首页 > 最新文献

PLoS Medicine最新文献

英文 中文
Cost-effectiveness of antenatal multiple micronutrients and balanced energy protein supplementation compared to iron and folic acid supplementation in India, Pakistan, Mali, and Tanzania: A dynamic microsimulation study. 在印度、巴基斯坦、马里和坦桑尼亚,与补充铁和叶酸相比,产前补充多种微量营养素和平衡能量蛋白质的成本效益:一项动态微观模拟研究。
IF 15.8 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2022-02-22 eCollection Date: 2022-02-01 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003902
Nicole Young, Alison Bowman, Kjell Swedin, James Collins, Nathaniel D Blair-Stahn, Paulina A Lindstedt, Christopher Troeger, Abraham D Flaxman
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Malnutrition among women of childbearing age is especially prevalent in Asia and sub-Saharan Africa and can be harmful to the fetus during pregnancy. In the most recently available Demographic and Health Survey (DHS), approximately 10% to 20% of pregnant women in India, Pakistan, Mali, and Tanzania were undernourished (body mass index [BMI] <18.5 kg/m2), and according to the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 study, approximately 20% of babies were born with low birth weight (LBW; <2,500 g) in India, Pakistan, and Mali and 8% in Tanzania. Supplementing pregnant women with micro and macronutrients during the antenatal period can improve birth outcomes. Recently, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended antenatal multiple micronutrient supplementation (MMS) that includes iron and folic acid (IFA) in the context of rigorous research. Additionally, WHO recommends balanced energy protein (BEP) for undernourished populations. However, few studies have compared the cost-effectiveness of different supplementation regimens. We compared the cost-effectiveness of MMS and BEP with IFA to quantify their benefits in 4 countries with considerable prevalence of maternal undernutrition.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>Using nationally representative estimates from the 2017 GBD study, we conducted an individual-based dynamic microsimulation of population cohorts from birth to 2 years of age in India, Pakistan, Mali, and Tanzania. We modeled the effect of maternal nutritional supplementation on infant birth weight, stunting and wasting using effect sizes from Cochrane systematic reviews and published literature. We used a payer's perspective and obtained costs of supplementation per pregnancy from the published literature. We compared disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in a baseline scenario with existing antenatal IFA coverage with scenarios where 90% of antenatal care (ANC) attendees receive either universal MMS, universal BEP, or MMS + targeted BEP (women with prepregnancy BMI <18.5 kg/m2 receive BEP containing MMS while women with BMI ≥18.5 kg/m2 receive MMS). We obtained 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) for all outputs to represent parameter and stochastic uncertainty across 100 iterations of model runs. ICERs for all scenarios were lowest in Pakistan and greatest in Tanzania, in line with the baseline trend in prevalence of and attributable burden to LBW. MMS + targeted BEP averts more DALYs than universal MMS alone while remaining cost-effective. ICERs for universal MMS compared to baseline IFA were $52 (95% UI: $28 to $78) for Pakistan, $72 (95% UI: $37 to $118) for Mali, $70 (95% UI: $43 to $104) for India, and $253 (95% UI: $112 to $481) for Tanzania. ICERs for MMS + targeted BEP compared to baseline IFA were $54 (95% UI: $32 to $77) for Pakistan, $73 (95% UI: $40 to $104) for Mali, $83 (95% UI: $58 to $111) for India, and $245 (95% UI: $127 to $405)
背景:育龄妇女营养不良在亚洲和撒哈拉以南非洲地区尤为普遍,可能对怀孕期间的胎儿有害。在最新的人口与健康调查(DHS)中,印度、巴基斯坦、马里和坦桑尼亚约有10%至20%的孕妇营养不良(体重指数[BMI])方法和发现:使用2017年GBD研究中具有全国代表性的估计数据,我们对印度、巴基斯坦、马里和坦桑尼亚从出生到2岁的人口队列进行了基于个体的动态微观模拟。我们利用Cochrane系统综述和已发表文献的效应量,模拟了母亲营养补充对婴儿出生体重、发育迟缓和消瘦的影响。我们采用了付款人的观点,并从已发表的文献中获得了每次妊娠的补充费用。我们比较了现有产前IFA覆盖的基线方案和90%产前护理(ANC)参与者接受普遍MMS、普遍BEP或MMS +靶向BEP(孕前BMI妇女)的方案中的残疾调整生命年(DALYs)和增量成本-效果比(ICERs)。结论:在本研究中,我们观察到与普遍MMS相比,MMS +靶向BEP避免了更多的DALYs,并且仍然具有成本效益。随着各国考虑根据世卫组织最近的指南使用MMS,提供有针对性的BEP是一种具有成本效益的战略,可以同时考虑,以最大限度地提高效益并使规划实施协同增效。
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness of antenatal multiple micronutrients and balanced energy protein supplementation compared to iron and folic acid supplementation in India, Pakistan, Mali, and Tanzania: A dynamic microsimulation study.","authors":"Nicole Young,&nbsp;Alison Bowman,&nbsp;Kjell Swedin,&nbsp;James Collins,&nbsp;Nathaniel D Blair-Stahn,&nbsp;Paulina A Lindstedt,&nbsp;Christopher Troeger,&nbsp;Abraham D Flaxman","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1003902","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003902","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Malnutrition among women of childbearing age is especially prevalent in Asia and sub-Saharan Africa and can be harmful to the fetus during pregnancy. In the most recently available Demographic and Health Survey (DHS), approximately 10% to 20% of pregnant women in India, Pakistan, Mali, and Tanzania were undernourished (body mass index [BMI] &lt;18.5 kg/m2), and according to the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 study, approximately 20% of babies were born with low birth weight (LBW; &lt;2,500 g) in India, Pakistan, and Mali and 8% in Tanzania. Supplementing pregnant women with micro and macronutrients during the antenatal period can improve birth outcomes. Recently, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended antenatal multiple micronutrient supplementation (MMS) that includes iron and folic acid (IFA) in the context of rigorous research. Additionally, WHO recommends balanced energy protein (BEP) for undernourished populations. However, few studies have compared the cost-effectiveness of different supplementation regimens. We compared the cost-effectiveness of MMS and BEP with IFA to quantify their benefits in 4 countries with considerable prevalence of maternal undernutrition.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods and findings: &lt;/strong&gt;Using nationally representative estimates from the 2017 GBD study, we conducted an individual-based dynamic microsimulation of population cohorts from birth to 2 years of age in India, Pakistan, Mali, and Tanzania. We modeled the effect of maternal nutritional supplementation on infant birth weight, stunting and wasting using effect sizes from Cochrane systematic reviews and published literature. We used a payer's perspective and obtained costs of supplementation per pregnancy from the published literature. We compared disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in a baseline scenario with existing antenatal IFA coverage with scenarios where 90% of antenatal care (ANC) attendees receive either universal MMS, universal BEP, or MMS + targeted BEP (women with prepregnancy BMI &lt;18.5 kg/m2 receive BEP containing MMS while women with BMI ≥18.5 kg/m2 receive MMS). We obtained 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) for all outputs to represent parameter and stochastic uncertainty across 100 iterations of model runs. ICERs for all scenarios were lowest in Pakistan and greatest in Tanzania, in line with the baseline trend in prevalence of and attributable burden to LBW. MMS + targeted BEP averts more DALYs than universal MMS alone while remaining cost-effective. ICERs for universal MMS compared to baseline IFA were $52 (95% UI: $28 to $78) for Pakistan, $72 (95% UI: $37 to $118) for Mali, $70 (95% UI: $43 to $104) for India, and $253 (95% UI: $112 to $481) for Tanzania. ICERs for MMS + targeted BEP compared to baseline IFA were $54 (95% UI: $32 to $77) for Pakistan, $73 (95% UI: $40 to $104) for Mali, $83 (95% UI: $58 to $111) for India, and $245 (95% UI: $127 to $405) ","PeriodicalId":20368,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"19 2","pages":"e1003902"},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8863292/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39943240","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Vaccine equity: A fundamental imperative in the fight against COVID-19. 疫苗公平:抗击COVID-19的根本任务。
IF 15.8 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2022-02-22 eCollection Date: 2022-02-01 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003948
On March 11, 2020, WHO declared the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) a global pandemic. Now, almost 2 years on, COVID-19 continues to cause widespread morbidity, mortality, and disruption, both directly and indirectly, on a global scale. The speed at which multiple effective vaccines were developed is a remarkable achievement and testament to scientific advances and collaboration. However, numerous barriers to global vaccination efforts have left 47% of the world’s population unvaccinated or only partially vaccinated to date, with huge disparities between countries in the proportion of fully vaccinated individuals ranging from 0% to 95% [1]. Barriers such as vaccine hesitancy and anti-vaccine movements have hindered the progress of vaccination efforts, and have been perpetuated by fears over vaccine safety and the spread of misinformation and disinformation, despite the wealth of evidence supporting the benefits of vaccination. Adding to the evidence on vaccine safety, in this issue of PLOS Medicine, William Whiteley [2] and Steven Kerr [3] and respective colleagues have shown in large-scale observational studies that the OxfordAstraZeneca vaccine is associated with no more than a small elevated risk of intracranial venous thrombosis and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, respectively. The risks of cerebral venous thromboses are far greater following COVID-19 infection [4], further underlining the demonstrated benefits of vaccination. Inequity of access to vaccines has posed a significant barrier to vaccination in lowand middle-income countries (LMICs), despite calls for action to achieve equitable distribution and production of COVID vaccines from WHO [5] and the UN Development Programme [6]. In addition to the health risks to unvaccinated individuals of contracting COVID-19, greater opportunities for infections and viral mutations [7] leave the world vulnerable to the emergence of new variants which threaten to evade our defences and undo progress made. Most recently, this has been seen in the emergence of the Omicron variant of concern. It is without doubt that vaccination rollout must be equitable and fair on a global scale. Despite tireless efforts by public health experts to extol the benefits of vaccine equity throughout the pandemic, global vaccination rates remain woefully unequal. As of February 1, 2022, approximately 183 COVID-19 vaccine doses had been administered per 100 people in high-income countries, compared to just 14 doses per 100 people in LMICs [8]. The COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access (COVAX) initiative was launched in April 2020 with the intention of addressing this imbalance through accelerated development, production and equitable distribution of vaccines. Yet, by December 30, 2021, only 7 African countries had achieved their target 40% vaccination rates [9], which leaves us with the question of how vaccine inequity can be tackled and what can be done to overcome barriers to vaccinati
{"title":"Vaccine equity: A fundamental imperative in the fight against COVID-19.","authors":"","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1003948","DOIUrl":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1003948","url":null,"abstract":"On March 11, 2020, WHO declared the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) a global pandemic. Now, almost 2 years on, COVID-19 continues to cause widespread morbidity, mortality, and disruption, both directly and indirectly, on a global scale. The speed at which multiple effective vaccines were developed is a remarkable achievement and testament to scientific advances and collaboration. However, numerous barriers to global vaccination efforts have left 47% of the world’s population unvaccinated or only partially vaccinated to date, with huge disparities between countries in the proportion of fully vaccinated individuals ranging from 0% to 95% [1]. Barriers such as vaccine hesitancy and anti-vaccine movements have hindered the progress of vaccination efforts, and have been perpetuated by fears over vaccine safety and the spread of misinformation and disinformation, despite the wealth of evidence supporting the benefits of vaccination. Adding to the evidence on vaccine safety, in this issue of PLOS Medicine, William Whiteley [2] and Steven Kerr [3] and respective colleagues have shown in large-scale observational studies that the OxfordAstraZeneca vaccine is associated with no more than a small elevated risk of intracranial venous thrombosis and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, respectively. The risks of cerebral venous thromboses are far greater following COVID-19 infection [4], further underlining the demonstrated benefits of vaccination. Inequity of access to vaccines has posed a significant barrier to vaccination in lowand middle-income countries (LMICs), despite calls for action to achieve equitable distribution and production of COVID vaccines from WHO [5] and the UN Development Programme [6]. In addition to the health risks to unvaccinated individuals of contracting COVID-19, greater opportunities for infections and viral mutations [7] leave the world vulnerable to the emergence of new variants which threaten to evade our defences and undo progress made. Most recently, this has been seen in the emergence of the Omicron variant of concern. It is without doubt that vaccination rollout must be equitable and fair on a global scale. Despite tireless efforts by public health experts to extol the benefits of vaccine equity throughout the pandemic, global vaccination rates remain woefully unequal. As of February 1, 2022, approximately 183 COVID-19 vaccine doses had been administered per 100 people in high-income countries, compared to just 14 doses per 100 people in LMICs [8]. The COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access (COVAX) initiative was launched in April 2020 with the intention of addressing this imbalance through accelerated development, production and equitable distribution of vaccines. Yet, by December 30, 2021, only 7 African countries had achieved their target 40% vaccination rates [9], which leaves us with the question of how vaccine inequity can be tackled and what can be done to overcome barriers to vaccinati","PeriodicalId":20368,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"19 2","pages":"e1003948"},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8863246/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39944090","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13
Phylogeography and transmission of M. tuberculosis in Moldova: A prospective genomic analysis. 摩尔多瓦结核分枝杆菌的系统地理学和传播:一项前瞻性基因组分析。
IF 15.8 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2022-02-22 eCollection Date: 2022-02-01 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003933
Chongguang Yang, Benjamin Sobkowiak, Vijay Naidu, Alexandru Codreanu, Nelly Ciobanu, Kenneth S Gunasekera, Melanie H Chitwood, Sofia Alexandru, Stela Bivol, Marcus Russi, Joshua Havumaki, Patrick Cudahy, Heather Fosburgh, Christopher J Allender, Heather Centner, David M Engelthaler, Nicolas A Menzies, Joshua L Warren, Valeriu Crudu, Caroline Colijn, Ted Cohen

Background: The incidence of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) remains critically high in countries of the former Soviet Union, where >20% of new cases and >50% of previously treated cases have resistance to rifampin and isoniazid. Transmission of resistant strains, as opposed to resistance selected through inadequate treatment of drug-susceptible tuberculosis (TB), is the main driver of incident MDR-TB in these countries.

Methods and findings: We conducted a prospective, genomic analysis of all culture-positive TB cases diagnosed in 2018 and 2019 in the Republic of Moldova. We used phylogenetic methods to identify putative transmission clusters; spatial and demographic data were analyzed to further describe local transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Of 2,236 participants, 779 (36%) had MDR-TB, of whom 386 (50%) had never been treated previously for TB. Moreover, 92% of multidrug-resistant M. tuberculosis strains belonged to putative transmission clusters. Phylogenetic reconstruction identified 3 large clades that were comprised nearly uniformly of MDR-TB: 2 of these clades were of Beijing lineage, and 1 of Ural lineage, and each had additional distinct clade-specific second-line drug resistance mutations and geographic distributions. Spatial and temporal proximity between pairs of cases within a cluster was associated with greater genomic similarity. Our study lasted for only 2 years, a relatively short duration compared with the natural history of TB, and, thus, the ability to infer the full extent of transmission is limited.

Conclusions: The MDR-TB epidemic in Moldova is associated with the local transmission of multiple M. tuberculosis strains, including distinct clades of highly drug-resistant M. tuberculosis with varying geographic distributions and drug resistance profiles. This study demonstrates the role of comprehensive genomic surveillance for understanding the transmission of M. tuberculosis and highlights the urgency of interventions to interrupt transmission of highly drug-resistant M. tuberculosis.

背景:在前苏联国家,耐多药结核病(MDR-TB)的发病率仍然非常高,在这些国家,超过20%的新病例和超过50%的既往治疗病例对利福平和异烟肼有耐药性。耐药菌株的传播,而不是通过对药物敏感结核病的治疗不足而选择的耐药性,是这些国家耐多药结核病事件的主要驱动因素。方法和发现:我们对摩尔多瓦共和国2018年和2019年诊断的所有培养阳性结核病病例进行了前瞻性基因组分析。我们使用系统发育方法来识别假定的传播集群;对空间和人口统计学数据进行分析,以进一步描述结核分枝杆菌的本地传播。在2236名参与者中,779人(36%)患有耐多药结核病,其中386人(50%)以前从未接受过结核病治疗。此外,92%的耐多药结核分枝杆菌菌株属于假定的传播集群。系统发育重建确定了3个大的分支,它们几乎一致地由耐多药结核病组成:其中2个分支属于北京谱系,1个属于乌拉尔谱系,每个分支都有额外的独特的分支特异性二线耐药性突变和地理分布。集群内成对病例之间的空间和时间接近性与更大的基因组相似性相关。我们的研究只持续了2年,与结核病的自然史相比,持续时间相对较短,因此,推断传播全面程度的能力有限。结论:摩尔多瓦耐多药结核病的流行与多种结核分枝杆菌菌株的本地传播有关,包括具有不同地理分布和耐药性特征的高耐药性结核分枝杆菌的不同分支。这项研究证明了全面的基因组监测在了解结核分枝杆菌传播方面的作用,并强调了干预措施中断高耐药性结核分枝杆菌的传播的紧迫性。
{"title":"Phylogeography and transmission of M. tuberculosis in Moldova: A prospective genomic analysis.","authors":"Chongguang Yang,&nbsp;Benjamin Sobkowiak,&nbsp;Vijay Naidu,&nbsp;Alexandru Codreanu,&nbsp;Nelly Ciobanu,&nbsp;Kenneth S Gunasekera,&nbsp;Melanie H Chitwood,&nbsp;Sofia Alexandru,&nbsp;Stela Bivol,&nbsp;Marcus Russi,&nbsp;Joshua Havumaki,&nbsp;Patrick Cudahy,&nbsp;Heather Fosburgh,&nbsp;Christopher J Allender,&nbsp;Heather Centner,&nbsp;David M Engelthaler,&nbsp;Nicolas A Menzies,&nbsp;Joshua L Warren,&nbsp;Valeriu Crudu,&nbsp;Caroline Colijn,&nbsp;Ted Cohen","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1003933","DOIUrl":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1003933","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The incidence of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) remains critically high in countries of the former Soviet Union, where >20% of new cases and >50% of previously treated cases have resistance to rifampin and isoniazid. Transmission of resistant strains, as opposed to resistance selected through inadequate treatment of drug-susceptible tuberculosis (TB), is the main driver of incident MDR-TB in these countries.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>We conducted a prospective, genomic analysis of all culture-positive TB cases diagnosed in 2018 and 2019 in the Republic of Moldova. We used phylogenetic methods to identify putative transmission clusters; spatial and demographic data were analyzed to further describe local transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Of 2,236 participants, 779 (36%) had MDR-TB, of whom 386 (50%) had never been treated previously for TB. Moreover, 92% of multidrug-resistant M. tuberculosis strains belonged to putative transmission clusters. Phylogenetic reconstruction identified 3 large clades that were comprised nearly uniformly of MDR-TB: 2 of these clades were of Beijing lineage, and 1 of Ural lineage, and each had additional distinct clade-specific second-line drug resistance mutations and geographic distributions. Spatial and temporal proximity between pairs of cases within a cluster was associated with greater genomic similarity. Our study lasted for only 2 years, a relatively short duration compared with the natural history of TB, and, thus, the ability to infer the full extent of transmission is limited.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The MDR-TB epidemic in Moldova is associated with the local transmission of multiple M. tuberculosis strains, including distinct clades of highly drug-resistant M. tuberculosis with varying geographic distributions and drug resistance profiles. This study demonstrates the role of comprehensive genomic surveillance for understanding the transmission of M. tuberculosis and highlights the urgency of interventions to interrupt transmission of highly drug-resistant M. tuberculosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":20368,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"19 2","pages":"e1003933"},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8903246/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39944091","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12
Learning from the COVID-19 pandemic to strengthen routine immunization systems. 从COVID-19大流行中吸取教训,加强常规免疫系统。
IF 15.8 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2022-02-22 eCollection Date: 2022-02-01 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003934
Kate Causey, Jonathan F Mosser

Kate Causey and Jonathan F Mosser discuss what can be learnt from the observed impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on routine immunisation systems.

Kate Causey和Jonathan F Mosser讨论了从观察到的新冠肺炎大流行对常规免疫系统的影响中可以学到什么。
{"title":"Learning from the COVID-19 pandemic to strengthen routine immunization systems.","authors":"Kate Causey,&nbsp;Jonathan F Mosser","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1003934","DOIUrl":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1003934","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Kate Causey and Jonathan F Mosser discuss what can be learnt from the observed impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on routine immunisation systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":20368,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"19 2","pages":"e1003934"},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8863284/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39944085","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
The global gap in treatment coverage for major depressive disorder in 84 countries from 2000-2019: A systematic review and Bayesian meta-regression analysis. 2000-2019年84个国家重度抑郁症治疗覆盖率的全球差距:系统回顾和贝叶斯元回归分析
IF 15.8 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2022-02-15 eCollection Date: 2022-02-01 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003901
Modhurima Moitra, Damian Santomauro, Pamela Y Collins, Theo Vos, Harvey Whiteford, Shekhar Saxena, Alize J Ferrari

Background: The treatment coverage for major depressive disorder (MDD) is low in many parts of the world despite MDD being a major contributor to disability globally. Most existing reviews of MDD treatment coverage do not account for potential sources of study-level heterogeneity that contribute to variation in reported treatment rates. This study aims to provide a comprehensive review of the evidence and analytically quantify sources of heterogeneity to report updated estimates of MDD treatment coverage and gaps by location and treatment type between 2000 and 2019.

Methods and findings: A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify relevant studies that provided data on treatment rates for MDD between January 1, 2000, and November 26, 2021, from 2 online scholarly databases PubMed and Embase. Cohort and cross-sectional studies were included if treatment rates pertaining to the last 12 months or less were reported directly or if sufficient information was available to calculate this along with 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). Studies were included if they made use of population-based surveys that were representative of communities, countries, or regions under study. Studies were included if they used established diagnostic criteria to diagnose cases of MDD. Sample and methodological characteristics were extracted from selected studies. Treatment rates were modeled using a Bayesian meta-regression approach and adjusted for select covariates that quantified heterogeneity in the data. These covariates included age, sex, treatment type, location, and choice of MDD assessment tool. A total of 149 studies were included for quantitative analysis. Treatment coverage for health service use ranged from 51% [95% UI 20%, 82%] in high-income locations to 20% [95% UI 1%, 53%] in low- and lower middle-income locations. Treatment coverage for mental health service use ranged from 33% [95% UI 8%, 66%] in high-income locations to 8% [95% UI <1%, 36%] in low- and lower middle-income countries. Minimally adequate treatment (MAT) rates ranged from 23% [95% UI 2%, 55%] in high-income countries to 3% [95% UI <1%, 25%]) in low- and lower middle-income countries. A primary methodological limitation was the lack of sufficient data from low- and lower middle-income countries, which precluded our ability to provide more detailed treatment rate estimates.

Conclusions: In this study, we observed that the treatment coverage for MDD continues to be low in many parts of the world and in particular in low- and lower middle-income countries. There is a continued need for routine data collection that will help obtain more accurate estimates of treatment coverage globally.

背景:尽管重度抑郁症(MDD)是全球致残的主要原因,但在世界许多地区,重度抑郁症(MDD)的治疗覆盖率很低。大多数关于重度抑郁症治疗覆盖率的现有综述没有考虑到研究水平异质性的潜在来源,这些异质性导致了报告的治疗率的变化。本研究旨在对证据进行全面审查,并对异质性来源进行分析量化,以报告2000年至2019年间按地点和治疗类型划分的MDD治疗覆盖率和差距的最新估计。方法和发现:对文献进行系统回顾,以确定2000年1月1日至2021年11月26日期间提供重度抑郁症治疗率数据的相关研究,这些数据来自PubMed和Embase两个在线学术数据库。如果直接报告过去12个月或更短时间的治疗率,或者如果有足够的信息可以计算治疗率和95%不确定区间(UIs),则纳入队列和横断面研究。如果研究采用了具有代表性的社区、国家或地区的基于人口的调查,则纳入研究。如果研究使用已建立的诊断标准来诊断重度抑郁症病例,则纳入研究。从选定的研究中提取样本和方法学特征。治疗率采用贝叶斯元回归方法建模,并根据量化数据异质性的选定协变量进行调整。这些协变量包括年龄、性别、治疗类型、地点和MDD评估工具的选择。共纳入149项研究进行定量分析。医疗服务使用的治疗覆盖率在高收入地区为51% [95% UI 20%, 82%],在低收入和中低收入地区为20% [95% UI 1%, 53%]。精神卫生服务使用的治疗覆盖率从高收入地区的33% (95% UI, 8%, 66%)到8% (95% UI)不等。结论:在本研究中,我们观察到,在世界许多地区,特别是在低收入和中低收入国家,重度抑郁症的治疗覆盖率仍然很低。继续需要常规数据收集,这将有助于获得更准确的全球治疗覆盖率估计。
{"title":"The global gap in treatment coverage for major depressive disorder in 84 countries from 2000-2019: A systematic review and Bayesian meta-regression analysis.","authors":"Modhurima Moitra,&nbsp;Damian Santomauro,&nbsp;Pamela Y Collins,&nbsp;Theo Vos,&nbsp;Harvey Whiteford,&nbsp;Shekhar Saxena,&nbsp;Alize J Ferrari","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1003901","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003901","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The treatment coverage for major depressive disorder (MDD) is low in many parts of the world despite MDD being a major contributor to disability globally. Most existing reviews of MDD treatment coverage do not account for potential sources of study-level heterogeneity that contribute to variation in reported treatment rates. This study aims to provide a comprehensive review of the evidence and analytically quantify sources of heterogeneity to report updated estimates of MDD treatment coverage and gaps by location and treatment type between 2000 and 2019.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify relevant studies that provided data on treatment rates for MDD between January 1, 2000, and November 26, 2021, from 2 online scholarly databases PubMed and Embase. Cohort and cross-sectional studies were included if treatment rates pertaining to the last 12 months or less were reported directly or if sufficient information was available to calculate this along with 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). Studies were included if they made use of population-based surveys that were representative of communities, countries, or regions under study. Studies were included if they used established diagnostic criteria to diagnose cases of MDD. Sample and methodological characteristics were extracted from selected studies. Treatment rates were modeled using a Bayesian meta-regression approach and adjusted for select covariates that quantified heterogeneity in the data. These covariates included age, sex, treatment type, location, and choice of MDD assessment tool. A total of 149 studies were included for quantitative analysis. Treatment coverage for health service use ranged from 51% [95% UI 20%, 82%] in high-income locations to 20% [95% UI 1%, 53%] in low- and lower middle-income locations. Treatment coverage for mental health service use ranged from 33% [95% UI 8%, 66%] in high-income locations to 8% [95% UI <1%, 36%] in low- and lower middle-income countries. Minimally adequate treatment (MAT) rates ranged from 23% [95% UI 2%, 55%] in high-income countries to 3% [95% UI <1%, 25%]) in low- and lower middle-income countries. A primary methodological limitation was the lack of sufficient data from low- and lower middle-income countries, which precluded our ability to provide more detailed treatment rate estimates.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this study, we observed that the treatment coverage for MDD continues to be low in many parts of the world and in particular in low- and lower middle-income countries. There is a continued need for routine data collection that will help obtain more accurate estimates of treatment coverage globally.</p>","PeriodicalId":20368,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"19 2","pages":"e1003901"},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8846511/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39925981","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 46
Excess years of life lost to COVID-19 and other causes of death by sex, neighbourhood deprivation, and region in England and Wales during 2020: A registry-based study. 2020年期间英格兰和威尔士按性别、邻里剥夺和地区划分的因COVID-19和其他死亡原因造成的额外寿命损失:一项基于登记的研究。
IF 15.8 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2022-02-15 eCollection Date: 2022-02-01 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003904
Evangelos Kontopantelis, Mamas A Mamas, Roger T Webb, Ana Castro, Martin K Rutter, Chris P Gale, Darren M Ashcroft, Matthias Pierce, Kathryn M Abel, Gareth Price, Corinne Faivre-Finn, Harriette G C Van Spall, Michelle M Graham, Marcello Morciano, Glen P Martin, Matt Sutton, Tim Doran
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Deaths in the first year of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in England and Wales were unevenly distributed socioeconomically and geographically. However, the full scale of inequalities may have been underestimated to date, as most measures of excess mortality do not adequately account for varying age profiles of deaths between social groups. We measured years of life lost (YLL) attributable to the pandemic, directly or indirectly, comparing mortality across geographic and socioeconomic groups.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>We used national mortality registers in England and Wales, from 27 December 2014 until 25 December 2020, covering 3,265,937 deaths. YLLs (main outcome) were calculated using 2019 single year sex-specific life tables for England and Wales. Interrupted time-series analyses, with panel time-series models, were used to estimate expected YLL by sex, geographical region, and deprivation quintile between 7 March 2020 and 25 December 2020 by cause: direct deaths (COVID-19 and other respiratory diseases), cardiovascular disease and diabetes, cancer, and other indirect deaths (all other causes). Excess YLL during the pandemic period were calculated by subtracting observed from expected values. Additional analyses focused on excess deaths for region and deprivation strata, by age-group. Between 7 March 2020 and 25 December 2020, there were an estimated 763,550 (95% CI: 696,826 to 830,273) excess YLL in England and Wales, equivalent to a 15% (95% CI: 14 to 16) increase in YLL compared to the equivalent time period in 2019. There was a strong deprivation gradient in all-cause excess YLL, with rates per 100,000 population ranging from 916 (95% CI: 820 to 1,012) for the least deprived quintile to 1,645 (95% CI: 1,472 to 1,819) for the most deprived. The differences in excess YLL between deprivation quintiles were greatest in younger age groups; for all-cause deaths, a mean of 9.1 years per death (95% CI: 8.2 to 10.0) were lost in the least deprived quintile, compared to 10.8 (95% CI: 10.0 to 11.6) in the most deprived; for COVID-19 and other respiratory deaths, a mean of 8.9 years per death (95% CI: 8.7 to 9.1) were lost in the least deprived quintile, compared to 11.2 (95% CI: 11.0 to 11.5) in the most deprived. For all-cause mortality, estimated deaths in the most deprived compared to the most affluent areas were much higher in younger age groups, but similar for those aged 85 or over. There was marked variability in both all-cause and direct excess YLL by region, with the highest rates in the North West. Limitations include the quasi-experimental nature of the research design and the requirement for accurate and timely recording.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this study, we observed strong socioeconomic and geographical health inequalities in YLL, during the first calendar year of the COVID-19 pandemic. These were in line with long-standing existing inequalities in En
背景:2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行第一年,英格兰和威尔士的死亡人数在社会、经济和地理上分布不均匀。然而,迄今为止,不平等的全面程度可能被低估了,因为大多数关于超额死亡率的措施没有充分考虑到不同社会群体之间死亡的年龄分布。我们测量了直接或间接归因于大流行的生命损失年数(YLL),比较了不同地理和社会经济群体的死亡率。方法和结果:我们使用了2014年12月27日至2020年12月25日期间英格兰和威尔士的全国死亡率登记册,涵盖了3,265,937例死亡。使用2019年英格兰和威尔士的单年度性别特定生命表计算yls(主要结果)。使用小组时间序列模型进行中断时间序列分析,按性别、地理区域和贫困五分位数估计2020年3月7日至2020年12月25日期间的预期YLL,按原因分列:直接死亡(COVID-19和其他呼吸道疾病)、心血管疾病和糖尿病、癌症和其他间接死亡(所有其他原因)。用期望值减去观测值来计算大流行期间的过量YLL。其他分析侧重于按年龄组划分的区域和贫困阶层的超额死亡。在2020年3月7日至2020年12月25日期间,英格兰和威尔士估计有763,550例(95% CI: 696,826至830,273)多余的YLL,相当于与2019年同期相比增加了15% (95% CI: 14至16)。在全因过量的YLL中存在很强的剥夺梯度,每10万人中最贫困的五分位数为916人(95% CI: 820至1,012),最贫困的五分位数为1,645人(95% CI: 1,472至1,819)。剥夺五分位数之间的超额YLL差异在年轻年龄组中最大;对于全因死亡,在最贫困的五分位数中,每例死亡平均损失9.1年(95% CI: 8.2至10.0),而在最贫困的五分位数中,每例死亡平均损失10.8年(95% CI: 10.0至11.6);对于COVID-19和其他呼吸系统死亡,在最贫困的五分之一人群中,每例死亡平均损失8.9年(95% CI: 8.7至9.1),而在最贫困的五分之一人群中,这一数字为11.2年(95% CI: 11.0至11.5)。就全因死亡率而言,与最富裕地区相比,最贫困地区较年轻年龄组的估计死亡率要高得多,但85岁或以上年龄组的估计死亡率相似。各地区的全因和直接过量YLL均有显著差异,西北地区的比率最高。限制包括研究设计的准实验性质以及对准确和及时记录的要求。结论:在本研究中,我们观察到在COVID-19大流行的第一个日历年中,YLL存在强烈的社会经济和地理卫生不平等。这与英格兰和威尔士长期存在的不平等现象是一致的,最贫困的地区报告的潜在YLL人数最多。
{"title":"Excess years of life lost to COVID-19 and other causes of death by sex, neighbourhood deprivation, and region in England and Wales during 2020: A registry-based study.","authors":"Evangelos Kontopantelis,&nbsp;Mamas A Mamas,&nbsp;Roger T Webb,&nbsp;Ana Castro,&nbsp;Martin K Rutter,&nbsp;Chris P Gale,&nbsp;Darren M Ashcroft,&nbsp;Matthias Pierce,&nbsp;Kathryn M Abel,&nbsp;Gareth Price,&nbsp;Corinne Faivre-Finn,&nbsp;Harriette G C Van Spall,&nbsp;Michelle M Graham,&nbsp;Marcello Morciano,&nbsp;Glen P Martin,&nbsp;Matt Sutton,&nbsp;Tim Doran","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1003904","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003904","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Deaths in the first year of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in England and Wales were unevenly distributed socioeconomically and geographically. However, the full scale of inequalities may have been underestimated to date, as most measures of excess mortality do not adequately account for varying age profiles of deaths between social groups. We measured years of life lost (YLL) attributable to the pandemic, directly or indirectly, comparing mortality across geographic and socioeconomic groups.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods and findings: &lt;/strong&gt;We used national mortality registers in England and Wales, from 27 December 2014 until 25 December 2020, covering 3,265,937 deaths. YLLs (main outcome) were calculated using 2019 single year sex-specific life tables for England and Wales. Interrupted time-series analyses, with panel time-series models, were used to estimate expected YLL by sex, geographical region, and deprivation quintile between 7 March 2020 and 25 December 2020 by cause: direct deaths (COVID-19 and other respiratory diseases), cardiovascular disease and diabetes, cancer, and other indirect deaths (all other causes). Excess YLL during the pandemic period were calculated by subtracting observed from expected values. Additional analyses focused on excess deaths for region and deprivation strata, by age-group. Between 7 March 2020 and 25 December 2020, there were an estimated 763,550 (95% CI: 696,826 to 830,273) excess YLL in England and Wales, equivalent to a 15% (95% CI: 14 to 16) increase in YLL compared to the equivalent time period in 2019. There was a strong deprivation gradient in all-cause excess YLL, with rates per 100,000 population ranging from 916 (95% CI: 820 to 1,012) for the least deprived quintile to 1,645 (95% CI: 1,472 to 1,819) for the most deprived. The differences in excess YLL between deprivation quintiles were greatest in younger age groups; for all-cause deaths, a mean of 9.1 years per death (95% CI: 8.2 to 10.0) were lost in the least deprived quintile, compared to 10.8 (95% CI: 10.0 to 11.6) in the most deprived; for COVID-19 and other respiratory deaths, a mean of 8.9 years per death (95% CI: 8.7 to 9.1) were lost in the least deprived quintile, compared to 11.2 (95% CI: 11.0 to 11.5) in the most deprived. For all-cause mortality, estimated deaths in the most deprived compared to the most affluent areas were much higher in younger age groups, but similar for those aged 85 or over. There was marked variability in both all-cause and direct excess YLL by region, with the highest rates in the North West. Limitations include the quasi-experimental nature of the research design and the requirement for accurate and timely recording.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions: &lt;/strong&gt;In this study, we observed strong socioeconomic and geographical health inequalities in YLL, during the first calendar year of the COVID-19 pandemic. These were in line with long-standing existing inequalities in En","PeriodicalId":20368,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"19 2","pages":"e1003904"},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8846534/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39925975","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18
Monetary incentives and peer referral in promoting secondary distribution of HIV self-testing among men who have sex with men in China: A randomized controlled trial. 金钱激励和同伴转诊促进中国男男性行为者艾滋病病毒自检二次分发:一项随机对照试验
IF 15.8 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2022-02-14 eCollection Date: 2022-02-01 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003928
Yi Zhou, Ying Lu, Yuxin Ni, Dan Wu, Xi He, Jason J Ong, Joseph D Tucker, Sean Y Sylvia, Fengshi Jing, Xiaofeng Li, Shanzi Huang, Guangquan Shen, Chen Xu, Yuan Xiong, Yongjie Sha, Mengyuan Cheng, Junjie Xu, Hongbo Jiang, Wencan Dai, Liqun Huang, Fei Zou, Cheng Wang, Bin Yang, Wenhua Mei, Weiming Tang
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Digital network-based methods may enhance peer distribution of HIV self-testing (HIVST) kits, but interventions that can optimize this approach are needed. We aimed to assess whether monetary incentives and peer referral could improve a secondary distribution program for HIVST among men who have sex with men (MSM) in China.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>Between October 21, 2019 and September 14, 2020, a 3-arm randomized controlled, single-blinded trial was conducted online among 309 individuals (defined as index participants) who were assigned male at birth, aged 18 years or older, ever had male-to-male sex, willing to order HIVST kits online, and consented to take surveys online. We randomly assigned index participants into one of the 3 arms: (1) standard secondary distribution (control) group (n = 102); (2) secondary distribution with monetary incentives (SD-M) group (n = 103); and (3) secondary distribution with monetary incentives plus peer referral (SD-M-PR) group (n = 104). Index participants in 3 groups were encouraged to order HIVST kits online and distribute to members within their social networks. Members who received kits directly from index participants or through peer referral links from index MSM were defined as alters. Index participants in the 2 intervention groups could receive a fixed incentive ($3 USD) online for the verified test result uploaded to the digital platform by each unique alter. Index participants in the SD-M-PR group could additionally have a personalized peer referral link for alters to order kits online. Both index participants and alters needed to pay a refundable deposit ($15 USD) for ordering a kit. All index participants were assigned an online 3-month follow-up survey after ordering kits. The primary outcomes were the mean number of alters motivated by index participants in each arm and the mean number of newly tested alters motivated by index participants in each arm. These were assessed using zero-inflated negative binomial regression to determine the group differences in the mean number of alters and the mean number of newly tested alters motivated by index participants. Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. We also conducted an economic evaluation using microcosting from a health provider perspective with a 3-month time horizon. The mean number of unique tested alters motivated by index participants was 0.57 ± 0.96 (mean ± standard deviation [SD]) in the control group, compared with 0.98 ± 1.38 in the SD-M group (mean difference [MD] = 0.41),and 1.78 ± 2.05 in the SD-M-PR group (MD = 1.21). The mean number of newly tested alters motivated by index participants was 0.16 ± 0.39 (mean ± SD) in the control group, compared with 0.41 ± 0.73 in the SD-M group (MD = 0.25) and 0.57 ± 0.91 in the SD-M-PR group (MD = 0.41), respectively. Results indicated that index participants in intervention arms were more likely to motivate unique tested alters (
背景:基于数字网络的方法可能会加强艾滋病毒自我检测(HIVST)试剂盒的同伴分发,但需要能够优化这种方法的干预措施。我们的目的是评估金钱激励和同伴推荐是否可以改善中国男男性行为者(MSM)中hiv的二次分发方案。方法和研究结果:在2019年10月21日至2020年9月14日期间,在309名(定义为指数参与者)中进行了一项3组随机对照单盲试验,这些人在出生时被指定为男性,年龄在18岁或以上,曾经发生过男性间的性行为,愿意在线订购艾滋病毒检测试剂盒,并同意在线接受调查。我们将指标参与者随机分配到三个组中的一个:(1)标准二次分布(对照组)组(n = 102);(2)有货币激励的二次分配(SD-M)组(n = 103);(3)有货币激励加同伴推荐的二次分配(SD-M-PR)组(n = 104)。鼓励三个组的指数参与者在线订购艾滋病毒传播工具包,并在其社交网络中分发给成员。直接从索引参与者或通过索引男男性行为者的同行推荐链接获得工具包的成员被定义为更改者。两个干预组的指数参与者可以在线获得固定奖励(3美元),用于通过每个唯一更改将验证的测试结果上传到数字平台。SD-M-PR组的索引参与者还可以有一个个性化的同伴推荐链接,以便更改在线订购工具包。指数参与者和更改者都需要支付可退还的押金(15美元)来订购工具包。所有指数参与者在订购工具包后都被分配了一个为期3个月的在线跟踪调查。主要结果是每组中指标参与者的平均改变数和每组中指标参与者的平均新测试改变数。这些评估使用零膨胀负二项回归,以确定在平均数量的改变和平均数量的新测试的改变由指数参与者的动机组的差异。在意向治疗基础上进行分析。我们还从医疗服务提供者的角度进行了为期3个月的微观成本经济评估。由指标被试引起的独特改变数,对照组平均为0.57±0.96(均数±标准差[SD]), SD- m组为0.98±1.38(均数差[MD] = 0.41), SD- m - pr组为1.78±2.05 (MD = 1.21)。对照组新测改变数为0.16±0.39 (mean±SD), SD- m组为0.41±0.73 (MD = 0.25), SD- m - pr组为0.57±0.91 (MD = 0.41)。结果表明,干预组的指数参与者更有可能激发独特的测试改变(对照与SD-M:发病率比[IRR = 2.98, 95% CI = 1.82 ~ 4.89, p值< 0.001;对照SD-M- pr: IRR = 3.26, 95% CI = 2.29 ~ 4.63, p值< 0.001)和新检测的改变者(对照SD-M: IRR = 4.22, 95% CI = 1.93 ~ 9.23, p值< 0.001;对照SD-M-PR: IRR = 3.49, 95% CI = 1.92 ~ 6.37, p值< 0.001)进行hiv - st。对照组新测者比例为28%,SD-M组为42%,SD-M- pr组为32%。共有18名测试者(3名指数参与者和15名改变者)被检测为HIV阳性,三组之间改变者的HIV反应率相似。794名测试人员的总成本为19,485.97美元,其中包括450名指数参与者和344名更改测试人员。总的来说,每个测试人员的平均成本是24.54美元,每个变更测试人员的平均成本是56.65美元。尽管SD-M- pr的效果更大,但在测试的改变和新测试的改变方面,平均而言,单独的金钱激励(SD-M组)比同伴推荐的金钱激励(SD-M- pr组)更具成本效益。与对照组相比,SD-M组每增加一个alter tester的成本为14.90美元,SD-M- pr组为16.61美元。对于新测试的改变,SD-M组每增加一个改变的成本为24.65美元,SD-M- pr组为49.07美元。研究期间未报告与研究相关的不良事件。限制包括数字网络方法可能会忽视缺乏互联网接入的个人。结论:单纯的金钱激励和金钱激励与同伴转诊相结合的干预可以促进hiv在男男性行为者中的二次分布。金钱奖励也可以通过鼓励男男性行为者通过二次分发进行首次检测来扩大艾滋病毒检测。这种基于社交网络的数字方法可以扩展到其他公共卫生研究,特别是在2019年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)时代。试验注册:中国临床试验注册中心(ChiCTR) ChiCTR1900025433。
{"title":"Monetary incentives and peer referral in promoting secondary distribution of HIV self-testing among men who have sex with men in China: A randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Yi Zhou,&nbsp;Ying Lu,&nbsp;Yuxin Ni,&nbsp;Dan Wu,&nbsp;Xi He,&nbsp;Jason J Ong,&nbsp;Joseph D Tucker,&nbsp;Sean Y Sylvia,&nbsp;Fengshi Jing,&nbsp;Xiaofeng Li,&nbsp;Shanzi Huang,&nbsp;Guangquan Shen,&nbsp;Chen Xu,&nbsp;Yuan Xiong,&nbsp;Yongjie Sha,&nbsp;Mengyuan Cheng,&nbsp;Junjie Xu,&nbsp;Hongbo Jiang,&nbsp;Wencan Dai,&nbsp;Liqun Huang,&nbsp;Fei Zou,&nbsp;Cheng Wang,&nbsp;Bin Yang,&nbsp;Wenhua Mei,&nbsp;Weiming Tang","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1003928","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003928","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Digital network-based methods may enhance peer distribution of HIV self-testing (HIVST) kits, but interventions that can optimize this approach are needed. We aimed to assess whether monetary incentives and peer referral could improve a secondary distribution program for HIVST among men who have sex with men (MSM) in China.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods and findings: &lt;/strong&gt;Between October 21, 2019 and September 14, 2020, a 3-arm randomized controlled, single-blinded trial was conducted online among 309 individuals (defined as index participants) who were assigned male at birth, aged 18 years or older, ever had male-to-male sex, willing to order HIVST kits online, and consented to take surveys online. We randomly assigned index participants into one of the 3 arms: (1) standard secondary distribution (control) group (n = 102); (2) secondary distribution with monetary incentives (SD-M) group (n = 103); and (3) secondary distribution with monetary incentives plus peer referral (SD-M-PR) group (n = 104). Index participants in 3 groups were encouraged to order HIVST kits online and distribute to members within their social networks. Members who received kits directly from index participants or through peer referral links from index MSM were defined as alters. Index participants in the 2 intervention groups could receive a fixed incentive ($3 USD) online for the verified test result uploaded to the digital platform by each unique alter. Index participants in the SD-M-PR group could additionally have a personalized peer referral link for alters to order kits online. Both index participants and alters needed to pay a refundable deposit ($15 USD) for ordering a kit. All index participants were assigned an online 3-month follow-up survey after ordering kits. The primary outcomes were the mean number of alters motivated by index participants in each arm and the mean number of newly tested alters motivated by index participants in each arm. These were assessed using zero-inflated negative binomial regression to determine the group differences in the mean number of alters and the mean number of newly tested alters motivated by index participants. Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. We also conducted an economic evaluation using microcosting from a health provider perspective with a 3-month time horizon. The mean number of unique tested alters motivated by index participants was 0.57 ± 0.96 (mean ± standard deviation [SD]) in the control group, compared with 0.98 ± 1.38 in the SD-M group (mean difference [MD] = 0.41),and 1.78 ± 2.05 in the SD-M-PR group (MD = 1.21). The mean number of newly tested alters motivated by index participants was 0.16 ± 0.39 (mean ± SD) in the control group, compared with 0.41 ± 0.73 in the SD-M group (MD = 0.25) and 0.57 ± 0.91 in the SD-M-PR group (MD = 0.41), respectively. Results indicated that index participants in intervention arms were more likely to motivate unique tested alters (","PeriodicalId":20368,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"19 2","pages":"e1003928"},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8887971/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39917496","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
Associations between lung function and physical and cognitive health in the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA): A cross-sectional study from a multicenter national cohort. 加拿大纵向老龄化研究(CLSA)中肺功能与身体和认知健康之间的关系:一项来自多中心国家队列的横断面研究。
IF 15.8 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2022-02-09 eCollection Date: 2022-02-01 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003909
MyLinh Duong, Ali Usman, Jinhui Ma, Yangqing Xie, Julie Huang, Michele Zaman, Alex Dragoman, Steven Jiatong Chen, Malik Farooqi, Parminder Raina

Background: Low lung function is associated with high mortality and adverse cardiopulmonary outcomes. Less is known of its association with broader health indices such as self-reported respiratory symptoms, perceived general health, and cognitive and physical performance. The present study seeks to address the association between forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), an indicator of lung function, with broad markers of general health, relevant to aging trajectory in the general population.

Methods and findings: From the Canadian general population, 22,822 adults (58% females, mean age 58.8 years [standard deviation (SD) 9.6]) were enrolled from the community between June 2012 and April 2015 from 11 Canadian cities and 7 provinces. Mixed effects regression was used to assess the cross-sectional relationship between FEV1 with self-reported respiratory symptoms, perceived poor general health, and cognitive and physical performance. All associations were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), education, smoking status, and self-reported comorbidities and expressed as adjusted odds ratios (aORs). Based on the Global Lung Function Initiative (GLI) reference values, 38% (n = 8,626) had normal FEV1 (z-scores >0), 37% (n = 8,514) mild (z-score 0 to > -1 SD), 19% (n = 4,353) moderate (z-score -1 to > -2 SD), and 6% (n = 1,329) severely low FEV1 (z-score = < -2 SD). There was a graded association between lower FEV1 with higher aOR [95% CI] of self-reported moderate to severe respiratory symptoms (mild FEV1 1.09 [0.99 to 1.20] p = 0.08, moderate 1.45 [1.28 to 1.63] p < 0.001, and severe 2.67 [2.21 to 3.23] p < 0.001]), perceived poor health (mild 1.07 [0.9 to 1.27] p = 0.45, moderate 1.48 [1.24 to 1.78] p = <0.001, and severe 1.82 [1.42 to 2.33] p < 0.001]), and impaired cognitive performance (mild 1.03 [0.95 to 1.12] p = 0.41, moderate 1.16 [1.04 to 1.28] p < 0.001, and severe 1.40 [1.19 to 1.64] p < 0.001]). Similar graded association was observed between lower FEV1 with lower physical performance on gait speed, Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, standing balance, and handgrip strength. These associations were consistent across different strata by age, sex, tobacco smoking, obstructive, and nonobstructive impairment on spirometry. A limitation of the current study is the observational nature of these findings and that causality cannot be inferred.

Conclusions: We observed graded associations between lower FEV1 with higher odds of disabling respiratory symptoms, perceived poor general health, and lower cognitive and physical performance. These findings support the broader implications of measured lung function on general health and aging trajectory.

背景:低肺功能与高死亡率和不良心肺结局相关。人们对其与更广泛的健康指数(如自我报告的呼吸道症状、感知的总体健康状况以及认知和身体表现)之间的关联知之甚少。本研究旨在探讨1秒用力呼气量(FEV1)这一肺功能指标与一般健康状况的广泛标志之间的关系,这与普通人群的衰老轨迹有关。方法和研究结果:2012年6月至2015年4月,从加拿大11个城市和7个省的社区招募了22,822名成年人(58%为女性,平均年龄58.8岁[标准差(SD) 9.6])。混合效应回归用于评估FEV1与自我报告的呼吸系统症状、总体健康状况不佳以及认知和身体表现之间的横断面关系。所有的关联根据年龄、性别、体重指数(BMI)、教育程度、吸烟状况和自我报告的合并症进行调整,并以调整优势比(aORs)表示。根据Global Lung Function Initiative (GLI)参考值,38% (n = 8,626)患者FEV1正常(z-score >0), 37% (n = 8,514)患者为轻度(z-score 0至> -1 SD), 19% (n = 4,353)患者为中度(z-score -1至> -2 SD), 6% (n = 1,329)患者为重度低FEV1 (z-score < -2 SD)。低FEV1与自我报告的中重度呼吸症状(轻度FEV1 1.09 [0.99 ~ 1.20] p = 0.08,中度FEV1 1.45 [1.28 ~ 1.63] p < 0.001,重度FEV1 2.67 [2.21 ~ 3.23] p < 0.001)、感知健康状况不佳(轻度FEV1 1.07 [0.9 ~ 1.27] p = 0.45,中度FEV1 1.48 [1.24 ~ 1.78] p = 0.45)的aOR (95% CI)呈分级相关性:我们观察到较低的FEV1与较高的致残呼吸道症状、总体健康状况不佳以及较低的认知和身体表现之间的分级关联。这些发现支持测量肺功能对一般健康和衰老轨迹的更广泛意义。
{"title":"Associations between lung function and physical and cognitive health in the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA): A cross-sectional study from a multicenter national cohort.","authors":"MyLinh Duong,&nbsp;Ali Usman,&nbsp;Jinhui Ma,&nbsp;Yangqing Xie,&nbsp;Julie Huang,&nbsp;Michele Zaman,&nbsp;Alex Dragoman,&nbsp;Steven Jiatong Chen,&nbsp;Malik Farooqi,&nbsp;Parminder Raina","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1003909","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003909","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Low lung function is associated with high mortality and adverse cardiopulmonary outcomes. Less is known of its association with broader health indices such as self-reported respiratory symptoms, perceived general health, and cognitive and physical performance. The present study seeks to address the association between forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), an indicator of lung function, with broad markers of general health, relevant to aging trajectory in the general population.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>From the Canadian general population, 22,822 adults (58% females, mean age 58.8 years [standard deviation (SD) 9.6]) were enrolled from the community between June 2012 and April 2015 from 11 Canadian cities and 7 provinces. Mixed effects regression was used to assess the cross-sectional relationship between FEV1 with self-reported respiratory symptoms, perceived poor general health, and cognitive and physical performance. All associations were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), education, smoking status, and self-reported comorbidities and expressed as adjusted odds ratios (aORs). Based on the Global Lung Function Initiative (GLI) reference values, 38% (n = 8,626) had normal FEV1 (z-scores >0), 37% (n = 8,514) mild (z-score 0 to > -1 SD), 19% (n = 4,353) moderate (z-score -1 to > -2 SD), and 6% (n = 1,329) severely low FEV1 (z-score = < -2 SD). There was a graded association between lower FEV1 with higher aOR [95% CI] of self-reported moderate to severe respiratory symptoms (mild FEV1 1.09 [0.99 to 1.20] p = 0.08, moderate 1.45 [1.28 to 1.63] p < 0.001, and severe 2.67 [2.21 to 3.23] p < 0.001]), perceived poor health (mild 1.07 [0.9 to 1.27] p = 0.45, moderate 1.48 [1.24 to 1.78] p = <0.001, and severe 1.82 [1.42 to 2.33] p < 0.001]), and impaired cognitive performance (mild 1.03 [0.95 to 1.12] p = 0.41, moderate 1.16 [1.04 to 1.28] p < 0.001, and severe 1.40 [1.19 to 1.64] p < 0.001]). Similar graded association was observed between lower FEV1 with lower physical performance on gait speed, Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, standing balance, and handgrip strength. These associations were consistent across different strata by age, sex, tobacco smoking, obstructive, and nonobstructive impairment on spirometry. A limitation of the current study is the observational nature of these findings and that causality cannot be inferred.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We observed graded associations between lower FEV1 with higher odds of disabling respiratory symptoms, perceived poor general health, and lower cognitive and physical performance. These findings support the broader implications of measured lung function on general health and aging trajectory.</p>","PeriodicalId":20368,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"19 2","pages":"e1003909"},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8870596/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39607883","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Information nudges for influenza vaccination: Evidence from a large-scale cluster-randomized controlled trial in Finland. 流感疫苗接种的信息推动:来自芬兰大规模集群随机对照试验的证据。
IF 15.8 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2022-02-09 eCollection Date: 2022-02-01 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003919
Lauri Sääksvuori, Cornelia Betsch, Hanna Nohynek, Heini Salo, Jonas Sivelä, Robert Böhm
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vaccination is the most effective means of preventing the spread of infectious diseases. Despite the proven benefits of vaccination, vaccine hesitancy keeps many people from getting vaccinated.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>We conducted a large-scale cluster randomized controlled trial in Finland to test the effectiveness of centralized written reminders (distributed via mail) on influenza vaccination coverage. The study included the entire older adult population (aged 65 years and above) in 2 culturally and geographically distinct regions with historically low (31.8%, n = 7,398, mean age 75.5 years) and high (57.7%, n = 40,727, mean age 74.0 years) influenza vaccination coverage. The study population was randomized into 3 treatments: (i) no reminder (only in the region with low vaccination coverage); (ii) an individual-benefits reminder, informing recipients about the individual benefits of vaccination; and (iii) an individual- and social-benefits reminder, informing recipients about the additional social benefits of vaccination in the form of herd immunity. There was no control treatment group in the region with high vaccination coverage as general reminders had been sent in previous years. The primary endpoint was a record of influenza vaccination in the Finnish National Vaccination Register during a 5-month follow-up period (from October 18, 2018 to March 18, 2019). Vaccination coverage after the intervention in the region with historically low coverage was 41.8% in the individual-benefits treatment, 38.9% in the individual- and social-benefits treatment and 34.0% in the control treatment group. Vaccination coverage after the intervention in the region with historically high coverage was 59.0% in the individual-benefits treatment and 59.2% in the individual- and social-benefits treatment. The effect of receiving any type of reminder letter in comparison to control treatment group (no reminder) was 6.4 percentage points (95% CI: 3.6 to 9.1, p < 0.001). The effect of reminders was particularly large among individuals with no prior influenza vaccination (8.8 pp, 95% CI: 6.5 to 11.1, p < 0.001). There was a substantial positive effect (5.3 pp, 95% CI: 2.8 to 7.8, p < 0.001) among the most consistently unvaccinated individuals who had not received any type of vaccine during the 9 years prior to the study. There was no difference in influenza vaccination coverage between the individual-benefit reminder and the individual- and social-benefit reminder (region with low vaccination coverage: 2.9 pp, 95% CI: -0.4 to 6.1, p = 0.087, region with high vaccination coverage: 0.2 pp, 95% CI: -1.0 to 1.3, p = 0.724). Study limitations included potential contamination between the treatments due to information spillovers and the lack of control treatment group in the region with high vaccination coverage.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this study, we found that sending reminders was an effective and scalable
背景:疫苗接种是预防传染病传播的最有效手段。尽管疫苗接种的益处已得到证实,但对疫苗的犹豫使许多人不愿接种疫苗。方法和研究结果:我们在芬兰进行了一项大规模的集群随机对照试验,以测试集中书面提醒(通过邮件分发)对流感疫苗接种覆盖率的有效性。该研究纳入了2个文化和地理上不同的地区的所有老年人(65岁及以上),这些地区的流感疫苗接种率历史低(31.8%,n = 7398,平均年龄75.5岁)和高(57.7%,n = 40727,平均年龄74.0岁)。将研究人群随机分为3种治疗方法:(i)不提醒(仅在疫苗接种覆盖率低的地区);(ii)个人利益提醒,告知接受者接种疫苗的个人利益;(iii)个人和社会效益提醒,以群体免疫的形式告知接受者接种疫苗的额外社会效益。由于前几年已发出一般提醒,该地区没有疫苗接种覆盖率高的对照治疗组。主要终点是在5个月的随访期间(2018年10月18日至2019年3月18日),芬兰国家疫苗接种登记册中的流感疫苗接种记录。在历史上覆盖率较低的地区,干预后的疫苗接种覆盖率在个人福利治疗组为41.8%,在个人和社会福利治疗组为38.9%,在对照治疗组为34.0%。在具有历史高覆盖率的区域,干预后的疫苗接种覆盖率在个人福利治疗中为59.0%,在个人和社会福利治疗中为59.2%。与对照组(无提示)相比,收到任何类型的提醒信的效果为6.4个百分点(95% CI: 3.6 ~ 9.1, p < 0.001)。提醒的效果在之前没有接种过流感疫苗的个体中特别大(8.8 pp, 95% CI: 6.5至11.1,p < 0.001)。在研究前9年未接种任何类型疫苗的最一贯未接种疫苗的个体中存在实质性的积极影响(5.3 pp, 95% CI: 2.8至7.8,p < 0.001)。个人利益提醒与个人和社会利益提醒之间的流感疫苗接种覆盖率没有差异(疫苗接种覆盖率低的地区:2.9 pp, 95% CI: -0.4至6.1,p = 0.087,疫苗接种覆盖率高的地区:0.2 pp, 95% CI: -1.0至1.3,p = 0.724)。研究的局限性包括由于信息溢出而导致的治疗之间的潜在污染以及在疫苗接种覆盖率高的地区缺乏对照治疗组。结论:在本研究中,我们发现发送提醒是一种有效且可扩展的干预策略,可以提高疫苗接种覆盖率低的老年人的疫苗接种覆盖率。除了个人利益之外,宣传疫苗接种的社会利益并没有提高疫苗接种的覆盖率。关于疫苗接种益处的信件提醒对提高流感疫苗接种覆盖率的有效性可能取决于人群先前的疫苗接种史。试验注册:AEARCT注册中心aearr -0003520和ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03748160。
{"title":"Information nudges for influenza vaccination: Evidence from a large-scale cluster-randomized controlled trial in Finland.","authors":"Lauri Sääksvuori,&nbsp;Cornelia Betsch,&nbsp;Hanna Nohynek,&nbsp;Heini Salo,&nbsp;Jonas Sivelä,&nbsp;Robert Böhm","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1003919","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003919","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Vaccination is the most effective means of preventing the spread of infectious diseases. Despite the proven benefits of vaccination, vaccine hesitancy keeps many people from getting vaccinated.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods and findings: &lt;/strong&gt;We conducted a large-scale cluster randomized controlled trial in Finland to test the effectiveness of centralized written reminders (distributed via mail) on influenza vaccination coverage. The study included the entire older adult population (aged 65 years and above) in 2 culturally and geographically distinct regions with historically low (31.8%, n = 7,398, mean age 75.5 years) and high (57.7%, n = 40,727, mean age 74.0 years) influenza vaccination coverage. The study population was randomized into 3 treatments: (i) no reminder (only in the region with low vaccination coverage); (ii) an individual-benefits reminder, informing recipients about the individual benefits of vaccination; and (iii) an individual- and social-benefits reminder, informing recipients about the additional social benefits of vaccination in the form of herd immunity. There was no control treatment group in the region with high vaccination coverage as general reminders had been sent in previous years. The primary endpoint was a record of influenza vaccination in the Finnish National Vaccination Register during a 5-month follow-up period (from October 18, 2018 to March 18, 2019). Vaccination coverage after the intervention in the region with historically low coverage was 41.8% in the individual-benefits treatment, 38.9% in the individual- and social-benefits treatment and 34.0% in the control treatment group. Vaccination coverage after the intervention in the region with historically high coverage was 59.0% in the individual-benefits treatment and 59.2% in the individual- and social-benefits treatment. The effect of receiving any type of reminder letter in comparison to control treatment group (no reminder) was 6.4 percentage points (95% CI: 3.6 to 9.1, p &lt; 0.001). The effect of reminders was particularly large among individuals with no prior influenza vaccination (8.8 pp, 95% CI: 6.5 to 11.1, p &lt; 0.001). There was a substantial positive effect (5.3 pp, 95% CI: 2.8 to 7.8, p &lt; 0.001) among the most consistently unvaccinated individuals who had not received any type of vaccine during the 9 years prior to the study. There was no difference in influenza vaccination coverage between the individual-benefit reminder and the individual- and social-benefit reminder (region with low vaccination coverage: 2.9 pp, 95% CI: -0.4 to 6.1, p = 0.087, region with high vaccination coverage: 0.2 pp, 95% CI: -1.0 to 1.3, p = 0.724). Study limitations included potential contamination between the treatments due to information spillovers and the lack of control treatment group in the region with high vaccination coverage.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions: &lt;/strong&gt;In this study, we found that sending reminders was an effective and scalable","PeriodicalId":20368,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"19 2","pages":"e1003919"},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8870595/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39607881","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Patient-reported outcomes and target effect sizes in pragmatic randomized trials in ClinicalTrials.gov: A cross-sectional analysis. 临床试验网站临床随机试验中患者报告的结果和目标效应大小:一项横断面分析。
IF 15.8 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2022-02-08 eCollection Date: 2022-02-01 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003896
Shelley Vanderhout, Dean A Fergusson, Jonathan A Cook, Monica Taljaard
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient and public engagement are critical ingredients of pragmatic trials, which are intended to be patient centered. Engagement of patients and members of the public in selecting the primary trial outcome and determining the target difference can better ensure that the trial is designed to inform the decisions of those who ultimately stand to benefit. However, to the best of our knowledge, the use and reporting of PROs and patient and public engagement in pragmatic trials have not been described. The objectives of this study were to review a sample of pragmatic trials to describe (1) the prevalence of reporting patient and public engagement; (2) the prevalence and types of PROs used; (3) how its use varies across trial characteristics; and (4) how sample sizes and target differences are determined for trials with primary PROs.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>This was a methodological review of primary reports of pragmatic trials. We used a published electronic search filter in MEDLINE to identify pragmatic trials, published in English between January 1, 2014 and April 3, 2019; we identified the subset that were registered in ClinicalTrials.gov and explicitly labeled as pragmatic. Trial descriptors were downloaded from ClinicalTrials.gov; information about PROs and sample size calculations were extracted from the manuscript. Chi-squared, Cochran-Armitage, and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to examine associations between trial characteristics and use of PROs. Among 4,337 identified primary trial reports, 1,988 were registered in CT.gov, of which 415 were explicitly labeled as pragmatic. Use of patient and public engagement was identified in 39 (9.4%). PROs were measured in 235 (56.6%): 144 (34.7%) used PROs as primary outcomes and 91 (21.9%) as only secondary outcomes. Primary PROs were symptoms (64; 44%), health behaviors (36; 25.0%), quality of life (17; 11.8%), functional status (16; 11.1%), and patient experience (10; 6.9%). Trial characteristics with lower prevalence of use of PROs included being conducted exclusively in children or adults over age 65 years, cluster randomization, recruitment in low- and middle-income countries, and primary purpose of prevention; trials conducted in Europe had the highest prevalence of PROs. For the 144 trials with a primary PRO, 117 (81.3%) reported a sample size calculation for that outcome; of these, 71 (60.7%) justified the choice of target difference, most commonly, using estimates from pilot studies (31; 26.5%), standardized effect sizes (20; 17.1%), or evidence reviews (16; 13.7%); patient or stakeholder opinions were used to justify the target difference in 8 (6.8%). Limitations of this study are the need for trials to be registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, which may have reduced generalizability, and extracting information only from the primary trial report.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this study, w
背景:使用患者报告的结果(PROs)以及患者和公众的参与是实用试验的关键因素,旨在以患者为中心。让患者和公众参与选择主要试验结果和确定目标差异,可以更好地确保试验的设计为最终受益人群的决定提供信息。然而,据我们所知,在实用的试验中,PROs的使用和报告以及患者和公众的参与并没有被描述。本研究的目的是回顾一个实用试验的样本,以描述(1)报告患者和公众参与的普遍程度;(2)使用PROs的流行程度和种类;(3)不同试验特征对其使用的差异;(4)如何确定具有主要PROs的试验的样本量和目标差异。方法和发现:这是对实用试验的主要报告的方法学回顾。我们使用MEDLINE上已发表的电子搜索过滤器来识别2014年1月1日至2019年4月3日期间发表的英文临床试验;我们确定了在ClinicalTrials.gov上注册并明确标记为实用的子集。试验描述符从ClinicalTrials.gov下载;有关PROs和样本量计算的信息从手稿中提取。使用卡方检验、Cochran-Armitage检验和Wilcoxon秩和检验来检验试验特征与PROs使用之间的关联。在4337份初步试验报告中,1988份在CT.gov上注册,其中415份被明确标记为实用主义。39个国家(9.4%)采用了患者和公众参与。235例(56.6%)患者测量了PROs, 144例(34.7%)患者将PROs作为主要结局,91例(21.9%)患者仅将其作为次要结局。主要优点是症状(64;44%),健康行为(36%;25.0%),生活质量(17%;11.8%),功能状态(16%;11.1%),患者经验(10%;6.9%)。使用pro患病率较低的试验特征包括:仅在儿童或65岁以上的成年人中进行、集群随机化、在低收入和中等收入国家招募、主要目的是预防;在欧洲进行的试验中,PROs的患病率最高。在144项具有原发性PRO的试验中,117项(81.3%)报告了该结果的样本量计算;其中,71个(60.7%)证明了目标差的选择是合理的,最常见的是使用试点研究的估计值(31;26.5%),标准化效应量(20;17.1%),或证据回顾(16;13.7%);患者或利益相关者的意见被用来证明8(6.8%)的目标差异。本研究的局限性是需要在ClinicalTrials.gov上注册试验,这可能降低了通用性,并且只能从主要试验报告中提取信息。结论:在本研究中,我们观察到实用的试验很少报告患者和公众参与,并且通常不使用PROs作为主要结果。当提供目标差异时,往往是不合理的,而且很少被患者和利益相关者告知。研究资助者、科学期刊和机构应支持试验人员纳入患者参与,以实现以患者为中心的实用试验的使命。
{"title":"Patient-reported outcomes and target effect sizes in pragmatic randomized trials in ClinicalTrials.gov: A cross-sectional analysis.","authors":"Shelley Vanderhout,&nbsp;Dean A Fergusson,&nbsp;Jonathan A Cook,&nbsp;Monica Taljaard","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1003896","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003896","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient and public engagement are critical ingredients of pragmatic trials, which are intended to be patient centered. Engagement of patients and members of the public in selecting the primary trial outcome and determining the target difference can better ensure that the trial is designed to inform the decisions of those who ultimately stand to benefit. However, to the best of our knowledge, the use and reporting of PROs and patient and public engagement in pragmatic trials have not been described. The objectives of this study were to review a sample of pragmatic trials to describe (1) the prevalence of reporting patient and public engagement; (2) the prevalence and types of PROs used; (3) how its use varies across trial characteristics; and (4) how sample sizes and target differences are determined for trials with primary PROs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods and findings: &lt;/strong&gt;This was a methodological review of primary reports of pragmatic trials. We used a published electronic search filter in MEDLINE to identify pragmatic trials, published in English between January 1, 2014 and April 3, 2019; we identified the subset that were registered in ClinicalTrials.gov and explicitly labeled as pragmatic. Trial descriptors were downloaded from ClinicalTrials.gov; information about PROs and sample size calculations were extracted from the manuscript. Chi-squared, Cochran-Armitage, and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to examine associations between trial characteristics and use of PROs. Among 4,337 identified primary trial reports, 1,988 were registered in CT.gov, of which 415 were explicitly labeled as pragmatic. Use of patient and public engagement was identified in 39 (9.4%). PROs were measured in 235 (56.6%): 144 (34.7%) used PROs as primary outcomes and 91 (21.9%) as only secondary outcomes. Primary PROs were symptoms (64; 44%), health behaviors (36; 25.0%), quality of life (17; 11.8%), functional status (16; 11.1%), and patient experience (10; 6.9%). Trial characteristics with lower prevalence of use of PROs included being conducted exclusively in children or adults over age 65 years, cluster randomization, recruitment in low- and middle-income countries, and primary purpose of prevention; trials conducted in Europe had the highest prevalence of PROs. For the 144 trials with a primary PRO, 117 (81.3%) reported a sample size calculation for that outcome; of these, 71 (60.7%) justified the choice of target difference, most commonly, using estimates from pilot studies (31; 26.5%), standardized effect sizes (20; 17.1%), or evidence reviews (16; 13.7%); patient or stakeholder opinions were used to justify the target difference in 8 (6.8%). Limitations of this study are the need for trials to be registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, which may have reduced generalizability, and extracting information only from the primary trial report.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions: &lt;/strong&gt;In this study, w","PeriodicalId":20368,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"19 2","pages":"e1003896"},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8824332/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39899668","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10
期刊
PLoS Medicine
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1