FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Australian research priorities for inherited retinal diseases: a James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership

Por: Robertson · E. G. · Hetherington · K. · Prain · M. · Ma · A. · Ayton · L. N. · Jamieson · R. V. · Shepard · E. · Boyd · L. · Hall · J. · Boyd · R. · Karandrews · S. · Feller · H. · Simunovic · M. P. · Grigg · J. R. · Yamamoto · K. · Wakefield · C. E. · Gonzalez-Cordero · A.
Objectives

Inherited retinal diseases (IRDs) are a broad range of diseases associated with abnormalities/degeneration of retinal cells. We aimed to identify the top 10 Australian research priorities for IRDs to ultimately facilitate more meaningful and potentially cost-effective research.

Design

We conducted a James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership that involved two Australian-wide surveys and online workshops.

Setting

Australia-wide.

Participants

Individuals aged 16 years or older were eligible to participate if they had an IRD, were caregivers of an individual with an IRD or were health professionals providing care to this community.

Outcome measure

In Survey 1, we gathered participants’ unanswered questions about IRDs. We grouped these into summary questions and undertook a literature review to verify if they were truly unanswered (ie, evidence uncertainties). In Survey 2, participants voted for the uncertainties that they considered a priority. Top-ranked uncertainties progressed for discussion and final prioritisation in two workshops.

Results

In Survey 1, we collected 223 questions from 69 participants. We grouped these into 42 summary questions and confirmed 41 as evidence uncertainties. In Survey 2, 151 participants voted, with the 16 uncertainties progressing to final prioritisation. The top 10 priorities, set by the 24 workshop participants, represented (1) treatment/cure; (2) symptoms and disease progression; (3) psychosocial well-being and (4) health service delivery. The #1 priority was for treatment to prevent, slow down or stop vision loss, followed by the #2 priority to address the psychological impact of having an IRD.

Conclusion

The top 10 research priorities highlight the need for IRD research that takes a whole-person, systems approach. Collaborations to progress priorities will accelerate the translation of research into real-world benefits.

INDIGO randomised controlled digital clinical trial: INvestigating DIgital outcomes and quality of life in cancer survivors - a study protocol

Por: Le Calvez · K. · Gregory · J. J. · Gath · J. · Wheatstone · P. · Ashley · L. · Chinembiri · O. · Cunliffe · A. · Davenport · G. · Jamieson Gilmore · K. · Langel · K. · Miglio · C. · Pakzad-Shahabi · L. · Padmasri · D. · Ruta · D. · Williams · H. · Williams · M.
Introduction

There are estimated to be 3.4 million patients in the UK living after a diagnosis of cancer. We know very little about their quality of life or healthcare usage. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are tools which help to translate a patient’s quality of life into measurable categories, but how to do this at scale remains underexplored. The study employs a randomised design to assess different engagement strategies for optimising participation, data linkage and questionnaire completion in Northwest London and then nationally, with appropriate research approvals.

Methods and analysis

We have designed and implemented an online, patient-completed, randomised observational trial. We will pilot it in Northwest London before national roll-out, using initially the General Practice (GP) record of a cancer diagnosis and then exploring the use of social media. The primary objective is to explore the feasibility of recruiting participants via self-identification or contact from the primary care research network and obtaining consent to link participants’ PROMs responses to their cancer registry records. Data collection occurs through a secure platform, with participants directly responsible for data entry. There is no formal target sample size because this is a feasibility study, and we want to explore how many patients we can recruit. Analyses will be conducted using descriptive statistics, repeated measures multilevel modelling and machine learning techniques. If a substantial difference in responses between randomisation arms is detected, ineffective strategies will be removed. If no clear difference is observed, recruitment will continue with periodic reviews based on response rates and data completeness.

Ethics and dissemination

The Study Coordination Centre has obtained approval from the London—Surrey Research Ethics Committee and Health Research Authority. We will publish and disseminate the results in local, national and international meetings, in peer-reviewed journals, on social media and on websites.

It has been registered under ‘Investigating Digital Outcomes for Cancer Survivors in the Community’ (NCT06095024).

Trial registration number

NCT06095024: Investigating Digital Outcomes for Cancer Survivors in the Community.

Bridging the digital divide for people with aphasia: a study protocol for codesigning web accessibility tools and guidelines

Por: Lee · J. · Worthy · P. · Deslandes · R. · Burton · B. · Copland · D. A. · Jamieson · P. · Barron · K. · Togher · L. · Shrubsole · K. · Shiggins · C. · Campbell · J. · Hill · A. · Wiles · J. · Haslam · S. A. · Wallace · S. J.
Introduction

Aphasia is a language impairment that affects one-third of people who experience a stroke. Aphasia can impact all facets of language: speaking, understanding, reading and writing. Around 60% of people with aphasia have persistent language impairments 1 year after their stroke, requiring ongoing healthcare and support. In recent years, the internet has become a key resource for the self-management of chronic health conditions. Navigating web content, however, requires language use, and as such, people living with aphasia are more likely to be excluded from digital health and support services. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines exist; however, they do not fully address the unique and diverse needs of people with aphasia, and a significant proportion of websites (over 90%) do not fully adhere to them. This protocol paper describes the first two stages of the Bridging the Digital Divide project, which aims to codesign and develop (a) a web-browser extension to re-render webpages to an ‘aphasia-friendly’ (accessible) format, (b) training tools to help users and health professionals customise the web-browser extension and (c) guidelines for developing communication-accessible websites.

Methods and analysis

The research will be conducted using experience-based codesign. In Stage 1a, focus groups will be held with (1) people with aphasia, (2) family members or significant others and (3) health professionals working with people with aphasia. Participants will be asked to share their experiences of accessing (or supporting a person with aphasia to access) healthcare, information and support services on the web. The nominal group technique (NGT) will be used to identify priorities for improving web accessibility for people with aphasia. Focus group data will be analysed using reflexive thematic analysis, and prioritisation data will be analysed using inductive qualitative content analysis. In Stage 1b, eight codesign workshops will be held with representatives of the three key stakeholder groups to iteratively codesign and develop a web-browser extension, training tools and guidelines to support web accessibility.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical clearance for Stage 1a and Stage 1b of this project has been approved by the University of Queensland Human Research Ethics Committee (Stage 1a approval number: 2023/HE000528, Stage 1b approval number: 2024/HE000721). The outcomes of this research will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences. A dissemination and celebration event will be held at the completion of the project.

❌