Cancer patient perspectives on survivorship goals from the Smart Patients online community.

BACKGROUND: Cancer impacts individuals' life goals. Recent cancer care guidelines recommend discussing life goals as part of patient-provider communication. The goal of this study was to understand patients' attitudes toward goal sharing with their cancer care providers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Semi-structured questionnaires were conducted via email with cancer patients and survivors (n = 39) on an online social network called Smart Patients. Participants answered open-ended questions about their life goals. They then completed a survey regarding their attitudes toward goal sharing with healthcare providers. The study team used an integrated inductive-deductive qualitative analysis to identify conceptual themes. RESULTS: Participants listed goals related to improving physical activity, control, enjoyment/leisure, and inner strength while reducing pain, anxiety, fear of recurrence, and uncertainty. Most of these goals were life goals rather than goals specifically related to medical care. Across all goals, there was a focus on returning to normality. Our findings show that 87% of participants expect their cancer specialist to discuss their treatment preferences and goals regularly with them. However, participants were reluctant to share their goals with their providers. Respondents felt that their providers did not have an interest in their life goals or time to address them in addition to their medical treatment. CONCLUSION: Even though cancer patient-provider communication guidelines advocate for discussions around life goals, participants in this study expressed reluctance to share life goals with providers. Further efforts to align expectations of patients and providers may facilitate adherence to cancer communication guidelines about life goals. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Cancer survivors should be aware that discussing life goals is part of recommended communication with their cancer care teams.

Correction to: Understanding the Bariatric Patient Perspective in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Bariatric Study.

In the original article the list of author names and affiliations were incorrect.

Understanding the Bariatric Patient Perspective in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Bariatric Study.

BACKGROUND: In 2016, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute funded the National Patient Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Bariatric Study (PBS). Understanding the experience of postoperative patients was a key component of this study. METHODS: Nine focus groups were conducted in Southern California, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, and Ohio and in a national advocacy conference for patients with obesity. Participants were identified and recruited in both clinical and community settings. Focus group transcripts were analyzed using an iterative inductive-deductive approach to identify global overarching themes. RESULTS: There were 76 focus group participants. Participants were mostly women (81.4%), had primarily undergone gastric sleeve (47.0%), were non-Hispanic white (51.4%), had some college education (44.3%), and made $100,000 annual income or less (65.7%). Qualitative findings included negative reactions patients received from friends, family, and co-workers once they disclosed that they had bariatric surgery to lose weight; and barriers to follow-up care included insurance coverage, emotional and situational challenges, and physical pain limiting mobility. CONCLUSIONS: These findings confirm the other qualitative findings in this area. The approach to bariatric surgery should be expanded to provide long-term comprehensive care that includes in-depth postoperative lifetime monitoring of emotional and physical health.

Task analysis of writing hospital admission orders: evidence of a problem-based approach.

As part of a broader project to improve the usability of computerized physician order entry (CPOE)systems, we set out to study the cognitive tasks physicians undertake to write "admission orders" when admitting a patient to the hospital. In particular, we evaluate the hypothesis that physicians' mental model of diagnostic and therapeutic planning is problem based, whereas both paper-based ordering and CPOE are typically organized around functional categories of orders such as those reflected in the mnemonic ADCVAANDIML. A task analysis was performed which included think-aloud observations of physicians writing orders in clinical care settings and for fictional case-scenarios, as well as a semistructured questionnaire. Our work finds core tasks of admitting a patient to hospital and conflicts between physicians' mental model and traditional ordering systems. Based on our study, we suggest improvements to traditional CPOE systems.

Toward continuous medical education.

While traditional continuing medical education (CME) courses increase participants' knowledge, they have minimal impact on the more relevant end points of physician behavior and patient outcomes. The interactive potential of online CME and its flexibility in time and place offer potential improvements over traditional CME. However, more emphasis should be placed on continuing education that occurs when clinicians search for answers to questions that arise in clinical practice, instead of that which occurs at an arbitrary time designated for CME. The use of learning portfolios and informationists can be integrated with self-directed CME to help foster a culture of lifelong learning.

Modeling the relationship between search terms in clinical queries.

We designed hedges for clinical queries sent to MEDLINE and Google in an attempt to explicitly model the relationship, such as treatment or diagnosis, between search terms. A pilot evaluation suggested that mean average precision (MAP) improved for a precomputed diagnostic query but not for a precomputed treatment query. An important limitation to this approach is that target resources do not explicitly model these relationships.

Heart to Heart: a computerized decision aid for assessment of coronary heart disease risk and the impact of risk-reduction interventions for primary prevention.

Heart to Heart is a computer-based decision aid for patients and providers that provides personalized, evidence-based information about coronary heart disease (CHD) risk and potential risk-reducing interventions. To develop Heart to Heart, the authors used Framing-ham risk equations and systematic reviews of risk-reducing interventions. The Web version was programmed using PHP: Hypertext Processor, a Web-based programming language, and has separate interfaces for providers and patients. The authors subsequently developed a modified version for personal digital assistants. Heart to Heart uses information about a patient's CHD risk factors (age, gender, total and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, diabetes, smoking, systolic blood pressure, and left ventricular hypertrophy) to calculate risk of total CHD events over 5 or 10 years. Patients and providers can then examine the effect of introducing one or more risk-reducing interventions (aspirin, lipid-lowering drug therapy, antihypertensive medication, or smoking cessation) on the patient's CHD risk. Future research will be directed to determining whether Heart to Heart can improve utilization of effective CHD risk-reducing interventions.

Development methodology for a "next generation" medical informatics curriculum for clinicians.

We describe a new methodology for development of a medical informatics curriculum for practicing clinicians. The curriculum is based on a biaxial framework in which information is categorized by type of application and role of the learner in relation to the application. The curriculum development process incorporates feedback from practicing clinicians on an ongoing basis.