Relevance of Guidelines.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Yadava OP
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7525888 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundSnakebite has recently been declared a global public health emergency. Empirical data showing the true burden of snakebite is lacking. Treatment with specific antivenoms is considered the only cure. However, several factors have led to an ongoing antivenom crisis. This study offers recommendations concerning the improvement of antivenom access and control, by providing an overview of the factors limiting the successful implementation of international guidelines within the international industry and state institutions. It further investigates the reasons for the epidemiological knowledge gap regarding snakebites.MethodsData for this study was collected using surveys with closed- and open-ended questions, which allowed for descriptive and thematic analysis, respectively. Participants for this study were selected as follows: 46 manufacturers were contacted from the open-access World Health Organization (WHO) Database for antivenom producers; 23 National Health Authorities (NHAs) of high-burden countries were contacted; and 11 poison centers or experts were randomly contacted.ResultsIn total, responses from 6/46 (13%) manufacturers, 10/23 (43%) NHAs, and 3/11 (27%) poison centers were received. The low response rates had a limiting effect on the coverage of this study, allowing only exploratory conclusions to be drawn. Based on the gathered information, a probable reason for the epidemiological knowledge gap is the low priority given to snakebites on public health agendas, driving interest and funding away from research in this field. As a consequence, the ensuing lack in funding is preventing state institutions and manufacturers from implementing international guidelines to the highest standards. Furthermore, manufacturers indicated that international guidelines were often not applicable in the field, lacking technical information and protocols.ConclusionSnakebite ranks low on international public health agendas, and partially due to this low priority, NHAs have shown limited efforts in conducting epidemiological studies, training health workers on snakebite management and creating national snakebite management strategies. The lack of NHA involvement is reflected in poor access to appropriate antivenoms as well as a lack of antivenom regulation. Manufacturers are taking positive steps toward full implementation of international guidelines and are improving quality control procedures. However, in order for international guidelines to become truly useful in the field, more technical guidance is required. This study reflects that there is a general lack of knowledge transfer amongst various actors: most producers, health authorities, and experts expect increased and improved communication and guidance from leading international bodies. Due to the low response rates observed in this study, conclusions drawn herein are not representative of the global situation; yet provide an exploratory insight on the difficulties facing antivenom management.
| S-EPMC4493585 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn 2009, the heads of the Executive Council of the European Chiropractors' Union (ECU) and the European Academy of Chiropractic (EAC) involved in the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) process for the chiropractic profession, set out to establish European guidelines for the reporting of adverse reactions to chiropractic treatment. There were a number of reasons for this: first, to improve the overall quality of patient care by aiming to reduce the application of potentially harmful interventions and to facilitate the treatment of patients within the context of achieving maximum benefit with a minimum risk of harm; second, to inform the training objectives for the Graduate Education and Continuing Professional Development programmes of all 19 ECU member nations, regarding knowledge and skills to be acquired for maximising patient safety; and third, to develop a guideline on patient safety incident reporting as it is likely to be part of future CEN standards for ECU member nations.ObjectiveTo introduce patient safety incident reporting within the context of chiropractic practice in Europe and to help individual countries and their national professional associations to develop or improve reporting and learning systems.DiscussionProviding health care of any kind, including the provision of chiropractic treatment, can be a complex and, at times, a risky activity. Safety in healthcare cannot be guaranteed, it can only be improved. One of the most important aspects of any learning and reporting system lies in the appropriate use of the data and information it gathers. Reporting should not just be seen as a vehicle for obtaining information on patient safety issues, but also be utilised as a tool to facilitate learning, advance quality improvement and to ultimately minimise the rate of the occurrence of errors linked to patient care.ConclusionsBefore a reporting and learning system can be established it has to be clear what the objectives of the system are, what resources will be required and whether the implementing organisation has the capacity to operate the system to its full advantage. Responding to adverse event reports requires the availability of experts to analyse the incidents and to provide feedback in a timely fashion. A comprehensive strategy for national implementation must be in place including, but not limited to, presentations at national meetings, the provision of written information to all practitioners and the running of workshops, so that all stakeholders fully understand the purposes of adverse event reporting. Unless this is achieved, any system runs the risk of failure, or at the very least, limited usefulness.
| S-EPMC3079683 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the last century, vitamin A was identified that included the nutritional relevant vitamin A1 / provitamin A1, as well as the vitamin A2 pathway concept. Globally, nutritional guidelines have focused on vitamin A1 with simplified recommendations and calculations based solely on vitamin A. The vitamin A / provitamin A terminology described vitamin A with respect to acting as a precursor of 11-cis-retinal, the chromophore of the visual pigment, as well as retinoic acid(s), being ligand(s) of the nuclear hormone receptors retinoic acid receptors (RARs) α, β and γ. All-trans-retinoic acid was conclusively shown to be the endogenous RAR ligand, while the concept of its isomer 9-cis-retinoic acid, being "the" endogenous ligand of the retinoid-X receptors (RXRs), remained inconclusive. Recently, 9-cis-13,14-dihydroretinoic acid was conclusively reported as an endogenous RXR ligand, and a direct nutritional precursor was postulated in 2018 and further confirmed by Rühl, Krezel and de Lera in 2021. This was further termed vitamin A5/X / provitamin A5/X. In this review, a new vitamin A5/X / provitamin A5/X concept is conceptualized in parallel to the vitamin A(1) / provitamin A(1) concept for daily dietary intake and towards dietary guidelines, with a focus on the existing national and international regulations for the physiological and nutritional relevance of vitamin A5/X. The aim of this review is to summarize available evidence and to emphasize gaps of knowledge regarding vitamin A5/X, based on new and older studies and proposed future directions as well as to stimulate and propose adapted nutritional regulations.
| S-EPMC10426203 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Here, we compile valuable insights gathered over years of generating Ribo-seq datasets from different plant species and experimental setups. We tested the effects of variable ribonuclease treatments for the generation of ribosome protected fragments (RPFs). We tested rRNA depletion strategies designed specifically for Arabidopsis and Tobacco. We also compare ligation-free to ligation-based library preparation strategies for generating Ribo-seq libraries.
2024-07-05 | GSE226508 | GEO
Project description:Amsterdam criteria for the hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) exclude most suspect cases of possible hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC). By contrast, revised Bethesda guidelines excessively broaden the disease spectrum. The aim of this study is to retrospectively evaluate the cliniciopathilogical characteristics of patients fulfilling the revised Bethesda guidelines and to review the efficacy and limitations of the revised guidelines.This retrospective study enrolled 3609 patients who underwent curative surgery for primary CRC. Patients were classified into the Bethesda group or the control group according to whether they fulfilled the revised Bethesda guidelines. Patients were further categorized when they fulfilled a minimum of 2 items of the revised guidelines. Individual items were analyzed for deficient mismatch repair (d-MMR).The median follow-up was 82.9 (interquartile range, 72-101) months. Patients in the Bethesda group were younger and had a higher rate of reduced mismatch repair (MMR) protein expression, microsatellite instability, and right colonic involvement (all P?<?0.001) than the control group. As a predictor of d-MMR, the revised Bethesda guidelines showed a sensitivity of 63.0% and a specificity of 72.6%. Items 1 and 2, respectively, or the item pair 1 and 2, were independent predictors of d-MMR (all P?<?0.001). Patients fulfilling the Bethesda guidelines showed clinicopathological features of HNPCC.The revised Bethesda guidelines appear to be a competent predictor of d-MMR. Specifically, items 1 and 2 are significant predictors of d-MMR and may be relevant to the application of the revised Bethesda guidelines.
| S-EPMC4753907 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectivesTo quantify and analyse the quality of evidence that is presented in national guidelines.SettingLevels of evidence used in all the current valid recommendations in the Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network (SIGN) guidelines were reviewed and statistically analysed.Outcome measuresThe proportion of level D evidence used in each guideline and a statistical analysis.MethodData were collected from published guidelines available online to the public. SIGN methodology entails a professional group selected by a national organisation to develop each of these guidelines. Statistical analysis of the relationship between the number of guideline recommendations and the quality of evidence used in its recommendations was performed.ResultThe proportion of level D evidence increases with the number of recommendations made. This correlation is significant with Kendall's τ=0.22 (approximate 95% CI 0.008 to 0.45), p = 0.04; and Spearman ρ=0.22 (approximate 95% CI 0.02 to 0.57), p=0.04.ConclusionsPractice guidelines should be brief and based on scientific evidence. Paradoxically the longest guidelines have the highest proportion of recommendations based on the lowest level of evidence. Guideline developers should be more aware of the need for brevity and a stricter application of evidence-based principles could achieve this. The findings support calls for a review of how evidence is used and presented in guidelines.
| S-EPMC3918980 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimGuidelines benefit patients and clinicians by distilling evidence into easy-to-read recommendations. The literature around the management of haemorrhoids is immense and guidelines are invaluable to improve treatment integrity and patient outcomes. We identified current haemorrhoid guidelines and assessed them for quality and consistency.MethodsA systematic search of the literature from January 2011 to October 2021 was carried out. Guidelines identified were assessed for quality using the AGREE II instrument and for consistency in terms of tabulated treatment recommendations.ResultsDuring this period nine guidelines were identified worldwide. The general quality was poor with only one guideline considered of high enough quality for use. In general, expert selection criteria for guideline development groups were vaguely defined. There were inconsistencies in the interpretation of the published evidence leading to variation in treatment recommendations.DiscussionFewer, higher quality guidelines, with more consistent results, are needed. Particular attention should be given to defining the selection of experts involved.
| S-EPMC9310584 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Reproducible science requires transparent reporting. The ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) were originally developed in 2010 to improve the reporting of animal research. They consist of a checklist of information to include in publications describing in vivo experiments to enable others to scrutinise the work adequately, evaluate its methodological rigour, and reproduce the methods and results. Despite considerable levels of endorsement by funders and journals over the years, adherence to the guidelines has been inconsistent, and the anticipated improvements in the quality of reporting in animal research publications have not been achieved. Here, we introduce ARRIVE 2.0. The guidelines have been updated and information reorganised to facilitate their use in practice. We used a Delphi exercise to prioritise and divide the items of the guidelines into 2 sets, the "ARRIVE Essential 10," which constitutes the minimum requirement, and the "Recommended Set," which describes the research context. This division facilitates improved reporting of animal research by supporting a stepwise approach to implementation. This helps journal editors and reviewers verify that the most important items are being reported in manuscripts. We have also developed the accompanying Explanation and Elaboration document, which serves (1) to explain the rationale behind each item in the guidelines, (2) to clarify key concepts, and (3) to provide illustrative examples. We aim, through these changes, to help ensure that researchers, reviewers, and journal editors are better equipped to improve the rigour and transparency of the scientific process and thus reproducibility.
| S-EPMC7610926 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Reproducible science requires transparent reporting. The ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) were originally developed in 2010 to improve the reporting of animal research. They consist of a checklist of information to include in publications describing in vivo experiments to enable others to scrutinise the work adequately, evaluate its methodological rigour, and reproduce the methods and results. Despite considerable levels of endorsement by funders and journals over the years, adherence to the guidelines has been inconsistent, and the anticipated improvements in the quality of reporting in animal research publications have not been achieved. Here, we introduce ARRIVE 2.0. The guidelines have been updated and information reorganised to facilitate their use in practice. We used a Delphi exercise to prioritise and divide the items of the guidelines into 2 sets, the 'ARRIVE Essential 10,' which constitutes the minimum requirement, and the 'Recommended Set,' which describes the research context. This division facilitates improved reporting of animal research by supporting a stepwise approach to implementation. This helps journal editors and reviewers verify that the most important items are being reported in manuscripts. We have also developed the accompanying Explanation and Elaboration document, which serves (1) to explain the rationale behind each item in the guidelines, (2) to clarify key concepts, and (3) to provide illustrative examples. We aim, through these changes, to help ensure that researchers, reviewers, and journal editors are better equipped to improve the rigour and transparency of the scientific process and thus reproducibility.
| S-EPMC7610696 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Reproducible science requires transparent reporting. The ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) were originally developed in 2010 to improve the reporting of animal research. They consist of a checklist of information to include in publications describing in vivo experiments to enable others to scrutinise the work adequately, evaluate its methodological rigour, and reproduce the methods and results. Despite considerable levels of endorsement by funders and journals over the years, adherence to the guidelines has been inconsistent, and the anticipated improvements in the quality of reporting in animal research publications have not been achieved. Here, we introduce ARRIVE 2.0. The guidelines have been updated and information reorganised to facilitate their use in practice. We used a Delphi exercise to prioritise and divide the items of the guidelines into 2 sets, the "ARRIVE Essential 10," which constitutes the minimum requirement, and the "Recommended Set," which describes the research context. This division facilitates improved reporting of animal research by supporting a stepwise approach to implementation. This helps journal editors and reviewers verify that the most important items are being reported in manuscripts. We have also developed the accompanying Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document, which serves (1) to explain the rationale behind each item in the guidelines, (2) to clarify key concepts, and (3) to provide illustrative examples. We aim, through these changes, to help ensure that researchers, reviewers, and journal editors are better equipped to improve the rigour and transparency of the scientific process and thus reproducibility.
| S-EPMC7360023 | biostudies-literature