Using self-reported health as a social determinants of health outcome: a scoping review of reviews.

Reducing disease prevalence rather than promoting health has long been the objective of significant population health initiatives, such as the social determinants of health (SDH) framework. However, empirical evidence suggests that people with diagnosed diseases often answer the self-reported health (SRH) question positively. In pursuit of a better proxy to understand, measure and improve health, this scoping review of reviews examines the potential of SRH to be used as an outcome of interest in population health policies. Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, it synthesizes findings from 77 review papers (published until 11 May 2022) and reports a robust association between SDH and SRH. It also investigates inconsistencies within and between reviews to reveal how variation in population health can be explained by studying the impact of contextual factors, such as cultural, social, economic and political elements, on structural determinants such as socioeconomic situation, gender and ethnicity. These insights provide informed hypotheses for deeper explorations of the role of SDH in improving SRH. The review detects several gaps in the literature. Notably, more evidence syntheses are required, in general, on the pathway from contextual elements to population SRH and, in particular, on the social determinants of adolescents' SRH. This study reports a disease-oriented mindset in collecting, analysing and reporting SRH across the included reviews. Future studies should utilize the capability of SRH in interconnecting social, psychological and biological dimensions of health to actualize its full potential as a central public health measure.

Personalized Computerized Training for Cognitive Dysfunction after COVID-19: A Before-and-After Feasibility Pilot Study.

The current pilot study was set to evaluate the feasibility and potential benefit of a personalized computerized cognitive training (CCT) intervention to improve cognitive function among people living with post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC). Seventy three adults who self-reported cognitive dysfunction more than 3 months after a diagnosis of COVID-19 took part in an 8-week training study. Participants' general cognitive function was assessed before they completed as many cognitive daily training sessions as they wished during an 8-week period, using a personalized CCT application at home. At the end of this period, participants repeated the general cognitive function assessment. The differences between the scores at 8 weeks and baseline in five cognitive domains (attention, memory, coordination, perception, reasoning), complemented with analyses of the changes based on the participants' age, training time, self-reported health level at baseline and time since the initial COVID-19 infection. Participants had significant cognitive dysfunction and self-reported negative health levels at baseline. Most of the participants obtained higher scores after CCT in each of the domains as compared with baseline. The magnitude of this score increase was high across domains. It is concluded that a self-administered CCT based on gamified cognitive tasks could be an effective way to ameliorate cognitive dysfunction in persons with PASC. The ClinicalTrials.gov identifier is NCT05571852.

A good death: non-negotiable personal conditions for clinicians, healthcare administrators and support staff.

OBJECTIVES: To ask all clinical, administrative and support staff affiliated with a large network of healthcare facilities to identify the conditions that they consider as non-negotiable for their own deaths to be regarded as good. METHODS: All 3495 staff of a healthcare network were asked to rank 10 conditions according to how non-negotiable they would be for themselves during their final 3 months or few hours for their own deaths to be considered as good. They were also asked about whether they had thought about their own death in the last 3 months, if they had a will, believed in God, and in the possibility of a good death, and the intensity of their fear of death. RESULTS: 2971 (85%) completed the survey. Most were female (79%) and clinical staff (65%). 93% believed in God, 60% had thought about their death recently, 33% had an intense fear of death, and 4% had a will. 64% considered a good death possible. Participants ranked dying at a preferred place, emotional support from family and friends and relief from physical symptoms as their top priorities. The lowest ranked conditions were (from the bottom) relief from psychological distress, performance of rituals and the right to terminate life. There were no statistically significant differences across genders or individual occupational groups. CONCLUSION: Most of conditions for a good death of interest to healthcare professionals could be provided without sophisticated medical infrastructure or specialised knowledge, opening the door for new support services to make it possible for everyone, anywhere.

Benefit-risk assessment and reporting in clinical trials of chronic pain treatments: IMMPACT recommendations.

ABSTRACT: Chronic pain clinical trials have historically assessed benefit and risk outcomes separately. However, a growing body of research suggests that a composite metric that accounts for benefit and risk in relation to each other can provide valuable insights into the effects of different treatments. Researchers and regulators have developed a variety of benefit-risk composite metrics, although the extent to which these methods apply to randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of chronic pain has not been evaluated in the published literature. This article was motivated by an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials consensus meeting and is based on the expert opinion of those who attended. In addition, a review of the benefit-risk assessment tools used in published chronic pain RCTs or highlighted by key professional organizations (ie, Cochrane, European Medicines Agency, Outcome Measures in Rheumatology, and U.S. Food and Drug Administration) was completed. Overall, the review found that benefit-risk metrics are not commonly used in RCTs of chronic pain despite the availability of published methods. A primary recommendation is that composite metrics of benefit-risk should be combined at the level of the individual patient, when possible, in addition to the benefit-risk assessment at the treatment group level. Both levels of analysis (individual and group) can provide valuable insights into the relationship between benefits and risks associated with specific treatments across different patient subpopulations. The systematic assessment of benefit-risk in clinical trials has the potential to enhance the clinical meaningfulness of RCT results.

Toward the "next normal": An opportunity to unlearn and reflect about life, death, and our mental health during the pandemic / Hacia la "próxima normalidad": una oportunidad para desaprender y reflexionar sobre la vida, la muerte y nuestra salud mental durante la pandemia

While pondering about a way to convey a message of hope, kindness and solidarity to my anesthesiology colleagues and to all the healthcare professionals and workers in Colombia and around the world, who are in the frontlines of the COVID-19 pandemic, I realized - once again- the severe impact it has had on our mental health and our lives. In the history of our generation and probably since 1918, mankind had not experienced the deleterious effect of a pandemic of such magnitude on our lives. A disrupting event of such magnitude invites us to reflect daily. So, I remembered that we, Colombian anesthesiologists, have a fantastic leader who sets an example for many of us, and who is renowned worldwide. A global leader in innovation and the creation of the future: Professor Alejandro Jadad. He used to speak often about pandemics, but pandemics of health and joy.

Mientras reflexionaba sobre una manera de transmitir un mensaje de esperanza, amabilidad y solidaridad a mis colegas de anestesiología y a todos los profesionales y trabajadores de la salud en Colombia y en todo el mundo, que se encuentran en la primera línea de la pandemia de COVID-19, me di cuenta: una vez de nuevo, el impacto severo que ha tenido en nuestra salud mental y nuestras vidas. En la historia de nuestra generación y probablemente desde 1918, la humanidad no había experimentado el efecto deletéreo de una pandemia de tal magnitud en nuestras vidas. Un acontecimiento perturbador de tal magnitud nos invita a reflexionar a diario. Entonces, recordé que nosotros, los anestesiólogos colombianos, tenemos un líder fantástico que es un ejemplo para muchos de nosotros y que es reconocido mundialmente. Líder mundial en innovación y creación de futuro: el profesor Alejandro Jadad. Solía ​​hablar a menudo de pandemias, pero de pandemias de salud y alegría.

Income-Generating Processes of Free Web-Based Digital Health Tools to Engage Patients: Qualitative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, digital tools have become a viable means for patients to address their health and information needs. Governments and health care organizations are offering digital tools such as self-assessment tools, symptom tracking tools, or chatbots. Other sources of digital tools, such as those offered through patient platforms, are available on the internet free of charge. We define patient platforms as health-specific websites that offer tools to anyone with internet access to engage them in their health care process with peer networks to support their learning. Although numerous social media platforms engage users without up-front charges, patient platforms are specific to health. As little is known about their business model, there is a need to understand what else these platforms are trying to achieve beyond supporting patients so that patients can make informed decisions about the benefits and risks of using the digital tools they offer. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to explore what patient platforms are trying to achieve beyond supporting patients and how their digital tools can be used to generate income. METHODS: Textual and visual data collected from a purposeful selection of 11 patient platforms from September 2013 to August 2014 were analyzed using framework analysis. Data were systematically and rigorously coded and categorized according to key issues and themes by following 5 steps: familiarizing, identifying a thematic framework, indexing, charting, and mapping and interpretation. We used open coding to identify additional concepts not captured in the initial thematic framework. This paper reports on emergent findings on the business models of the platforms and their income-generating processes. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed that in addition to patients, the platforms support other parties with interests in health and information exchanges. Patient platforms did not charge up-front fees but generated income from other sources, such as advertising, sponsorship, marketing (eg, sending information to users on behalf of sponsors or providing means for sponsors to reach patients directly), supporting other portals, and providing research services. CONCLUSIONS: This study reports on the mechanisms by which some patient platforms generate income to support their operations, gain profit, or both. Although income-generating processes exist elsewhere on social media platforms in general, they pose unique challenges in the health context because digital tools engage patients in health and information exchanges. This study highlights the need to minimize the potential for unintended consequences that can pose health risks to patients or can lead to increased health expenses. By understanding other interests that patient platforms support, our findings point to important policy implications, such as whether (and how) authorities might protect users from processes that may not always be in their best interests and can potentially incur costs to the health system.

What would it take to die well? A systematic review of systematic reviews on the conditions for a good death.

The medicalisation of life under the influence of health-care systems, focused on curing diseases, has made dying well challenging. This systematic review identifies common themes from published systematic reviews about the conditions for a good death as a means to guide decisions around this universal event. MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo, and AMED were searched for citations with "good death" or "dying well" in their titles on Sept 23, 2020, and complemented with backward reference and forward citation screening with Google Scholar. Articles published in peer-reviewed journals in any language were included. Articles that focused on the identification of conditions for a good death and described how primary studies were sought and selected were also included. Data on general characteristics, quality, and themes were extracted independently. 13 of 275 potentially eligible reviews were included. Common themes were dying at the preferred place, relief from pain and psychological distress, emotional support from loved ones, autonomous treatment decision making, avoidance of futile life-prolonging interventions and of being a burden to others, right to assisted suicide or euthanasia, effective communication with professionals, and performance of rituals. No reviews specified the meaning or timing of death, connected themes, or prioritised them. Vague jargon was often used to describe complex concepts. Most conditions for a good death could be offered to most dying people, without costly medical infrastructure or specialised knowledge. Efforts to describe these conditions clearly, to identify whether there are exceptions or missing items, and whether they apply in non-dominant settings (ie, outstide institutional, affluent, anglophone, and Christian settings) are needed.

Experiencing Positive Health, as a Family, While Living With a Rare Complex Disease: Bringing Participatory Medicine Through Collaborative Decision Making Into the Real World.

Physician-patient collaboration was recognized as a critical core of participatory medicine more than a century ago. However, the subsequent focus on scientific research to enable cures and increased dominance of physicians in health care subordinated patients to a passive role. This paternalistic model weakened in the past 50 years-as women, minorities, and the disabled achieved greater rights, and as incurable chronic diseases and unrelieved pain disorders became more prevalent-promoting a more equitable role for physicians and patients. By 2000, a shared decision-making model became the pinnacle for clinical decisions, despite a dearth of data on health outcomes, or the model's reliance on single patient or solo practitioner studies, or evidence that no single model could fit all clinical situations. We report about a young woman with intractable epilepsy due to a congenital brain malformation whose family and medical specialists used a collaborative decision-making approach. This model positioned the health professionals as supporters of the proactive family, and enabled them all to explore and co-create knowledge beyond the clinical realm. Together, they involved other members of the community in the decisions, while harnessing diverse relationships to allow all family members to achieve positive levels of health, despite the resistance of the seizures to medical treatment and the incurable nature of the underlying disease.

Interpretation of chronic pain clinical trial outcomes: IMMPACT recommended considerations.

Interpreting randomized clinical trials (RCTs) is crucial to making decisions regarding the use of analgesic treatments in clinical practice. In this article, we report on an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) consensus meeting organized by the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks, the purpose of which was to recommend approaches that facilitate interpretation of analgesic RCTs. We review issues to consider when drawing conclusions from RCTs, as well as common methods for reporting RCT results and the limitations of each method. These issues include the type of trial, study design, statistical analysis methods, magnitude of the estimated beneficial and harmful effects and associated precision, availability of alternative treatments and their benefit-risk profile, clinical importance of the change from baseline both within and between groups, presentation of the outcome data, and the limitations of the approaches used.

Delivering Benefits at Speed Through Real-World Repurposing of Off-Patent Drugs: The COVID-19 Pandemic as a Case in Point.

Real-world drug repurposing-the immediate "off-label" prescribing of drugs to address urgent clinical needs-is a widely overlooked opportunity. Off-label prescribing (ie, for a nonapproved indication) is legal in most countries and tends to shift the burden of liability and cost to physicians and patients, respectively. Nevertheless, health crises may mean that real-world repurposing is the only realistic source for solutions. Optimal real-world repurposing requires a track record of safety, affordability, and access for drug candidates. Although thousands of such drugs are already available, there is no central repository of off-label uses to facilitate immediate identification and selection of potentially useful interventions during public health crises. Using the current coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic as an example, we provide a glimpse of the extensive literature that supports the rationale behind six generic drugs, in four classes, all of which are affordable, supported by decades of safety data, and targeted toward the underlying pathophysiology that makes COVID-19 so deadly. This paper briefly summarizes why cimetidine or famotidine, dipyridamole, fenofibrate or bezafibrate, and sildenafil citrate are worth considering for patients with COVID-19. Clinical trials to assess efficacy are already underway for famotidine, dipyridamole, and sildenafil, and further trials of all these agents will be important in due course. These examples also reveal the unlimited opportunity to future-proof our health care systems by proactively mining, synthesizing, cataloging, and evaluating the off-label treatment opportunities of thousands of safe, well-established, and affordable generic drugs.

No Time to Waste: Real-World Repurposing of Generic Drugs as a Multifaceted Strategy Against COVID-19.

Real-world drug repurposing-the immediate "off-label" prescribing of drugs to address urgent clinical needs-is an indispensable strategy gaining rapid traction in the current COVID-19 crisis. Although off-label prescribing (ie, for a nonapproved indication) is legal in most countries, it tends to shift the burden of liability and cost to physicians and patients, respectively. Nevertheless, in urgent public health crises, it is often the only realistic source of a meaningful potential solution. To be considered for real-world repurposing, drug candidates should ideally have a track record of safety, affordability, and wide accessibility. Although thousands of such drugs are already available, the absence of a central repository of off-label uses presents a barrier to the immediate identification and selection of the safest, potentially useful interventions. Using the current COVID-19 pandemic as an example, we provide a glimpse at the extensive literature that supports the rationale behind six generic drugs, in four classes, all of which are affordable, supported by decades of safety data, and pleiotropically target the underlying pathophysiology that makes COVID-19 so dangerous. Having previously fast-tracked this paper to publication in summary form, we now expand on why cimetidine/famotidine (histamine type-2 receptor antagonists), dipyridamole (antiplatelet agent), fenofibrate/bezafibrate (cholesterol/triglyceride-lowering agents), and sildenafil (phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor) are worth considering for patients with COVID-19 based on their antiviral, anti-inflammatory, renoprotective, cardioprotective, and anticoagulation properties. These examples also reveal the unlimited opportunity to future-proof public health by proactively mining, synthesizing, and cataloging the off-label treatment opportunities of thousands of safe, well-established, and affordable generic drugs.

From a Digital Bottle: A Message to Ourselves in 2039.

We are fully aware that we could have wasted our time writing this message, as nobody might read it. Even those who read it might ignore it, and those who read and care about it might be unable to do anything. It may simply be too late. Nevertheless, this message describes the hopes we had back in 1999, imagining how the incredible digital tools whose birth we were witnessing, could change the world for the better. In 2019, when we wrote these words, we were saddened to realize that most of what we had imagined and proposed in the past 20 years could have been written the day before, without losing an iota of relevance. Whoever or whatever you might be, dear reader-a human, a sentient machine, or a hybrid-we would like you to understand that, rather than an attempt to predict the future, which probably continues to be an impossible endeavor, this message was meant to act as an invitation, regardless of when or where it is found, to engage in a conversation that has already transcended time and space, even if the issues it contains have become irrelevant.

Tools for Engaging Patients on Patient Platforms: A Classification Framework.

This paper outlines a framework for identifying and classifying different types of patient engagement tools, available on online patient platforms, according to the flow of information and patient engagement concepts. We demonstrate the application of the framework using data collected from a purposive sample of eleven patient platforms, stratified by various attributes (for-profit/not-for-profit, single/multiple conditions, different conditions). This framework can help health care organizations in better understanding the processes supported by various tools, and thereby determining better ways to engage patients using web-based Platforms.

Public-private partnership (PPP) development: Toward building a PPP framework for healthy eating.

Public-private partnerships (PPPs) in public health have gained great attention in the global health literature over the last two decades. Evidence suggests that PPPs could contribute to mitigating complex health problems. There is, however, limited knowledge about the process and specific conditions in which PPPs for healthy eating, in particular, can be developed successfully. To address this gap, this article first summarizes the literature, and second, using qualitative content analysis, identifies factors deemed to influence the process of building PPPs for healthy eating. The literature search was undertaken in two stages. The first stage focused on PPPs in public health to understand what constitutes a PPP, and the types and characteristics of PPPs. The second stage sought empirical examples and conceptual papers related to PPPs for healthy eating to identify critical elements that could facilitate or hinder partnerships between the government and the food industry. The search yielded 38 articles on PPPs in public health and 20 on PPPs for healthy eating. The analysis generated 23 individual elements that have the potential to influence a successful process of building PPPs for healthy eating (eg, endorsement from an individual champion, equal representation from partner organizations on board committees). The analysis also yielded five factors that appeared to well-represent the 23 individual elements of PPP formation: motivation, enablers, governance, benefits, and barriers. These results constitute an important step to understand critical factors involved in the formation of PPPs in public health and should inform additional empirical research to validate them.

Using decision thresholds for ranking treatments in network meta-analysis results in more informative rankings.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate how the rank probabilities obtained from network meta-analysis (NMA) change with the use of increasingly stringent criteria for the relative effect comparing two treatments which ranks one treatment better than the other. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic survey and reanalysis of published data. We included all systematic reviews (SRs) with NMA from the field of cardiovascular medicine that had trial-level data available, published in Medline up to February 2015. We reran all the NMAs and determined the probabilities of each treatment being the best. For the best treatment, we examined the effect on these probabilities of varying, what we call the decision threshold, the relative effect required to declare two treatments different. RESULTS: We included 14 SRs, having a median of 20 randomized trials and 9 treatments. The best treatments had probabilities of being best that ranged from 38% to 85.3%. The effect of changing the decision thresholds on the probability of a treatment being best varied substantially across reviews, with relatively little decrease (∼20 percentage points) in some settings but a decline to near 0% in others. CONCLUSION: Rank probabilities can be fragile to increases in the decision threshold used to claim that one treatment is more effective than another. Including these thresholds into the calculation of rankings may aid their interpretation and use in clinical practice.

Chiropractic care and risk for acute lumbar disc herniation: a population-based self-controlled case series study.

PURPOSE: Chiropractic care is popular for low back pain, but may increase the risk for acute lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Low back pain is a common early (prodromal) symptom of LDH and commonly precedes LDH diagnosis. Our objective was to investigate the association between chiropractic care and acute LDH with early surgical intervention, and contrast this with the association between primary care physician (PCP) care and acute LDH with early surgery. METHODS: Using a self-controlled case series design and population-based healthcare databases in Ontario, Canada, we investigated all adults with acute LDH requiring emergency department (ED) visit and early surgical intervention from April 1994 to December 2004. The relative incidence of acute LDH with early surgery in exposed periods after chiropractic visits relative to unexposed periods was estimated within individuals, and compared with the relative incidence of acute LDH with early surgery following PCP visits. RESULTS: 195 cases of acute LDH with early surgery (within 8 weeks) were identified in a population of more than 100 million person-years. Strong positive associations were found between acute LDH and both chiropractic and PCP visits. The risk for acute LDH with early surgery associated with chiropractic visits was no higher than the risk associated with PCP visits. CONCLUSIONS: Both chiropractic and primary medical care were associated with an increased risk for acute LDH requiring ED visit and early surgery. Our analysis suggests that patients with prodromal back pain from a developing disc herniation likely seek healthcare from both chiropractors and PCPs before full clinical expression of acute LDH. We found no evidence of excess risk for acute LDH with early surgery associated with chiropractic compared with primary medical care.

Chiropractic spinal manipulation and the risk for acute lumbar disc herniation: a belief elicitation study.

PURPOSE: Chiropractic spinal manipulation treatment (SMT) is common for back pain and has been reported to increase the risk for lumbar disc herniation (LDH), but there is no high quality evidence about this. In the absence of good evidence, clinicians can have knowledge and beliefs about the risk. Our purpose was to determine clinicians' beliefs regarding the risk for acute LDH associated with chiropractic SMT. METHODS: Using a belief elicitation design, 47 clinicians (16 chiropractors, 15 family physicians and 16 spine surgeons) that treat patients with back pain from primary and tertiary care practices were interviewed. Participants' elicited incidence estimates of acute LDH among a hypothetical group of patients with acute low back pain treated with and without chiropractic SMT, were used to derive the probability distribution for the relative risk (RR) for acute LDH associated with chiropractic SMT. RESULTS: Chiropractors expressed the most optimistic belief (median RR 0.56; IQR 0.39-1.03); family physicians expressed a neutral belief (median RR 0.97; IQR 0.64-1.21); and spine surgeons expressed a slightly more pessimistic belief (median RR 1.07; IQR 0.95-1.29). Clinicians with the most optimistic views believed that chiropractic SMT reduces the incidence of acute LDH by about 60% (median RR 0.42; IQR 0.29-0.53). Those with the most pessimistic views believed that chiropractic SMT increases the incidence of acute LDH by about 30% (median RR 1.29; IQR 1.11-1.59). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians' beliefs about the risk for acute LDH associated with chiropractic SMT varied systematically across professions, in spite of a lack of scientific evidence to inform these beliefs. These probability distributions can serve as prior probabilities in future Bayesian analyses of this relationship.

Creating a pandemic of health: What is the role of digital technologies?

Imagine a world in which every human being is healthy until the last breath. Thanks to the fast penetration of digital technologies in every region of the planet, this seemingly utopian scenario is not only feasible but also potentially viable. Now that digital technologies have provided almost full interconnectivity among all humans, they should be used to meet key challenges to ensure that health is created and that it spreads to reach every person on earth. The objective of this article is to describe and trigger a serious discussion of such challenges, which include: adopting a new concept of health; positioning self-rated health as the main outcome of the system; creating a health-oriented model to guide service provision; facilitating the identification, scaling up, and sustaining of innovations that can create and spread health; promoting a culture of health promotion; and encouraging the emergence of Precision Health. Once these challenges are met, and health becomes pandemic, public health would have fulfilled its vision, a healthy life for all, at last.