OBJECTIVE: To investigate the estimated minimal prevalence, needs, and potential interventions for the diagnosis and management of HAE in the AP.
METHODS: A structured questionnaire was distributed to representative experts from member societies of the Asia Pacific Association of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology. Patient profiles and the presence of diagnostic facilities or tests, regional and national HAE guidelines, and patient support groups were reported and compared.
RESULTS: Completed questionnaires were received from 14 representatives of 12 member countries and territories, representing 46% of the world population. Overall minimal prevalence of HAE in the AP region was 0.02/100,000 population, with significant heterogeneity across different centers. Only one-half and one-third had registered on-demand and prophylactic medications, respectively. Few had patient support groups (58%) or regional guidelines (33%), and their existence was associated with the availability of HAE-specific medications. Availability of C1-inhibitor level testing was associated with a lower age at HAE diagnosis (P = .017).
CONCLUSIONS: Hereditary angioedema in the AP differs from that in Western countries. Hereditary angioedema-specific medications were registered in only a minority of countries and territories, but those with patient support groups or regional guidelines were more likely to have better access. Asia Pacific-specific consensus and guidelines are lacking and urgently needed.
METHODS: we searched six electronic databases, which include PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, SciELO, ERIC and AgeLine, between January 2000 and April 2022. Reference lists of the included papers were also manually searched. The COSMIN (CONsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments) guidelines were used to evaluate the measurement properties and the quality of evidence for each instrument.
RESULTS: 13 instruments from 29 studies were included for evaluation of their measurement properties. Of the 13 reviewed, 6 were on the ability to learn, 3 were on the ability to grow and 4 were on the ability to make decisions. The review found no single instrument that measured all three constructs in unidimensional or multidimensional scales. Many of the instruments were found to have sufficient overall rating on content validity, structural validity, internal consistency and cross-cultural validity. The quality of evidence was rated as low due to a limited number of related validation studies.
CONCLUSION: a few existing instruments to assess the ability to learn, grow and make decisions of older people can be identified in the literature. Further research is needed in validating them against functional, real-world outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: The authors undertook a scoping umbrella review of the research integrity literature concerning RCTs.
SEARCH STRATEGY AND SELECTION CRITERIA: Following prospective registration (https://osf.io/3ursn), two reviewers independently searched PubMed, Scopus, The Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, without language or time restrictions, until November 2021. The authors included systematic reviews covering any aspect of research integrity throughout the RCT lifecycle.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The authors assessed methodological quality using a modified AMSTAR 2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) tool and collated the main findings.
MAIN RESULTS: A total of 55 relevant reviews, summarizing 6001 studies (median per review, 63; range, 8-1106) from 1964 to 2021, had an overall critically low quality of 96% (53 reviews). Topics covered included general aspects (15%), design and approval (22%), conduct and monitoring (11%), reporting (38%), postpublication concerns (2%), and future research (13%). The most common integrity issues covered were ethics (18%) and transparency (18%).
CONCLUSIONS: Low-quality reviews identified various integrity issues across the RCT lifecycle, emphasizing the importance of high ethical standards and professionalism while highlighting gaps in the integrity landscape. Multistakeholder consensus is needed to develop specific RCT integrity standards.
OBJECTIVE: To reach international consensus among psoriasis experts on a uniform dosing regimen for treatment with methotrexate in adult and pediatric patients with psoriasis and identify potential future research topics.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Between September 2020 and March 2021, a survey study with a modified eDelphi procedure that was developed and distributed by the Amsterdam University Medical Center and completed by 180 participants worldwide (55 [30.6%] resided in non-Western countries) was conducted in 3 rounds. The proposals on which no consensus was reached were discussed in a conference meeting (June 2021). Participants voted on 21 proposals with a 9-point scale (1-3 disagree, 4-6 neither agree nor disagree, 7-9 agree) and were recruited through the Skin Inflammation and Psoriasis International Network and European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology in June 2020. Apart from being a dermatologist/dermatology resident, there were no specific criteria for participation in the survey. The participants worked mainly at a university hospital (97 [53.9%]) and were experienced in treating patients with psoriasis with methotrexate (163 [91.6%] had more than 10 years of experience).
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: In a survey with eDelphi procedure, we tried to reach consensus on 21 proposals. Consensus was defined as less than 15% voting disagree (1-3). For the consensus meeting, consensus was defined as less than 30% voting disagree.
RESULTS: Of 251 participants, 180 (71.7%) completed all 3 survey rounds, and 58 participants (23.1%) joined the conference meeting. Consensus was achieved on 11 proposals in round 1, 3 proposals in round 2, and 2 proposals in round 3. In the consensus meeting, consensus was achieved on 4 proposals. More research is needed, especially for the proposals on folic acid and the dosing of methotrexate for treating subpopulations such as children and vulnerable patients.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this eDelphi consensus study, consensus was reached on 20 of 21 proposals involving methotrexate dosing in patients with psoriasis. This consensus may potentially be used to harmonize the treatment with methotrexate in patients with psoriasis.
METHODS: A multi-speciality expert panel consisting of nine Malaysian physicians from different healthcare settings who manage a diverse OA patient population was convened. Using a combination of the ADAPTE process and modified Delphi method, the panel reviewed current evidence on the management of knee OA and synthesised a set of nine recommendations on the management of knee OA, supported by an algorithm that summarises the consensus' core messages.
RESULTS: A multimodal intervention strategy is the mainstay of OA management and the choice of any single or multimodal intervention may vary over the course of the disease. Overall, a non-pharmacological core treatment set of patient education, weight loss and exercise is recommended for all patients. When pharmacotherapy is indicated, symptomatic slow-acting drugs for osteoarthritis are recommended at the early stage of disease, and they can be paired with physical therapy as background treatment. Concurrent advanced pharmacotherapy that includes non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, intraarticular injections and short-term weak opioids can be considered if patients do not respond sufficiently to background treatment. Patients with severe symptomatic knee OA should be considered for knee replacement surgery. Management should begin with specific treatments with the least systemic exposure or toxicity, and the choice of treatment should be determined as a shared decision between patients and their team of healthcare providers.
CONCLUSIONS: This consensus presents nine recommendations that advocate an algorithmic approach in the management of patients living with knee OA. They are applicable to patients receiving treatment from primary to tertiary care providers in Malaysia as well as other countries.
Methods: The modified Delphi method was used to obtain the consensus. The initial indicators, based on a literature review, were evaluated and assessed by members of the expert panel through three rounds of repetition until the consensus was reached. The expert panel members were selected based on their knowledge of or expertise in pharmacy service performance and geographical considerations. Analysis of the expert panel consensus level was determined by calculating the mean and interquartile range.
Results: Fifteen expert panel members started the first round (93.7% of the 16 targets) with 12 of them (75%) completing the third round of the modified Delphi method. Three expert panel members were representatives of the Regency Health Office, and the others were pharmacist practitioners at primary health centres from three different regencies. The consensus results were 26 indicators of drug management, 19 indicators of clinical pharmacy services, and two indicators of overall pharmacy performance.
Conclusion: The consensus indicators for measuring drug management, clinical pharmacy services, and overall pharmacy performance can be used as a reference and standard to measure the quality of pharmacy services at primary health centres. Therefore, the measurement results are more relevant if compared between one and other studies.