Measuring comorbidity in cardiovascular research: a systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Buck HG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3730163 | biostudies-literature | 2013
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Measuring comorbidity in cardiovascular research: a systematic review.
Buck Harleah G HG Akbar Jabar A JA Zhang Sarah Jingying SJ Bettger Janet A Prvu JA
Nursing research and practice 20130717
Background. Everything known about the roles, relationships, and repercussions of comorbidity in cardiovascular disease is shaped by how comorbidity is currently measured. Objectives. To critically examine how comorbidity is measured in randomized controlled trials or clinical trials and prospective observational studies in acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), or stroke. Design. Systematic review of studies of hospitalized adults from MEDLINE CINAHL, PsychINFO, and ISI Web of S ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionNumerous instruments have been developed to assess spirituality and measure its association with health outcomes. This study's aims were to identify instruments used in clinical research that measure spirituality; to propose a classification of these instruments; and to identify those instruments that could provide information on the need for spiritual intervention.MethodsA systematic literature search in MEDLINE, CINHAL, PsycINFO, ATLA, and EMBASE databases, using the terms "spirituality" and "adult$," and limited to journal articles was performed to identify clinical studies that used a spiritual assessment instrument. For each instrument identified, measured constructs, intended goals, and data on psychometric properties were retrieved. A conceptual and a functional classification of instruments were developed.ResultsThirty-five instruments were retrieved and classified into measures of general spirituality (N = 22), spiritual well-being (N = 5), spiritual coping (N = 4), and spiritual needs (N = 4) according to the conceptual classification. Instruments most frequently used in clinical research were the FACIT-Sp and the Spiritual Well-Being Scale. Data on psychometric properties were mostly limited to content validity and inter-item reliability. According to the functional classification, 16 instruments were identified that included at least one item measuring a current spiritual state, but only three of those appeared suitable to address the need for spiritual intervention.ConclusionsInstruments identified in this systematic review assess multiple dimensions of spirituality, and the proposed classifications should help clinical researchers interested in investigating the complex relationship between spirituality and health. Findings underscore the scarcity of instruments specifically designed to measure a patient's current spiritual state. Moreover, the relatively limited data available on psychometric properties of these instruments highlight the need for additional research to determine whether they are suitable in identifying the need for spiritual interventions.
| S-EPMC3208480 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is an increasing need to evaluate the production and impact of medical research produced by institutions. Many indicators exist, yet we do not have enough information about their relevance. The objective of this systematic review was (1) to identify all the indicators that could be used to measure the output and outcome of medical research carried out in institutions and (2) enlist their methodology, use, positive and negative points.MethodologyWe have searched 3 databases (Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science) using the following keywords: [Research outcome* OR research output* OR bibliometric* OR scientometric* OR scientific production] AND [indicator* OR index* OR evaluation OR metrics]. We included articles presenting, discussing or evaluating indicators measuring the scientific production of an institution. The search was conducted by two independent authors using a standardised data extraction form. For each indicator we extracted its definition, calculation, its rationale and its positive and negative points. In order to reduce bias, data extraction and analysis was performed by two independent authors.FindingsWe included 76 articles. A total of 57 indicators were identified. We have classified those indicators into 6 categories: 9 indicators of research activity, 24 indicators of scientific production and impact, 5 indicators of collaboration, 7 indicators of industrial production, 4 indicators of dissemination, 8 indicators of health service impact. The most widely discussed and described is the h-index with 31 articles discussing it.DiscussionThe majority of indicators found are bibliometric indicators of scientific production and impact. Several indicators have been developed to improve the h-index. This indicator has also inspired the creation of two indicators to measure industrial production and collaboration. Several articles propose indicators measuring research impact without detailing a methodology for calculating them. Many bibliometric indicators identified have been created but have not been used or further discussed.
| S-EPMC4383328 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesA key barrier in supporting health research capacity development (HRCD) is the lack of empirical measurement of competencies to assess skills and identify gaps in research activities. An effective tool to measure HRCD in healthcare workers would help inform teams to undertake more locally led research. The objective of this systematic review is to identify tools measuring healthcare workers' individual capacities to conduct research.DesignSystematic review and narrative synthesis using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist for reporting systematic reviews and narrative synthesis and the Critical Appraisals Skills Programme (CASP) checklist for qualitative studies.Data sources11 databases were searched from inception to 16 January 2020. The first 10 pages of Google Scholar results were also screened.Eligibility criteriaWe included papers describing the use of tools/to measure/assess HRCD at an individual level among healthcare workers involved in research. Qualitative, mixed and quantitative methods were all eligible. Search was limited to English language only.Data extraction and synthesisTwo authors independently screened and reviewed studies using Covidence software, and performed quality assessments using the extraction log validated against the CASP qualitative checklist. The content method was used to define a narrative synthesis.ResultsThe titles and abstracts for 7474 unique records were screened and the full texts of 178 references were reviewed. 16 papers were selected: 7 quantitative studies; 1 qualitative study; 5 mixed methods studies; and 3 studies describing the creation of a tool. Tools with different levels of accuracy in measuring HRCD in healthcare workers at the individual level were described. The Research Capacity and Culture tool and the 'Research Spider' tool were the most commonly defined. Other tools designed for ad hoc interventions with good generalisability potential were identified. Three papers described health research core competency frameworks. All tools measured HRCD in healthcare workers at an individual level with the majority adding a measurement at the team/organisational level, or data about perceived barriers and motivators for conducting health research.ConclusionsCapacity building is commonly identified with pre/postintervention evaluations without using a specific tool. This shows the need for a clear distinction between measuring the outcomes of training activities in a team/organisation, and effective actions promoting HRCD. This review highlights the lack of globally applicable comprehensive tools to provide comparable, standardised and consistent measurements of research competencies.Prospero registration numberCRD42019122310.
| S-EPMC8264867 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundComorbidity can affect health-care utilization and outcomes, and the results and interpretation of risk adjustment studies that attempt to predict rehabilitation utilization and outcomes are influenced by the choice of comorbidity measurement. Although the identification of an appropriate measurement has been conducted in some populations and outcomes, this information is currently lacking for the non-traumatic brain injury (nTBI) population in inpatient rehabilitation settings. As such, this is a systematic review protocol to survey the methods used to measure comorbidities in the rehabilitation setting for patients with nTBI.Methods/designMEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, Embase, The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, and Health and Psychosocial Instruments will be systematically searched using the concepts 'nTBI,' 'comorbidity,' and 'rehabilitation.' Grey matters and the reference list of eligible articles will also be searched. Study selection will be performed independently by two reviewers based on predetermined eligibility criteria through two rounds of screening using, first, the title and abstract, followed by full-text. Extracted information will include study purpose, design, and setting; data source and type; outcomes variables; statistical methods; comorbidity measurement method, rationale, justification, or validation; and results involving comorbidity. The data will be tabulated and narratively synthesized. Meta-analyses will be performed if appropriate.Systematic review registrationThis protocol has not been registered with PROSPERO.DiscussionThis protocol provides a systematic method for surveying current practice as well as monitoring the progress on comorbidity measurement methodology and effects of comorbidity on rehabilitation outcomes for patients with nTBI. The selection of an appropriate comorbidity measurement method has implications for the interpretation of both descriptive and risk adjustment studies, and thus, the validity of evidence used to inform planning and delivery of services.
| S-EPMC4328947 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFrailty, neurodegeneration and geriatric syndromes cause a significant impact at the clinical, social, and economic level, mainly in the context of the aging world. Recently, Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs), virtual reality tools, and machine learning models have been increasingly applied to the care of older patients to improve diagnosis, prognosis, and interventions. However, so far, the methodological limitations of studies in this field have prevented to generalize data to real-word. This review systematically overviews the research designs used by studies applying technologies for the assessment and treatment of aging-related syndromes in older people.MethodsFollowing the PRISMA guidelines, records from PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were systematically screened to select original articles in which interventional or observational designs were used to study technologies' applications in samples of frail, comorbid, or multimorbid patients.ResultsThirty-four articles met the inclusion criteria. Most of the studies used diagnostic accuracy designs to test assessment procedures or retrospective cohort designs to build predictive models. A minority were randomized or non-randomized interventional studies. Quality evaluation revealed a high risk of bias for observational studies, while a low risk of bias for interventional studies.ConclusionsThe majority of the reviewed articles use an observational design mainly to study diagnostic procedures and suffer from a high risk of bias. The scarce presence of methodologically robust interventional studies may suggest that the field is in its infancy. Methodological considerations will be presented on how to standardize procedures and research quality in this field.
| S-EPMC10334509 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The review of human participant research by Research Ethics Committees (RECs) or Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) is a complex multi-faceted process that cannot be reduced to an algorithm. However, this does not give RECs/ IRBs permission to be inconsistent in their specific requirements to researchers or in their final opinions. In England the Health Research Authority (HRA) coordinates 67 committees, and has adopted a consistency improvement plan including a process called "Shared Ethical Debate" (ShED) where multiple committees review the same project. Committee reviews are compared for consistency by analysing the resulting minutes.We present a description of the ShED process. We report an analysis of minutes created by research ethics committees participating in two ShED exercises, and compare them to minutes produced in a published "mystery shopper" exercise. We propose a consistency score by defining top themes for each exercise, and calculating the ratio between top themes and total themes identified by each committee for each ShED exercise.Our analysis highlights qualitative differences between the ShED 19, ShED 20 and "mystery shopper" exercises. The quantitative measure of consistency showed only one committee across the three exercises with more than half its total themes as top themes (ratio of 0.6). The average consistency scores for the three exercises were 0.23 (ShED19), 0.35 (ShED20) and 0.32 (mystery shopper). There is a statistically significant difference between the ShED 19 exercise, and the ShED 20 and mystery shopper exercises.ShED exercises are effective in identifying inconsistency between ethics committees and we describe a scoring method that could be used to quantify this. However, whilst a level of inconsistency is probably inevitable in research ethics committee reviews, studies must move beyond the ShED methodology to understand why inconsistency occurs, and what an acceptable level of inconsistency might be.
| S-EPMC5704399 | biostudies-other
Project description:Remote monitoring technologies (RMTs) allow continuous, unobtrusive, and real-time monitoring of the cardiovascular system. An overview of existing RMTs measuring cardiovascular physiological variables is lacking. This systematic review aimed to describe RMTs measuring cardiovascular functions in community-dwelling adults. An electronic search was conducted via PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from January 1, 2020, to April 7, 2022. Articles reporting on non-invasive RMTs used unsupervised in community-dwelling adults were included. Reviews and studies in institutionalized populations were excluded. Two reviewers independently assessed the studies and extracted the technologies used, cardiovascular variables measured, and wearing locations of RMTs. Validation of the RMTs was examined based on the COSMIN tool, and accuracy and precision were presented. This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022320082). A total of 272 articles were included representing 322,886 individuals with a mean or median age from 19.0 to 88.9 years (48.7% female). Of all 335 reported RMTs containing 216 distinct devices, photoplethysmography was used in 50.3% of RMTs. Heart rate was measured in 47.0% of measurements, and the RMT was worn on the wrist in 41.8% of devices. Nine devices were reported in more than three articles, of which all were sufficiently accurate, six were sufficiently precise, and four were commercially available in December 2022. The top four most reported technologies were AliveCor KardiaMobile®, Fitbit Charge 2, and Polar H7 and H10 Heart Rate Sensors. With over 200 distinct RMTs reported, this review provides healthcare professionals and researchers an overview of available RMTs for monitoring the cardiovascular system.
| S-EPMC10196312 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lipids are important modifiers of protein function, particularly as parts of lipoproteins, which transport lipophilic substances and mediate cellular uptake of circulating lipids. As such, lipids are of particular interest as blood biological markers for cardiovascular disease (CVD) as well as for conditions linked to CVD such as atherosclerosis, diabetes mellitus, obesity and dietary states. Notably, lipid research is particularly well developed in the context of CVD because of the relevance and multiple causes and risk factors of CVD. The advent of methods for high-throughput screening of biological molecules has recently resulted in the generation of lipidomic profiles that allow monitoring of lipid compositions in biological samples in an untargeted manner. These and other earlier advances in biomedical research have shaped the knowledge we have about lipids in CVD. To evaluate the knowledge acquired on the multiple biological functions of lipids in CVD and the trends in their research, we collected a dataset of references from the PubMed database of biomedical literature focused on plasma lipids and CVD in human and mouse. Using annotations from these records, we were able to categorize significant associations between lipids and particular types of research approaches, distinguish non-biological lipids used as markers, identify differential research between human and mouse models, and detect the increasingly mechanistic nature of the results in this field. Using known associations between lipids and proteins that metabolize or transport them, we constructed a comprehensive lipid-protein network, which we used to highlight proteins strongly connected to lipids found in the CVD-lipid literature. Our approach points to a series of proteins for which lipid-focused research would bring insights into CVD, including Prostaglandin G/H synthase 2 (PTGS2, a.k.a. COX2) and Acylglycerol kinase (AGK). In this review, we summarize our findings, putting them in a historical perspective of the evolution of lipid research in CVD.
| S-EPMC10742042 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNon-cardiovascular comorbidities are recognised as independent prognostic factors in selected heart failure (HF) populations, but the evidence on non-selected HF and how comorbid disease severity and change impacts on outcomes has not been synthesised. We identified primary HF comorbidity follow-up studies to compare the impact of non-cardiovascular comorbidity, severity and change on the outcomes of quality of life, all-cause hospital admissions and all-cause mortality.MethodsLiterature databases (Jan 1990-May 2013) were screened using validated strategies and quality appraisal (QUIPS tool). Adjusted hazard ratios for the main HF outcomes were combined using random effects meta-analysis and inclusion of comorbidity in prognostic models was described.ResultsThere were 68 primary HF studies covering nine non-cardiovascular comorbidities. Most were on diabetes mellitus (DM), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and renal dysfunction (RD) for the outcome of mortality (93%) and hospital admissions (16%), median follow-up of 4 years. The adjusted associations between HF comorbidity and mortality were DM (HR 1.34; 95% CI 1.2, 1.5), COPD (1.39; 1.2, 1.6) and RD (1.52; 1.3, 1.7). Comorbidity severity increased mortality from moderate to severe disease by an estimated 78%, 42% and 80% respectively. The risk of hospital admissions increased up to 50% for each disease. Few studies or prognostic models included comorbidity change.ConclusionsNon-cardiovascular comorbidity and severity significantly increases the prognostic risk of poor outcomes in non-selected HF populations but there is a major gap in investigating change in comorbid status over time. The evidence supports a step-change for the inclusion of comorbidity severity in new HF interventions to improve prognostic outcomes.
| S-EPMC4518480 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIgnoring treatments in prognostic model development or validation can affect the accuracy and transportability of models. We aim to quantify the extent to which the effects of treatment have been addressed in existing prognostic model research and provide recommendations for the handling and reporting of treatment use in future studies.MethodsWe first describe how and when the use of treatments by individuals in a prognostic study can influence the development or validation of a prognostic model. We subsequently conducted a systematic review of the handling and reporting of treatment use in prognostic model studies in cardiovascular medicine. Data on treatment use (e.g. medications, surgeries, lifestyle interventions), the timing of their use, and the handling of such treatment use in the analyses were extracted and summarised.ResultsThree hundred two articles were included in the review. Treatment use was not mentioned in 91 (30%) articles. One hundred forty-six (48%) reported specific information about treatment use in their studies; 78 (26%) provided information about multiple treatments. Three articles (1%) reported changes in medication use ("treatment drop-in") during follow-up. Seventy-nine articles (26%) excluded treated individuals from their analysis, 80 articles (26%) modelled treatment as an outcome, and of the 155 articles that developed a model, 86 (55%) modelled treatment use, almost exclusively at baseline, as a predictor.ConclusionsThe use of treatments has been partly considered by the majority of CVD prognostic model studies. Detailed accounts including, for example, information on treatment drop-in were rare. Where relevant, the use of treatments should be considered in the analysis of prognostic model studies, particularly when a prognostic model is designed to guide the use of certain treatments and these treatments have been used by the study participants. Future prognostic model studies should clearly report the use of treatments by study participants and consider the potential impact of treatment use on the study findings.
| S-EPMC6460846 | biostudies-literature