[Determinants of the utilization of cancer screening among older adults in Saxony-Anhalt-What is the influence of health literacy?] / Determinanten der Inanspruchnahme der Krebsfrüherkennung von älteren Erwachsenen in Sachsen-Anhalt ­ Welchen Einfluss hat die Gesundheitskompetenz auf die Inanspruchnahme?

BACKGROUND: In order to preserve health and thus social participation, it is important for older people to make health-related decisions, such as those regarding the use of a secondary prevention service like cancer screening. National and international studies show that various predictors determine cancer screening participation. The aim of this study is to determine the cancer screening utilization of older people in a structurally weak region. METHODS: In 2021, a cross-sectional study in each of two urban and rural communities in Saxony-Anhalt surveyed individuals aged 55 years and older about determinants, reasons, and barriers to preventive service use (n = 954). Binary logistic regression analysis is used to analyze determinants of cancer screening use. RESULTS: Three quarters of the study population (76.6%) self-reported participating in a cancer screening service at least once. The multivariable analyses demonstrate factors that influence the utilization of cancer screening. Age, partial knowledge on cancer screening, cancer screening as a benefit offered by a statutory health insurances' bonus program, experience with cancer in the immediate environment, thoughts about one's own health, and the feeling of security that participation gives are factors that significantly influence the use of cancer screening. Descriptively, the physician's recommendation is the strongest factor for participation. CONCLUSION: The analyses show that cancer screenings are generally well received by older people in Saxony-Anhalt, but participation in them is not related to health literacy. In keeping with the National Cancer Plan, older people should generally be supported in making an informed decision, for example, through target-group-specific physician education.

Cohort profile: a longitudinal regional cohort study to assess COVID-19 seroprevalence in blood donors - baseline characteristics of the SeMaCo study participants.

PURPOSE: The SeMaCo study (Serologische Untersuchungen bei Blutspendern des Großraums Magdeburg auf Antikörper gegen SARS-CoV-2), a prospective, longitudinal cohort study with four survey phases spanning 3-5 months each over a period of 22 months, extends the spectrum of seroepidemiological studies in Germany. We present here a careful characterisation of the initial survey phase of the cohort to provide baseline data on infection incidence and obtained from questionnaires, focussing in particular on the attitude towards COVID-19 vaccinations, the vaccination success and the vaccination acceptance. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2195 individual blood donors from the donor pool of the blood donation service of the University Hospital Magdeburg were enrolled in the initial survey phase from 20 January 2021 to 30 April 2021. 2138 participants gave sociodemographic/contact data (51.7% male, mean age 44 years) and 2082 participants answered the vaccination questionnaire. FINDINGS TO DATE: Out of 2195 participants with antibody results, 1909 (87.0%) were antibody negative. The remaining 286 subjects (13.0%) were either antibody-positive and vaccinated (160/286; 55.9%) or antibody-positive without vaccination information (17/286; 5.9%) or antibody-positive and unvaccinated (109/286; 38.1%). The latter result reflects the rate of true or highly probable SARS-CoV-2 infections in our initial study cohort. FUTURE PLANS: The study primarily aims to measure the prevalence and long-term kinetics of IgG-antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Including the baseline, the study foresees four survey periods of 3-4 months each. At each visit, we will assess the blood donors' attitude towards vaccination, the antibody response following vaccination and/or infection, as well as undesired vaccination effects. We aim to test the same participants during the survey periods by repeated invitations for blood donation to ensure a long-term (follow-up) in as many study participants as possible. After the four survey phases, a longitudinal data set will be created that reflects the course of the antibody levels/frequencies as well as the infection and vaccination incidence. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00023263.

[Research Data Center on Health - Vision for Further Development from the Research Perspective]. / Forschungsdatenzentrum Gesundheit ­ Vision für eine Weiterentwicklung aus Sicht der Forschung.

The German research data center for health will provide claims data of statutory health insurances. The data center was set up at the medical regulatory body BfArM pursuant to the German data transparency regulation (DaTraV). The data provided by the center will cover about 90% of the German population, supporting research on healthcare issues, including questions of care supply, demand and the (mis-)match of both. These data support the development of recommendations for evidence-based healthcare. The legal framework for the center (including §§ 303a-f of Book V of the Social Security Code and two subsequent ordinances) leaves a considerable degree of freedom when it comes to organisational and procedural aspects of the center's operation. The present paper addresses these degrees of freedom. From the point of view of researchers, ten statements show the potential of the data center and provide ideas for its further and sustainable development.

Digital Health Information Provided by Public Health Stakeholders on Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Evaluation.

In the federal state of Germany, Saxony-Anhalt, colorectal cancer is the second most frequent cause of death among cancer patients. In order to identify cancer precursors early, colorectal cancer screenings are essential. In this context, health information contributes to informing individuals and imparting them with necessary knowledge to make a decision about (non-)utilization of preventive services. Numerous public health stakeholders (e.g., statutory health insurances) provide health information. This study aimed to evaluate the quality of web-based health information offered by public health stakeholders in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany. A systematic evaluation was used. A search was performed using pre-defined eligibility criteria and search terms. Two independent reviewers assessed the search results based on seven main categories (60 items) developed by the study team in line with the "Guideline Evidence-based Health Information". In total, 37 materials from 16 different stakeholders were included and yielded a "mediocre quality" (median = 69%). The materials had only partially fulfilled the requirements of national recommendations for evidence-based health information. Access to digital health information regarding colon cancer screening was unsatisfactory, especially for individuals with auditory or visual impairments, due to use of inappropriate communication technologies. Further efforts are required to improve digital health information about colorectal cancer screening.

Regional Utilization of Preventive Services in the 55-Plus Age Group: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: In Germany, the proportion of people with chronic diseases and multimorbidity is increasing. To counteract the emergence and worsening of age-related conditions, there is a need for preventive care structures and measures. The preventive services that are financed by statutory health insurance (SHI; eg, vaccinations, cancer screening) are only used by part of the German population. There are no current findings about the utilization of these services by older adults in the eastern German federal state of Saxony-Anhalt, which is particularly strongly affected by demographic change. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to investigate the actual utilization and determinants of, reasons for, and barriers to utilization of preventive services financed by the SHI in Saxony-Anhalt in the 55-plus age group. METHODS: In this study, a convergent mixed methods design is used. The actual use of preventive services will be shown by means of (1) a claims data analysis looking at data on statutory outpatient medical care from both the Central Research Institute of Ambulatory Health Care in Germany (Zi) and the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Dentists in Saxony-Anhalt (KZV LSA). The determinants, attitudes, and behaviors associated with use will be analyzed through (2) a cross-sectional survey as well as (3) qualitative data from semistructured interviews with residents of Saxony-Anhalt and from focus group discussions with physicians. (4) A stock take and systematic evaluation of digitally available informational material on colorectal cancer screening, by way of example, provides an insight into the information available as well as its quality. The conceptual framework of the study is the behavioral model of health services use by Andersen et al (last modified in 2014). RESULTS: (1) The Zi and KZV LSA are currently preparing the requested claims data. (2) The survey was carried out from April 2021 to June 2021 in 2 urban and 2 rural municipalities (encompassing a small town and surrounding area) in Saxony-Anhalt. In total, 3665 people were contacted, with a response rate of 25.84% (n=954). (3) For the semistructured interviews, 18 participants from the 4 different study regions were recruited in the same period. A total of 4 general practitioners and 3 medical specialists participated in 2 focus group discussions. (4) For the systematic evaluation of existing informational material on colorectal cancer screening, 37 different informational materials were identified on the websites of 16 health care actors. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide current and reliable data on the use of preventive services in the 55-plus age group in Saxony-Anhalt. It will yield insights into the determinants, reasons, and barriers associated with their utilization. The results will reveal the potential for preventive measures and enable concrete recommendations for action for the target population of the study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00024059; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00024059. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/33512.

Practical training in medical sociology "Analysis of social environments of living quarters". A field experiment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: In the summer semester 2020, a new format was introduced at the Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg for first-year medical students in the subject of medical sociology with a neighborhood-related social environment analysis. Didactic approach: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the didactic concept had to be changed at short notice from seminar group-related fieldwork in different districts of Magdeburg to individual work at the place of study or home, supplemented by accompanying online offers. The students were asked to characterize their neighborhood in terms of quality of life, health and illness as well as medical care by means of interviews with inhabitants of their immediate living environment, a neighborhood inspection with the taking of photographs and an analysis of official secondary data. The aim was to gain initial experience in scientific work (data collection, presentation and interpretation of results, as well as reporting). An evaluation of this new course and conclusions derived from it for its further development will be reported. Evaluation: 51 percent of the students participated in an evaluation of the course. The clear majority rated the internship as "good" or "very good". As a suggestion for improvement, the desire for optional supplementary individual counseling and better formal preparation for the performance assessments were expressed several times. Two thirds of those surveyed consider the online teaching format to be useful even in post-pandemic times.

Good Practice Data Linkage (GPD): A Translation of the German Version.

The data linkage of different data sources for research purposes is being increasingly used in recent years. However, generally accepted methodological guidance is missing. The aim of this article is to provide methodological guidelines and recommendations for research projects that have been consented to across different German research societies. Another aim is to endow readers with a checklist for the critical appraisal of research proposals and articles. This Good Practice Data Linkage (GPD) was already published in German in 2019, but the aspects mentioned can easily be transferred to an international context, especially for other European Union (EU) member states. Therefore, it is now also published in English. Since 2016, an expert panel of members of different German scientific societies have worked together and developed seven guidelines with a total of 27 practical recommendations. These recommendations include (1) the research objectives, research questions, data sources, and resources; (2) the data infrastructure and data flow; (3) data protection; (4) ethics; (5) the key variables and linkage methods; (6) data validation/quality assurance; and (7) the long-term use of data for questions still to be determined. The authors provide a rationale for each recommendation. Future revisions will include new developments in science and updates of data privacy regulations.

[The baseline assessment of the German National Cohort (NAKO Gesundheitsstudie): participation in the examination modules, quality assurance, and the use of secondary data]. / Die Basiserhebung der NAKO Gesundheitsstudie: Teilnahme an den Untersuchungsmodulen, Qualitätssicherung und Nutzung von Sekundärdaten.

BACKGROUND: The German National Cohort (NAKO) is an interdisciplinary health study aimed at elucidating causes for common chronic diseases and detecting their preclinical stages. This article provides an overview of design, methods, participation in the examinations, and their quality assurance based on the midterm baseline dataset (MBD) of the recruitment. METHODS: More than 200,000 women and men aged 20-69 years derived from random samples of the German general population were recruited in 18 study centers (2014-2019). The data collection comprised physical examinations, standardized interviews and questionnaires, and the collection of biomedical samples for all participants (level 1). At least 20% of all participants received additional in-depth examinations (level 2), and 30,000 received whole-body magnet resonance imaging (MRI). Additional information will be collected through secondary data sources such as medical registries, health insurances, and pension funds. This overview is based on the MBD, which included 101,839 participants, of whom 11,371 received an MRI. RESULTS: The mean response proportion was 18%. The participation in the examinations was high with most of the modules performed by over 95%. Among MRI participants, 96% completed all 12 MRI sequences. More than 90% of the participants agreed to the use of complementary secondary and registry data. DISCUSSION: Individuals selected for the NAKO were willing to participate in all examinations despite the time-consuming program. The NAKO provides a central resource for population-based epidemiologic research and will contribute to developing innovative strategies for prevention, screening and prediction of chronic diseases.

[Routine Data from Emergency Departments: Varying Documentation Standards, Billing Modalities and Data Custodians at an Identical Unit of Care]. / Routinedaten aus Notaufnahmen: Unterschiedliche Dokumentationsanforderungen, Abrechnungsmodalitäten und Datenhalter bei identischem Ort der Leistungserbringung.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is a big need for data on emergency department (ED) utilization in Germany. One reason is the ongoing reorganisation of emergency care. Possible sources are routine data that are being collected based on legal regulations. Different payers and compensation systems have their own requirements for data collection. METHODOLOGICAL CHALLENGES: Due to the sectoral separation of health care services, there is no dataset or data holder to provide information on all ED treatments in Germany. From an administrative point of view, emergency care in Germany is considered ambulatory outpatient or inpatient care from the time point of admission to the ED. In contrast, clinical decision about inpatient admission can sometimes only be made towards the end of emergency care. EDs themselves cannot be identified in claims data; only the medical discipline (e. g. surgery) is classified. In the case of outpatient treatment, reimbursed by the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians, at least one coded diagnosis (ICD) has to be recorded, accompanied by an additional code for the likelihood of this diagnosis. In case of multiple ICDs, a primary diagnosis cannot be specified. In the case of in-hospital treatment, an admission diagnosis must be recorded. After completion of hospital treatment, the main diagnosis and possibly secondary diagnoses are transferred to the respective health insurance fund. The statutory occupational accident insurance has its own requirements. SOLUTIONS: Depending on the research question and study design, different approaches are required. If data are queried directly in emergency departments or hospitals, additional information on the designated data holder and billing mode is crucial. When using health insurance data from inpatient care, the identification of emergency departments can be estimated on the basis of the reason for hospital admission and defined "unique" emergency ICDs. The case-related hospital statistics has its own limitations, but includes inpatients of all payers. DISCUSSION: Differing requirements for the administrative documentation cause a high workload in emergency departments. A standardised data collection system for all payers for inpatient and outpatient emergency care is recommended. This would contribute to the creation of valid and comparable datasets. The introduction of a particular identifier for EDs in claims data would enhance health services research.

What understanding of economics do medical students have?

Introduction: Economic topics appear in the medical studies curriculum at different times. Despite socio-political relevance, there is hardly any information about the degree of understanding that medical students have of "economics in medicine". The present study addresses the questions: What understanding of "economics in medicine" do medical students have before the start of the Practical Year? To what extent is economic teaching content understood as "economization" from outside the profession? Method: Magdeburg medical students in the 5th year of study, who participated in preparatory seminars for the Practical Year (PY) in 2014 and 2015 (60 participants each), assessed the relevance of various seminar topics four months prior to the start of the semester. On the basis of a three-stage qualitative-reconstructive partial evaluation, students' economic understanding is explored through secondary analysis: deductive derivation of the analysis units; integrative basic method ("segmentation", "micro-linguistic detailed analysis", "central theme"); development of a theoretical model by placing the central themes in context following Grounded Theory. Results: Based on the theory, 19 free-text answers with economic reference were identified from the total of all free-text answers. Each answer was assigned to at least one of a total of six themes of the students' understanding of economics: de-professionalizing economization, deciding and working economically, ambivalent requirements for efficiency and equity, the doctor as an entrepreneur, economics as relevant learning content, PY as a conflict-laden setting for economized working and learning. The theoretical model contains social, praxeological and professional references, which can themselves be ambivalent and conflicting. Conclusion: Despite their critical attitude, the surveyed medical students are neither hostile to economics nor do they regard economics in medicine as a taboo subject. Economic learning content is recognized as relevant. Educational formats that tackle the tension between patient and system orientation in a problem-oriented manner can be a productive setting for economic reflection.

[Good Practice Data Linkage]. / Gute Praxis Datenlinkage (GPD).

Individual data linkage of different data sources for research purposes is being increasingly used in Germany in recent years. However, generally accepted methodological guidance is missing. The aim of this article is to define such methodological standards for research projects. Another aim is to provide readers with a checklist for critical appraisal of research proposals and articles. Since 2016, an expert panel of members of different German scientific societies have worked together and developed 7 guidelines with a total of 27 practical recommendations. These recommendations include (1) research aims, questions, data sources and resources, (2) infrastructure and data flow, (3) data privacy, (4) ethics, (5) key variables and type of linkage, (6) data validation/quality assurance and (7) long-term use for future research questions. The authors provide a rationale for each recommendation. Future revisions will include any new developments in science and data privacy.

[Linkage of large secondary and registry data sources with data of cohort studies : usage of a dual potential]. / Verknüpfung großer Sekundär- und Registerdatenquellen mit Daten aus Kohortenstudien : Doppeltes Potenzial nutzen.

Cohort studies provide the best evidence of all epidemiological observational studies for the identification of causal relationships between risk factors and diseases. However, this design may lead to drawbacks that may affect the validity and reliability of the results. This follows in particular from systematic errors, such as selection bias or recall bias. One possibility to avoid or counteract some of these drawbacks is to link primary data from cohort studies with secondary and register data. The linkage of these data may also be used for mutual validations. Data that were previously linked with primary data within the context of cohort studies in Germany were obtained from statutory health insurances and pensions as well as data from the Federal Employment Agency and cancer registries. All these data have two features in common: First, they all cover detailed information about a large population and over a long period of time. Second, all sources are in principle able to provide data on an individual level such that an individual data linkage, e.g. with primary data, is possible. However, use and linkage of each of these data sources are restricted by several limitations. These have to be accounted for as well as numerous legal restrictions that exist in Germany to especially prevent the misuse of social data.