Family Medicine and Community Health最新文献

The conversation about consciousness of artificial intelligence (AI) is an ongoing topic since 1950s. Despite the numerous applications of AI identified in healthcare and primary healthcare, little is known about how a conscious AI would reshape its use in this domain. While there is a wide range of ideas as to whether AI can or cannot possess consciousness, a prevailing theme in all arguments is uncertainty. Given this uncertainty and the high stakes associated with the use of AI in primary healthcare, it is imperative to be prepared for all scenarios including conscious AI systems being used for medical diagnosis, shared decision-making and resource management in the future. This commentary serves as an overview of some of the pertinent evidence supporting the use of AI in primary healthcare and proposes ideas as to how consciousnesses of AI can support or further complicate these applications. Given the scarcity of evidence on the association between consciousness of AI and its current state of use in primary healthcare, our commentary identifies some directions for future research in this area including assessing patients', healthcare workers' and policy-makers' attitudes towards consciousness of AI systems in primary healthcare settings.

Introduction: Pelvic floor disorders (PFDs) pose substantial physical and psychological burdens for a growing number of women. Given the ubiquity of these conditions and known patient reluctance to seek care, primary care providers (PCPs) have a unique opportunity to increase treatment and provide appropriate referrals for these patients.

Methods: An online survey was administered to PCPs to assess provider practices, knowledge, comfort managing and ease of referral for PFDs. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between demographic/practice characteristics of PCPs and two primary outcomes of interest: discomfort with management and difficulty with referral of PFDs.

Results: Of the 153 respondents to the survey, more felt comfortable managing stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and overactive bladder (OAB), compared with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and faecal incontinence (FI) and were less likely to refer patients with urinary symptoms. Few providers elicited symptoms for POP and FI as compared with SUI and OAB. Provider variables that were significantly associated with discomfort with management varied by PFD, but tended to correlate with less exposure to PFDs (eg, those with fewer years of practice, and internal medicine and family physicians as compared with geriatricians); whereas the factors that were significantly associated with difficulty in referral, again varied by PFD, but were related to practice characteristics (eg, specialist network, type of practice, practice setting and quantity of patients).

Conclusion: These findings highlight the need to increase PCPs awareness of PFDs and develop effective standardised screening protocols, as well as collaboration with pelvic floor specialists to improve screening, treatment and referral for patients with PFDs.

This paper proposes the utilisation of twin studies as a novel and powerful methodological approach to investigate critical research questions pertaining to cancer prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment and survivorship within primary care contexts. The inherent genetic similarity between monozygotic (MZ) (identical) twins provides a unique opportunity to disentangle genetic and environmental influences on cancer-related outcomes. MZ twins share virtually identical genetic makeup, offering a unique opportunity to discern the relative contributions of genetic and environmental factors to cancer-related outcomes. In contrast, dizygotic (DZ) twins, also known as fraternal twins, develop from two separate eggs fertilised by two different sperm and share on average 50% of their genetic material, the same level of genetic similarity found in non-twin siblings. Comparisons between MZ and DZ twins enable researchers to disentangle hereditary factors from shared environmental influences. This methodology has the potential to advance our understanding of the multifaceted interplay between genetic predisposition, lifestyle factors and healthcare interventions in the context of cancer care. This paper outlines the rationale, design considerations and potential applications of twin studies in primary care-based cancer research.

Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) lesions may regress spontaneously, offering an alternative to immediate treatment, especially for women of childbearing age (15-45 years).We conducted a prospective multicentre study on conservative CIN2 management, with semiannual follow-up visits over 24 months, biomarkers' investigation and treatment for progression to CIN3+ or CIN2 persistence for more than 12 months. Here, we assess women's willingness to participate and adherence to the study protocol.The study was set in population-based organised cervical cancer screening.From April 2019 to October 2021, 640 CIN2 cases were diagnosed in women aged 25-64 participating in the screening programmes.According to our predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, 228 (35.6%) women were not eligible; 93 (22.6%) of the 412 eligible refused, and 319 (77.4%) were enrolled. Refusal for personal reasons (ie, desire to become pregnant, anxiety, difficulty in complying with the study protocol) and external barriers (ie, residence elsewhere and language problems) accounted for 71% and 17%, respectively. Only 9% expressed a preference for treatment. The primary ineligibility factor was the upper age limit of 45 years. After enrolment, 12 (4%) women without evidence of progression requested treatment, 125 (39%) were lost to follow-up (mostly after 6-12 months) and 182 (57%) remained compliant. Remarkably, 40% of enrolees did not fully adhere to the protocol, whereas only 5% (20/412) of the eligible women desired treatment.Our study demonstrates a good acceptance of conservative management for CIN2 lesions by the women, supporting its implementation within cervical screening programmes.

The recent release of highly advanced generative artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots, including ChatGPT and Bard, which are powered by large language models (LLMs), has attracted growing mainstream interest over its diverse applications in clinical practice, including in health and healthcare. The potential applications of LLM-based programmes in the medical field range from assisting medical practitioners in improving their clinical decision-making and streamlining administrative paperwork to empowering patients to take charge of their own health. However, despite the broad range of benefits, the use of such AI tools also comes with several limitations and ethical concerns that warrant further consideration, encompassing issues related to privacy, data bias, and the accuracy and reliability of information generated by AI. The focus of prior research has primarily centred on the broad applications of LLMs in medicine. To the author's knowledge, this is, the first article that consolidates current and pertinent literature on LLMs to examine its potential in primary care. The objectives of this paper are not only to summarise the potential benefits, risks and challenges of using LLMs in primary care, but also to offer insights into considerations that primary care clinicians should take into account when deciding to adopt and integrate such technologies into their clinical practice.

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) in assessing an intervention for pre-frail senior citizens. Additionally, the study aimed to explain how the GAS goals were established based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) categories, including body function, activity and participation and environmental factors.

Methods: In this study, 220 pre-frail older adults were randomly selected to participate in a controlled trial. The intervention group engaged in multicomponent exercise three times a week, once at a community health service location and twice at home. The control group received advice on physical activity but did not have supervised exercise. Participants in both groups selected individualised GAS goals from 23 goals developed based on ICF by focus group discussion. The study used generalised estimating equations to analyse the differences between the groups.

Results: The study included 144 participants, 72 in the exercise group and 72 in the control group. The top three individualised goals for all participants were vestibular functions (53.5%), pain management (43.1%) and lifting and carrying objects (31.9%). Both groups saw a significant increase in GAS scores at week 8 and week 24 of the intervention (p<0.05), but the exercise group showed a more significant improvement (p<0.05). The participants living alone were associated with lower postintervention improvements in the GAS scores. In contrast, the participants who were using a smartphone were likely to get higher postintervention improvements in the GAS scores.

Conclusions: GAS can be a valuable tool for setting and evaluating individualised and meaningful goals in body functions, activity and participation and environmental factors. The multicomponent exercise interventions can help pre-frail older adults achieve their expected goals as measured by the GAS.