| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- van Setten, Jessica, et al.
(författare)
-
PR interval genome-wide association meta-analysis identifies 50 loci associated with atrial and atrioventricular electrical activity
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Nature Communications. - : NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP. - 2041-1723. ; 9
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Electrocardiographic PR interval measures atrio-ventricular depolarization and conduction, and abnormal PR interval is a risk factor for atrial fibrillation and heart block. Our genomewide association study of over 92,000 European-descent individuals identifies 44 PR interval loci (34 novel). Examination of these loci reveals known and previously not-yet-reported biological processes involved in cardiac atrial electrical activity. Genes in these loci are overrepresented in cardiac disease processes including heart block and atrial fibrillation. Variants in over half of the 44 loci were associated with atrial or blood transcript expression levels, or were in high linkage disequilibrium with missense variants. Six additional loci were identified either by meta-analysis of similar to 105,000 African and European-descent individuals and/or by pleiotropic analyses combining PR interval with heart rate, QRS interval, and atrial fibrillation. These findings implicate developmental pathways, and identify transcription factors, ionchannel genes, and cell-junction/cell-signaling proteins in atrio-ventricular conduction, identifying potential targets for drug development.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Cunningham, S. G., et al.
(författare)
-
Core Standards of the EUBIRO Project Defining a European Diabetes Data Dictionary for Clinical Audit and Healthcare Delivery
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Methods of Information in Medicine. - : Georg Thieme Verlag KG. - 0026-1270 .- 2511-705X. ; 55:2, s. 166-176
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: A set of core diabetes indicators were identified in a clinical review of current evidence for the EUBIROD project. In order to allow accurate comparisons of diabetes indicators, a standardised currency for data storage and aggregation was required. We aimed to define a robust European data dictionary with appropriate clinical definitions that can be used to analyse diabetes outcomes and provide the foundation for data collection from existing electronic health records for diabetes. Methods: Existing clinical datasets used by 15 partner institutions across Europe were collated and common data items analysed for consistency in terms of recording, data definition and units of measurement. Where necessary, data mappings and algorithms were specified in order to allow partners to meet the standard definitions. A series of descriptive elements were created to document metadata for each data item, including recording, consistency, completeness and quality. Results: While datasets varied in terms of consistency, it was possible to create a common standard that could be used by all. The minimum dataset defined 53 data items that were classified according to their feasibility and validity. Mappings and standardised definitions were used to create an electronic directory for diabetes care, providing the foundation for the EUBIROD data analysis repository, also used to implement the diabetes registry and model of care for Cyprus. Conclusions: The development of data dictionaries and standards can be used to improve the quality and comparability of health information. A data dictionary has been developed to be compatible with other existing data sources for diabetes, within and beyond Europe.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Cunningham, S G, et al.
(författare)
-
Core Standards of the EUBIROD Project. Defining a European Diabetes Data Dictionary for Clinical Audit and Healthcare Delivery.
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Methods of information in medicine. - 2511-705X. ; 55:2, s. 166-76
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A set of core diabetes indicators were identified in a clinical review of current evidence for the EUBIROD project. In order to allow accurate comparisons of diabetes indicators, a standardised currency for data storage and aggregation was required. We aimed to define a robust European data dictionary with appropriate clinical definitions that can be used to analyse diabetes outcomes and provide the foundation for data collection from existing electronic health records for diabetes.Existing clinical datasets used by 15 partner institutions across Europe were collated and common data items analysed for consistency in terms of recording, data definition and units of measurement. Where necessary, data mappings and algorithms were specified in order to allow partners to meet the standard definitions. A series of descriptive elements were created to document metadata for each data item, including recording, consistency, completeness and quality.While datasets varied in terms of consistency, it was possible to create a common standard that could be used by all. The minimum dataset defined 53 data items that were classified according to their feasibility and validity. Mappings and standardised definitions were used to create an electronic directory for diabetes care, providing the foundation for the EUBIROD data analysis repository, also used to implement the diabetes registry and model of care for Cyprus.The development of data dictionaries and standards can be used to improve the quality and comparability of health information. A data dictionary has been developed to be compatible with other existing data sources for diabetes, within and beyond Europe.
|
|
| 9. |
- Alper, BS, et al.
(författare)
-
Defining certainty of net benefit: a GRADE concept paper
- 2019
-
Ingår i: BMJ open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 9:6, s. e027445-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology is used to assess and report certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. This GRADE concept article is not GRADE guidance but introduces certainty of net benefit, defined as the certainty that the balance between desirable and undesirable health effects is favourable. Determining certainty of net benefit requires considering certainty of effect estimates, the expected importance of outcomes and variability in importance, and the interaction of these concepts. Certainty of net harm is the certainty that the net effect is unfavourable. Guideline panels using or testing this approach might limit strong recommendations to actions with a high certainty of net benefit or against actions with a moderate or high certainty of net harm. Recommendations may differ in direction or strength from that suggested by the certainty of net benefit or harm when influenced by cost, equity, acceptability or feasibility.
|
|
| 10. |
- Hultcrantz, Monica, et al.
(författare)
-
The GRADE Working Group clarifies the construct of certainty of evidence
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. - : Pergamon Press. - 0895-4356 .- 1878-5921. ; 87, s. 4-13
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To clarify the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) definition of certainty of evidence and suggest possible approaches to rating certainty of the evidence for systematic reviews, health technology assessments, and guidelines. Study Design and Setting: This work was carried out by a project group within the GRADE Working Group, through brainstorming and iterative refinement of ideas, using input from workshops, presentations, and discussions at GRADE Working Group meetings to produce this document, which constitutes official GRADE guidance. Results: Certainty of evidence is best considered as the certainty that a true effect lies on one side of a specified threshold or within a chosen range. We define possible approaches for choosing threshold or range. For guidelines, what we call a fully contextualized approach requires simultaneously considering all critical outcomes and their relative value. Less-contextualized approaches, more appropriate for systematic reviews and health technology assessments, include using specified ranges of magnitude of effect, for example, ranges of what we might consider no effect, trivial, small, moderate, or large effects. Conclusion: It is desirable for systematic review authors, guideline panelists, and health technology assessors to specify the threshold or ranges they are using when rating the certainty in evidence. (C) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.
|
|
