| 1. |
- Duffy, J. M. N., et al.
(författare)
-
Top 10 priorities for future infertility research: an international consensus development study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Human Reproduction. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0268-1161 .- 1460-2350. ; 35:12, s. 2715-2724
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- STUDY QUESTION: Can the priorities for future research in infertility be identified? SUMMARY ANSWER: The top 10 research priorities for the four areas of male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction and ethics, access and organization of care for people with fertility problems were identified. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Many fundamental questions regarding the prevention, management and consequences of infertility remain unanswered. This is a barrier to improving the care received by those people with fertility problems. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Potential research questions were collated from an initial international survey, a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and Cochrane systematic reviews. A rationalized list of confirmed research uncertainties was prioritized in an interim international survey. Prioritized research uncertainties were discussed during a consensus development meeting. Using a formal consensus development method, the modified nominal group technique, diverse stakeholders identified the top 10 research priorities for each of the categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction and ethics, access and organization of care. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems and others (healthcare funders, healthcare providers, healthcare regulators, research funding bodies and researchers) were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus methods advocated by the James Lind Alliance. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The initial survey was completed by 388 participants from 40 countries, and 423 potential research questions were submitted. Fourteen clinical practice guidelines and 162 Cochrane systematic reviews identified a further 236 potential research questions. A rationalized list of 231 confirmed research uncertainties was entered into an interim prioritization survey completed by 317 respondents from 43 countries. The top 10 research priorities for each of the four categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility (including age-related infertility, ovarian cysts, uterine cavity abnormalities and tubal factor infertility), medically assisted reproduction (including ovarian stimulation, IUI and IVF) and ethics, access and organization of care were identified during a consensus development meeting involving 41 participants from I I countries. These research priorities were diverse and seek answers to questions regarding prevention, treatment and the longer-term impact of infertility. They highlight the importance of pursuing research which has often been overlooked, including addressing the emotional and psychological impact of infertility, improving access to fertility treatment, particularly in lower resource settings and securing appropriate regulation. Addressing these priorities will require diverse research methodologies, including laboratory-based science, qualitative and quantitative research and population science. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods, which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, methodological decisions informed by professional judgment and arbitrary consensus definitions. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: We anticipate that identified research priorities, developed to specifically highlight the most pressing clinical needs as perceived by healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems and others, will help research funding organizations and researchers to develop their future research agenda.
|
|
| 2. |
- Flenady, Vicki, et al.
(författare)
-
Stillbirths : recall to action in high-income countries.
- 2016
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 387:10019, s. 691-702
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Variation in stillbirth rates across high-income countries and large equity gaps within high-income countries persist. If all high-income countries achieved stillbirth rates equal to the best performing countries, 19,439 late gestation (28 weeks or more) stillbirths could have been avoided in 2015. The proportion of unexplained stillbirths is high and can be addressed through improvements in data collection, investigation, and classification, and with a better understanding of causal pathways. Substandard care contributes to 20-30% of all stillbirths and the contribution is even higher for late gestation intrapartum stillbirths. National perinatal mortality audit programmes need to be implemented in all high-income countries. The need to reduce stigma and fatalism related to stillbirth and to improve bereavement care are also clear, persisting priorities for action. In high-income countries, a woman living under adverse socioeconomic circumstances has twice the risk of having a stillborn child when compared to her more advantaged counterparts. Programmes at community and country level need to improve health in disadvantaged families to address these inequities.
|
|
| 3. |
- Sadler, J. E., et al.
(författare)
-
Update on the pathophysiology and classification of von Willebrand disease: a report of the Subcommittee on von Willebrand Factor
- 2006
-
Ingår i: Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. - : Elsevier BV. - 1538-7933 .- 1538-7836. ; 4:10, s. 2103-2114
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- von Willebrand disease (VWD) is a bleeding disorder caused by inherited defects in the concentration, structure, or function of von Willebrand factor (VWF). VWD is classified into three primary categories. Type 1 includes partial quantitative deficiency, type 2 includes qualitative defects, and type 3 includes virtually complete deficiency of VWF. VWD type 2 is divided into four secondary categories. Type 2A includes variants with decreased platelet adhesion caused by selective deficiency of high-molecular-weight VWF multimers. Type 2B includes variants with increased affinity for platelet glycoprotein Ib. Type 2M includes variants with markedly defective platelet adhesion despite a relatively normal size distribution of VWF multimers. Type 2N includes variants with markedly decreased affinity for factor VIII. These six categories of VWD correlate with important clinical features and therapeutic requirements. Some VWF gene mutations, alone or in combination, have complex effects and give rise to mixed VWD phenotypes. Certain VWD types, especially type 1 and type 2A, encompass several pathophysiologic mechanisms that sometimes can be distinguished by appropriate laboratory studies. The clinical significance of this heterogeneity is under investigation, which may support further subdivision of VWD type 1 or type 2A in the future.
|
|
| 4. |
- Sangeorzan, Irina, et al.
(författare)
-
Toward Shared Decision-Making in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy : Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study
- 2023
-
Ingår i: JMIR Research Protocols. - : JMIR Publications. - 1929-0748. ; 12
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Health care decisions are a critical determinant in the evolution of chronic illness. In shared decision-making (SDM), patients and clinicians work collaboratively to reach evidence-based health decisions that align with individual circumstances, values, and preferences. This personalized approach to clinical care likely has substantial benefits in the oversight of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM), a type of nontraumatic spinal cord injury. Its chronicity, heterogeneous clinical presentation, complex management, and variable disease course engenders an imperative for a patient-centric approach that accounts for each patient's unique needs and priorities. Inadequate patient knowledge about the condition and an incomplete understanding of the critical decision points that arise during the course of care currently hinder the fruitful participation of health care providers and patients in SDM. This study protocol presents the rationale for deploying SDM for DCM and delineates the groundwork required to achieve this.Objective: The study's primary outcome is the development of a comprehensive checklist to be implemented upon diagnosis that provides patients with essential information necessary to support their informed decision-making. This is known as a core information set (CIS). The secondary outcome is the creation of a detailed process map that provides a diagrammatic representation of the global care workflows and cognitive processes involved in DCM care. Characterizing the critical decision points along a patient's journey will allow for an effective exploration of SDM tools for routine clinical practice to enhance patient-centered care and improve clinical outcomes.Methods: Both CISs and process maps are coproduced iteratively through a collaborative process involving the input and consensus of key stakeholders. This will be facilitated by Myelopathy.org, a global DCM charity, through its Research Objectives and Common Data Elements for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy community. To develop the CIS, a 3-round, web-based Delphi process will be used, starting with a baseline list of information items derived from a recent scoping review of educational materials in DCM, patient interviews, and a qualitative survey of professionals. A priori criteria for achieving consensus are specified. The process map will be developed iteratively using semistructured interviews with patients and professionals and validated by key stakeholders.Results: Recruitment for the Delphi consensus study began in April 2023. The pilot-testing of process map interview participants started simultaneously, with the formulation of an initial baseline map underway.Conclusions: This protocol marks the first attempt to provide a starting point for investigating SDM in DCM. The primary work centers on developing an educational tool for use in diagnosis to enable enhanced onward decision-making. The wider objective is to aid stakeholders in developing SDM tools by identifying critical decision junctures in DCM care. Through these approaches, we aim to provide an exhaustive launchpad for formulating SDM tools in the wider DCM community.
|
|
| 5. |
- Ardern, Clare, 1985-, et al.
(författare)
-
2016 Consensus statement on return to sport from the First World Congress in Sports Physical Therapy, Bern
- 2016
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Sports Medicine. - : BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP. - 0306-3674 .- 1473-0480. ; 50:14, s. 853-864
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Deciding when to return to sport after injury is complex and multifactorial-an exercise in risk management. Return to sport decisions are made every day by clinicians, athletes and coaches, ideally in a collaborative way. The purpose of this consensus statement was to present and synthesise current evidence to make recommendations for return to sport decision-making, clinical practice and future research directions related to returning athletes to sport. A half day meeting was held in Bern, Switzerland, after the First World Congress in Sports Physical Therapy. 17 expert clinicians participated. 4 main sections were initially agreed upon, then participants elected to join 1 of the 4 groups-each group focused on 1 section of the consensus statement. Participants in each group discussed and summarised the key issues for their section before the 17-member group met again for discussion to reach consensus on the content of the 4 sections. Return to sport is not a decision taken in isolation at the end of the recovery and rehabilitation process. Instead, return to sport should be viewed as a continuum, paralleled with recovery and rehabilitation. Biopsychosocial models may help the clinician make sense of individual factors that may influence the athletes return to sport, and the Strategic Assessment of Risk and Risk Tolerance framework may help decision-makers synthesise information to make an optimal return to sport decision. Research evidence to support return to sport decisions in clinical practice is scarce. Future research should focus on a standardised approach to defining, measuring and reporting return to sport outcomes, and identifying valuable prognostic factors for returning to sport.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
