Identifying acne treatment uncertainties via a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership

Objectives: The Acne Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) was set up to identify and rank treatment uncertainties by bringing together people with acne, and professionals providing care within and beyond the National Health Service (NHS). Setting: The UK with international participation. Participants: Teenagers and adults with acne, parents, partners, nurses, clinicians, pharmacists, private practitioners. Methods: Treatment uncertainties were collected via separate online harvesting surveys, embedded within the PSP website, for patients and professionals. A wide variety of approaches were used to promote the surveys to stakeholder groups with a particular emphasis on teenagers and young adults. Survey submissions were collated using keywords and verified as uncertainties by appraising existing evidence. The 30 most popular themes were ranked via weighted scores from an online vote. At a priority setting workshop, patients and professionals discussed the 18 highest-scoring questions from the vote, and reached consensus on the top 10. Results: In the harvesting survey, 2310 people, including 652 professionals and 1456 patients (58% aged 24 y or younger), made submissions containing at least one research question. After checking for relevance and rephrasing, a total of 6255 questions were collated into themes. Valid votes ranking the 30 most common themes were obtained from 2807 participants. The top 10 uncertainties prioritised at the workshop were largely focused on management strategies, optimum use of common prescription medications and the role of nondrug based interventions. More female than male patients took part in the harvesting surveys and vote. A wider range of uncertainties were provided by patients compared to professionals. Conclusions: Engaging teenagers and young adults in priority setting is achievable using a variety of promotional methods. The top 10 uncertainties reveal an extensive knowledge gap about widely used interventions and the relative merits of drug versus non-drug based treatments in acne management

Second fiddle or second chance? : the significance of grandfatherhood

EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo

AMS lighter footprint strategy at 'The Perch'

The focus of our group’s project was to create a resource tool for those involved with the planning and coordinating of the upcoming fine dining restaurant ‘The Perch’, to be located in the new SUB at UBC. Building on the AMS Lighter Footprint Strategy, our methods for compiling resources and developing a handbook consisted of many steps, all which tied back to the vision of sustainability. These included the initial phases of reviewing literature and past AMS projects as well as conducting interviews with local restaurants holding a similar sustainable-fine-dining vision to gain insight on their motives and success factors. From this information our group compiled a list of criteria important for sustainable menu success, which included nutritional, organic, local/seasonal, fair trade, animal welfare, vegetarian, and vegan elements. We then conducted a simple survey to determine the importance of each criterion to a convenience sample, enabling us to gain insight as to how the categories ranked among the public and proceed to make recommendations that best matched the criteria demand. Upon analyzing the gathered data, we found a common theme of using and promoting local/seasonal foods from the restaurant interviews, and through the survey established a list of sustainable criteria ranked from most important to least important being; nutrition, local/seasonal, animal welfare, fair trade, organic, vegetarian, vegan. Further, our group was able to provide recommendations on narrowing ‘The Perch’s menu theme to ingredients that incorporate the popular criteria as indicated by restaurant interviewees and survey participants. Through developing this handbook, we hope to have addressed the needs of the project by targeting the vision of ‘The Perch” restaurant and compiling a list of resources that are easily accessible and useful. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”Land and Food Systems, Faculty ofUnreviewedUndergraduat

Speaking up about safety concerns:multi-setting qualitative study of patients' views and experiences

Peer reviewedPreprin

Data from: Identifying acne treatment uncertainties via a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership

Objectives: The Acne Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) was set up to identify and rank treatment uncertainties by bringing together people with acne and professionals providing care within and beyond the NHS. Setting: The UK with international participation. Participants: Teenagers and adults with acne, parents, partners, nurses, clinicians, pharmacists, private practitioners. Methods: Treatment uncertainties were collected via separate online harvesting surveys, embedded within the PSP website, for patients and professionals. A wide variety of approaches were used to promote the surveys to stakeholder groups with a particular emphasis on teenagers and young adults. Survey submissions were collated using keywords and verified as uncertainties by appraising existing evidence. The 30 most popular themes were ranked via weighted scores from an online vote. At a priority setting workshop, patients and professionals discussed the 18 highest-scoring questions from the vote and reached consensus on the top ten. Results: In the harvesting survey, 2,310 people including 652 professionals and 1,456 patients (58% aged 24 y or younger) made submissions containing at least one research question. After checking for relevance and rephrasing, a total of 6,255 questions were collated into themes. Valid votes ranking the 30 most common themes were obtained from 2,807 participants. The top ten uncertainties prioritised at the workshop were largely focused on management strategies, optimum use of common prescription medications and the role of non-drug based interventions. More female than male patients took part in the harvesting surveys and vote. A wider range of uncertainties were provided by patients compared to professionals. Conclusions: Engaging teenagers and young adults in priority setting is achievable using a variety of promotional methods. The top ten uncertainties reveal an extensive knowledge gap about widely used interventions and the relative merits of drug versus non-drug based treatments in acne management

Acne PSP harvesting survey professional version no identifiers 220315

The raw unedited submissions to the Acne PSP harvesting survey for the collection of treatment uncertainties are contained in the following Excel files: Acne PSP harvesting survey patient version no identifiers 230315 Acne PSP harvesting survey professional version no identifiers 230315 All potential personal identifiers have been removed (age range, gender, ethnicity, first part of postcode) but could be made available on request for anyone who wishes to use them in their analyses and has the necessary ethical and, if required, NHS governance approvals. For each data set, null entries (i.e. those submissions which did not contain any entries in the columns to collect treatment uncertainties) have been removed. The submissions are listed in the order they were received. In the patient version, treatment uncertainties could be entered into any of columns D through to K. In the professional version, treatment uncertainties could be entered into any of columns B, D, F, H and J. At the close of the survey, submitted text was rephrased as required in order to separate out individual questions. Many submissions were not written as questions; where one or more questions could reasonably be inferred from the submitted text, they were extracted and included in totals. The total number of questions in the journal article refers to the number of questions in scope after rephrasing. An unlimited number of keywords (MesH descriptors wherever possible) were added to each separate question to enable collation by theme and/or by intervention type. Further information can be obtained from: Dr E Anne Eady, [email protected] Tel: 01943 608823 OR Dr Alison Layton, [email protected] Tel: 01423 553364 Fax: 01423 55340

Acne PSP harvesting survey patient version no identifiers 230315

Acne PSP harvesting survey patient version no identifiers 23031

Data from: Identifying acne treatment uncertainties via a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership

Objectives: The Acne Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) was set up to identify and rank treatment uncertainties by bringing together people with acne and professionals providing care within and beyond the NHS. Setting: The UK with international participation. Participants: Teenagers and adults with acne, parents, partners, nurses, clinicians, pharmacists, private practitioners. Methods: Treatment uncertainties were collected via separate online harvesting surveys, embedded within the PSP website, for patients and professionals. A wide variety of approaches were used to promote the surveys to stakeholder groups with a particular emphasis on teenagers and young adults. Survey submissions were collated using keywords and verified as uncertainties by appraising existing evidence. The 30 most popular themes were ranked via weighted scores from an online vote. At a priority setting workshop, patients and professionals discussed the 18 highest-scoring questions from the vote and reached consensus on the top ten. Results: In the harvesting survey, 2,310 people including 652 professionals and 1,456 patients (58% aged 24 y or younger) made submissions containing at least one research question. After checking for relevance and rephrasing, a total of 6,255 questions were collated into themes. Valid votes ranking the 30 most common themes were obtained from 2,807 participants. The top ten uncertainties prioritised at the workshop were largely focused on management strategies, optimum use of common prescription medications and the role of non-drug based interventions. More female than male patients took part in the harvesting surveys and vote. A wider range of uncertainties were provided by patients compared to professionals. Conclusions: Engaging teenagers and young adults in priority setting is achievable using a variety of promotional methods. The top ten uncertainties reveal an extensive knowledge gap about widely used interventions and the relative merits of drug versus non-drug based treatments in acne management.,Acne PSP harvesting survey patient version no identifiers 230315Acne PSP harvesting survey professional version no identifiers 220315The raw unedited submissions to the Acne PSP harvesting survey for the collection of treatment uncertainties are contained in the following Excel files: Acne PSP harvesting survey patient version no identifiers 230315 Acne PSP harvesting survey professional version no identifiers 230315 All potential personal identifiers have been removed (age range, gender, ethnicity, first part of postcode) but could be made available on request for anyone who wishes to use them in their analyses and has the necessary ethical and, if required, NHS governance approvals. For each data set, null entries (i.e. those submissions which did not contain any entries in the columns to collect treatment uncertainties) have been removed. The submissions are listed in the order they were received. In the patient version, treatment uncertainties could be entered into any of columns D through to K. In the professional version, treatment uncertainties could be entered into any of columns B, D, F, H and J. At the close of the survey, submitted text was rephrased as required in order to separate out individual questions. Many submissions were not written as questions; where one or more questions could reasonably be inferred from the submitted text, they were extracted and included in totals. The total number of questions in the journal article refers to the number of questions in scope after rephrasing. An unlimited number of keywords (MesH descriptors wherever possible) were added to each separate question to enable collation by theme and/or by intervention type. Further information can be obtained from: Dr E Anne Eady, [email protected] Tel: 01943 608823 OR Dr Alison Layton, [email protected] Tel: 01423 553364 Fax: 01423 553401