Journal of clinical epidemiology
-
To develop a framework to identify and classify interactions within and among treatments and conditions and to test this framework with guidelines on chronic heart failure (CHF) and its frequent comorbidity. ⋯ The interaction matrix provides a structure to present different types of interactions between an index disease and comorbidity. Guideline developers may consider the matrix to support clinical decision making in multimorbidity. Further research is needed to show its relevance to improve guidelines and health outcomes.
-
Self-efficacy theory, as developed by Bandura, suggests that self-efficacy is an important predictor of future behavior. The Chronic Disease Self-Management Program was designed to enhance self-efficacy as one approach to improving health behaviors and outcomes for people with varying chronic diseases. The six-item Self-Efficacy to Manage Chronic Disease Scale (SEMCD) and the four-item Spanish-language version (SEMCD-S) were developed to measure changes in self-efficacy in program participants and have been used in a numerous evaluations of chronic disease self-management programs. This study describes the development of the scales and their psychometric properties. ⋯ The SEMCD and SEMCD-S are reliable and appear to be valid instruments for assessing self-efficacy for managing chronic disease. There was remarkable consistency across a range of studies from varying countries using two languages.
-
The American College of Chest Physicians Antithrombotic Guidelines ninth iteration placed restrictions on panelists with recommendations on which they disclosed a primary conflict of interest (COI). We aimed to describe panelists' financial and intellectual COI and evaluate to what extent, beyond assessing financial COI, assessing intellectual COI affected COI management. ⋯ COI had a relatively low prevalence and a skewed distribution, many panelists with none and some with many disclosures. A substantial number of disclosures should have resulted in restrictions based on intellectual COI in the absence of financial COI.
-
Groups such as the Institute of Medicine emphasize the importance of attention to financial conflicts of interest. Little guidance exists, however, on managing the risk of bias for systematic reviews from nonfinancial conflicts of interest. We sought to create practical guidance on ensuring adequate clinical or content expertise while maintaining independence of judgment on systematic review teams. ⋯ The feasibility and utility of this approach to ensuring needed expertise on systematic reviews and minimizing bias from nonfinancial conflicts of interest must be investigated.