Browsing by Subject "Methodology"
Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Data collection challenges in community settings: Insights from two field studies of patients with chronic disease(Springer, 2015-05) Holden, Richard J.; McDougald Scott, Amanda M.; Hoonakker, Peter L.T.; Hundt, Ann S.; Carayon, Pascale; Department of Biohealth Informatics, School of Informatics and ComputingPurpose Collecting information about health and disease directly from patients can be fruitfully accomplished using contextual approaches, ones that combine more and less structured methods in home and community settings. This paper's purpose is to describe and illustrate a framework of the challenges of contextual data collection. Methods A framework is presented based on prior work in community-based participatory research and organizational science, comprised of ten types of challenges across four broader categories. Illustrations of challenges and suggestions for addressing them are drawn from two mixed-method, contextual studies of patients with chronic disease in two regions of the US. Results The first major category of challenges was concerned with the researcher-participant partnership, for example, the initial lack of mutual trust and understanding between researchers, patients, and family members. The second category concerned patient characteristics such as cognitive limitations and a busy personal schedule that created barriers to successful data collection. The third concerned research logistics and procedures such as recruitment, travel distances, and compensation. The fourth concerned scientific quality and interpretation, including issues of validity, reliability, and combining data from multiple sources. The two illustrative studies faced both common and diverse research challenges and used many different strategies to address them. Conclusion Collecting less structured data from patients and others in the community is potentially very productive but requires the anticipation, avoidance, or negotiation of various challenges. Future work is necessary to better understand these challenges across different methods and settings, as well as to test and identify strategies to address them.Item Digital Scientific Platform for Independent Content in Neurology: Rigorous Quality Guideline Development and Implementation(JMIR, 2022-06-09) Kantor, Daniel; Farlow, Martin; Ludolph, Albert; Montaner, Joan; Sankar, Raman; Sawyer, Robert N., Jr.; Stocchi, Fabrizio; Lara, Agnès; Clark, Sarah; Deschet, Karine; Ouyahia, Loucif; Hadjiat, Yacine; Neurology, School of MedicineBackground: Digital communication has emerged as a major source of scientific and medical information for health care professionals. There is a need to set up an effective and reliable methodology to assess and monitor the quality of content that is published on the internet. Objective: The aim of this project was to develop content quality guidelines for Neurodiem, an independent scientific information platform dedicated to neurology for health care professionals and neuroscientists. These content quality guidelines are intended to be used by (1) content providers as a framework to meet content quality standards and (2) reviewers as a tool for analyzing and scoring quality of content. Methods: Specific scientific criteria were designed using a 5-point scale to measure the quality of curated and original content published on the website: for Summaries, (1) source reliability and topic relevance for neurologists, (2) structure, and (3) scientific and didactic value; for Congress highlights, (1) relevance of congress selection, (2) congress coverage based on the original program, and (3) scientific and didactic value of individual abstracts; for Expert points of view and talks, (1) credibility (authorship) and topic relevance for neurologists, (2) scientific and didactic value, and (3) reliability (references) and format. The criteria were utilized on a monthly basis and endorsed by an independent scientific committee of widely recognized medical experts in neurology. Results: Summary content quality for the 3 domains (reliability and relevance, structure, and scientific and didactic value) increased in the second month after the implementation of the guidelines. The domain scientific and didactic value had a mean score of 8.20/10. Scores for the domains reliability and relevance (8-9/10) and structure (45-55/60) showed that the maintenance of these 2 quality items over time was more challenging. Talks (either in the format of interviews or slide deck-supported scientific presentations) and expert point of view demonstrated high quality after the implementation of the content quality guidelines that was maintained over time (15-25/25). Conclusions: Our findings support that content quality guidelines provide both (1) a reliable framework for generating independent high-quality content that addresses the educational needs of neurologists and (2) are an objective evaluation tool for improving and maintaining scientific quality level. The use of these criteria and this scoring system could serve as a standard and reference to build an editorial strategy and review process for any medical news or platforms.Item The linearized disposition index augments understanding of treatment effects in diabetes(American Physiological Society, 2021) Kile, Amanda J.; Hanna, Clarissa; Hannon, Tamara S.; Kirkman, M. Sue; Considine, Robert V.; Patel, Yash; Mather, Kieren J.; Medicine, School of MedicineThe disposition index, calculated by multiplying measures of insulin secretion and insulin sensitivity, is widely applied as a sensitivity-adjusted measure of insulin secretion. We have recently shown that linearizing the underlying relationship uniquely permits identification of terms relating to maximal insulin secretion capacity and the secretion-coupling relationship, with both terms separately contributing to differences in the secretion-sensitivity relationship across gradations of glycemia. Here, we demonstrate the application of this linearized equation to the evaluation of treatment-induced changes in the insulin secretion-sensitivity relationship. We applied a combination of repeated-measures multivariate linear regression (evaluating treatment-induced changes in the joint relationship of insulin sensitivity and secretion) plus mixed-model repeated measures (evaluating treatment effects on maximal secretion capacity and on the secretion-sensitivity coupling slope) and compared against a usual application of the disposition index calculated from the same measurements. This novel approach allows a more informative description of treatment-induced changes compared with the usual disposition index, including isolating the source of change within the mutually adjusted relationship and identifying treatment-induced changes in the secretion-sensitivity coupling slope and in maximal insulin secretion. Application of this linearized approach provides an expanded understanding of treatment-induced changes in the insulin sensitivity-secretion relationship. NEW & NOTEWORTHY: The linearized insulin secretion-sensitivity relationship allows separate evaluation of the secretion-sensitivity slope and of maximal insulin secretion. Here, we demonstrate the application of this methodology to the evaluation of clinical trial data, showing that it provides an expanded understanding of treatment-induced changes compared with the disposition index.Item Multi-Round compared to Real-Time Delphi for consensus in core outcome set (COS) development: a randomised trial(Springer Nature, 2021-02-15) Quirke, Fiona A.; Healy, Patricia; Bhraonáin, Elaine Ní; Daly, Mandy; Biesty, Linda; Hurley, Tim; Walker, Karen; Meher, Shireen; Haas, David M.; Bloomfield, Frank H.; Kirkham, Jamie J.; Molloy, Eleanor J.; Devane, Declan; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of MedicineBackground: The Delphi method is used in a wide variety of settings as a method of building consensus on important issues. Traditionally, the Delphi method uses multiple rounds of a survey to allow for feedback of other participants' survey responses in between rounds. By informing participants about how others answer a question or prioritise specific topics, it allows for diverse opinions to inform the consensus process. For this reason, the Delphi method is popular as a consensus building approach in developing core outcome sets (COS), i.e. the minimum agreed set of standardised outcomes that should be measured and reported in studies on a specific health condition. In a COS setting, participants prioritise the importance of outcomes for inclusion in a COS. This usually involves participating in multiple rounds of a survey that can span several weeks or months. Challenges with participant retention have been highlighted in previous COS. We will compare a three-round with a Real-Time Delphi approach on prioritised outcomes. This trial is embedded within the COHESION study which is developing a COS for interventions treating neonatal encephalopathy. Methods: One hundred and eighty stakeholders (parents/caregivers of infants diagnosed and treated with neonatal encephalopathy, healthcare providers and researchers) will be randomised using stratified randomisation to take part in either the Multi-Round or Real-Time Delphi. Stakeholders will rate the importance of the same set of outcomes in both arms. We will compare the prioritised outcomes at the end of both surveys as well as other parameters such as feedback, initial condition and iteration effects. Discussion: This trial will provide evidence to inform decisions on the use of Multi-Round compared to Real-Time Delphi survey methods.Item Multicenter registry of United States emergency department patients tested for SARS-CoV-2(Wiley, 2020-11-12) Kline, Jeffrey A.; Pettit, Katherine L.; Kabrhel, Christopher; Courtney, D. Mark; Nordenholz, Kristen E.; Camargo, Carlos A.; Emergency Medicine, School of MedicineThis paper summarizes the methodology for the registry of suspected COVID‐19 in emergency care (RECOVER), a large clinical registry of patients from 155 United States (US) emergency departments (EDs) in 27 states tested for SARS‐CoV‐2 from March–September 2020. The initial goals are to derive and test: (1) a pretest probability instrument for prediction of SARS‐CoV‐2 test results, and from this instrument, a set of simple criteria to exclude COVID‐19 (the COVID‐19 Rule‐Out Criteria—the CORC rule), and (2) a prognostic instrument for those with COVID‐19. Patient eligibility included any ED patient tested for SARS‐CoV‐2 with a nasal or oropharyngeal swab. Abstracted clinical data included 204 variables representing the earliest manifestation of infection, including week of testing, demographics, symptoms, exposure risk, past medical history, test results, admission status, and outcomes 30 days later. In addition to the primary goals, the registry will provide a vital platform for characterizing the course, epidemiology, clinical features, and prognosis of patients tested for COVID‐19 in the ED setting.Item Precision and accuracy of hyperglycemic clamps in a multicenter study(American Physiological Society, 2021) Mather, Kieren J.; Tjaden, Ashley H.; Hoehn, Adam; Nadeau, Kristen J.; Buchanan, Thomas A.; Kahn, Steven E.; Arslanian, Silva A.; Caprio, Sonia; Atkinson, Karen M.; Cree-Green, Melanie; Utzschneider, Kristina M.; Edelstein, Sharon L.; RISE Consortium; Medicine, School of MedicineApplication of glucose clamp methodologies in multicenter studies brings challenges for standardization. The Restoring Insulin Secretion (RISE) Consortium implemented a hyperglycemic clamp protocol across seven centers using a combination of technical and management approaches to achieve standardization. Two-stage hyperglycemic clamps with glucose targets of 200 mg/dL and >450 mg/dL were performed utilizing a centralized spreadsheet-based algorithm that guided dextrose infusion rates using bedside plasma glucose measurements. Clamp operators received initial and repeated training with ongoing feedback based on surveillance of clamp performance. The precision and accuracy of the achieved stage-specific glucose targets were evaluated, including differences by study center. We also evaluated robustness of the method to baseline physiologic differences and on-study treatment effects. The RISE approach produced high overall precision (3%–9% variance in achieved plasma glucose from target at various times across the procedure) and accuracy (SD < 10% overall). Statistically significant but numerically small differences in achieved target glucose concentrations were observed across study centers, within the magnitude of the observed technical variability. Variation of the achieved target glucose over time in placebo-treated individuals was low (<3% variation), and the method was robust to differences in baseline physiology (youth vs. adult, IGT vs. diabetes status) and differences in physiology induced by study treatments. The RISE approach to standardization of the hyperglycemic clamp methodology across multiple study centers produced technically excellent standardization of achieved glucose concentrations. This approach provides a reliable method for implementing glucose clamp methodology across multiple study centers. NEW & NOTEWORTHY: The Restoring Insulin Secretion (RISE) study centers undertook hyperglycemic clamps using a simplified methodology and a decision guidance algorithm implemented in an easy-to-use spreadsheet. This approach, combined with active management including ongoing central data surveillance and routine feedback to study centers, produced technically excellent standardization of achieved glucose concentrations on repeat studies within and across study centers.Item Reducing the Number of Tests for COVID-19 Infection via Group Testing Methodologies(Society of Statistics, Computer and Applications (SSCA), 2020-07-12) Sarkar, Jyotirmoy; Mathematical Sciences, School of ScienceTotal economic shutdown being detrimental to a nation’s prosperity, most governments are reopening businesses and schools with the requirement of frequent and mass-scale testing to determine each person’s status of COVID-19 infection. Obviously, the costs add up quickly and impose a heavy economic toll. As a way out of this dilemma, employers and administrators should consider seriously the application of group testing methodologies. Group testing methods check samples in batches, rather than individually, for the presence of a disease. If the group tests positive, then the group is investigated further to identify who all are positive. On the other hand, if the group tests negative, not just once but also a second or a third time, then everyone within the group is cleared for activity. With a carefully chosen protocol, group testing costs can be 30-80% lower than those of individual testing, with the savings being higher when prevalence of the disease is lower.