health and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine
    corecore