Journal of evaluation in clinical practice
-
This paper depicts a Covid science case, that of the AstraZeneca Vaxzevria vaccine, with specific focus on what happened in Italy. Given that we believe acknowledging the role of non-evidential factors in medicine is an important insight into the recent philosophy of science, we illustrate how in the case of Vaxzevria, the interplay between facts, values (both epistemic and non-epistemic) and cognitive biases may have possibly led to different institutional decisions based on the same evidence. The structure of the paper is as follows. ⋯ Second, we sketch a timeline of Vaxzevria's approvals and suspensions by relevant institutional healthcare authorities with special focus on Italy and the Italian Medicines Agency. Then we show the interplay between the evidence base, epistemic as well as non-epistemic values and cognitive biases using a narrative review of political decisions along with newspaper and social media content pertaining to Vaxzevria. We briefly compare Italy with other European countries to show that different political decisions were made on the basis of the same evidence.
-
Studies in adult medicine have shown that physicians base testing decisions on the patient's clinical condition but also consider other factors, including local practice or patient expectations. In pediatrics, physicians and parents jointly decide on behalf of a (young) child. This might demand more explicit and more complex deliberations, with sometimes conflicting interests. We explored pediatricians' considerations in diagnostic test ordering and the factors that influence their deliberation. ⋯ We obtained an overview of the considerations that are weighed in pediatric test decisions. The comparatively strong focus on prevention of harm motivates pediatricians to critically appraise the added value of testing and drivers of low-value testing. Pediatricians' relatively restrictive approach to testing could provide an example for other disciplines. Improved guidelines and physician and patient education could help to withstand the perceived pressure to test.
-
This study was designed to determine the associations between insurance status and clinical outcomes among patients with hyperglycaemic crisis. ⋯ Insurance status is associated with the outcomes of hospitalisation for hyperglycaemic crisis; uninsured patients with hyperglycaemic crisis face a higher risk of mortality in China.
-
The informal caregivers who provide unpaid support for persons living with dementia (PLWD) are often unprepared to appropriately manage symptoms and navigate health services to support themselves or the PLWD. ⋯ The findings imply that caregivers are aware of disease progression, dementia symptoms, and do not feel supported by their providers in managing care or accessing support services. There is opportunity to support informal caregivers in a primary care setting by appropriately uptraining providers in dementia care.
-
Decision curve analysis (DCA) helps integrate prediction models with treatment assessments to guide personalised therapeutic choices among multiple treatment options. However, the current versions of DCA do not explicitly model treatment effects in the analysis but implicitly or holistically assess therapeutic benefits and harms. In addition, the existing DCA cannot allow the comparison of multiple treatments using a standard metric. ⋯ We describe gDCA for evaluating single or multiple treatments to help tailor therapy toward individual risk characteristics. gDCA further helps integrate the principles of evidence-based medicine with decision analysis.