1
|
Kirby K, Coggins J, Gibson A, Liddiard C, Moore TH, Savović J, Mitchell K, Thompson A, Benger J, Body R. A multiple criteria decision analysis to establish the use cases and candidate point of care tests to enter into a platform trial of multiple in vitro diagnostic point of care tests in the prehospital environment. NIHR OPEN RESEARCH 2024; 4:29. [PMID: 39145100 PMCID: PMC11320030 DOI: 10.3310/nihropenres.13580.2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/22/2024] [Indexed: 08/16/2024]
Abstract
Background There are increasing demands on Emergency Medical Services. More efficient treatment pathways are required to support conveyance decision making and patient referral in prehospital care. Point of Care testing is increasingly available and utilised across the NHS to support optimal ways of working. We aimed to design and conduct a Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis to prioritise in vitro point of care tests and use cases for inclusion in a platform trial of in vitro point of care testing in UK Emergency Medical Services. Methods We designed a Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis that included systematic scoping reviews stakeholder recruitment, two stakeholder surveys and two stakeholder workshops to scope the use cases, explore criteria and map use cases, evaluate the criteria and measure the use cases against the criteria. Results We recruited 32 stakeholders. We developed a scoring matrix with 4 criteria for scoring the use cases and 8 criteria for scoring the point of care tests and applied weighting determined from survey results. Use cases were scored by the stakeholders against 4 criteria. The 3 highest scoring use cases were point of care troponin testing in: possible Acute Myocardial Infarction, lactate testing in suspected sepsis and in trauma. We developed the process for scoring the point of care tests to be completed close to a proposed trial to allow for a changes in technology. Conclusions We successfully designed a Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis to identify use cases and candidate tests for inclusion in a future platform trial of in vitro point of care testing in UK Emergency Medical Services. We identified 3 use cases for evaluation in a platform trial of in vitro point of care testing: troponin testing in possible acute myocardial infarction, lactate testing in suspected sepsis and lactate testing to identify occult haemorrhage in trauma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kim Kirby
- University of the West of England, Bristol, BS16 ODD, UK
- South Western Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, EX2 7HY, UK
| | | | - Andy Gibson
- University of the West of England, Bristol, BS16 ODD, UK
| | - Cathy Liddiard
- University of the West of England, Bristol, BS16 ODD, UK
| | - Theresa H.M. Moore
- The National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West, Bristol, BS1 2NT, UK
| | - Jelena Savović
- The National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West, Bristol, BS1 2NT, UK
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| | | | | | | | - Richard Body
- University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ngorsuraches S, Lai TC, Habermann R, Wheeler Y, Meador W. Using a Patient-Centered Multicriteria Decision Analysis to Assess the Value of Multiple Sclerosis Treatments in the US: A Study Protocol. PHARMACOECONOMICS - OPEN 2024:10.1007/s41669-024-00509-3. [PMID: 38982030 DOI: 10.1007/s41669-024-00509-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/27/2024] [Indexed: 07/11/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The engagement of patients and family caregivers in value assessment is pivotal since they provide valuable contributions to assessment acceptability and relevance. The proposed study aims to use patient-centered techniques and multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) to evaluate the values of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for multiple sclerosis (MS) from the perspectives of patients and family caregivers living in three 'Deep South' States of the US-Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi. METHODS This study will follow guidance from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) for patient engagement and two best practice reports for MCDA from the Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) to complete value assessment. Throughout the study, we will engage multiple stakeholders, including patients, family caregivers, healthcare providers, and payers. Forty patients with MS and their family caregivers from Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi will be invited to participate in this study. We will intensively train them for value assessment knowledge and MCDA before we engage them in MCDA to determine the value of DMTs for MS. DISCUSSIONS Our approach differs from common MCDA since we incorporated a patient-centered framework in this study. Unlike previous studies only briefly inform or prepare participants before the MCDA process, in this study, we will provide basic value assessment trainings for patients and family caregivers to ensure they can effectively engage throughout the patient-centered MCDA process. We expect this study will demonstrate that the patient-centered MCDA approach is feasible and likely leads to improved patients' and family caregivers' engagement in value assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Surachat Ngorsuraches
- Harrison College of Pharmacy, Health Outcomes Research and Policy, Auburn University, 4306A Walker Building, Auburn, AL, 36849, USA.
| | - Tim C Lai
- Harrison College of Pharmacy, Health Outcomes Research and Policy, Auburn University, 4306A Walker Building, Auburn, AL, 36849, USA
| | - Rebecca Habermann
- The Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi Chapter, National Multiple Sclerosis Society, 2200 Woodcrest Pl Ste 230, Birmingham, AL, 35209, USA
| | - Yolanda Wheeler
- School of Nursing, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1701 University Blvd, Birmingham, AL, 35294, USA
| | - William Meador
- Department of Neurology, Heersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 7th Avenue South, Birmingham, AL, 35233, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Phelps CE. Values Beyond "Health" in Budget-Constrained Healthcare Systems. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2024; 27:830-836. [PMID: 38401798 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2024.02.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2023] [Revised: 12/17/2023] [Accepted: 02/14/2024] [Indexed: 02/26/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Most current methods to value healthcare treatments only incorporate measures such as quality-adjusted life-years, combining gains in health-related quality of life and life expectancy in specific ways. Failure of these methods to recognize other dimensions of value has led to calls for methods to include additional values that are associated with the healthcare treatments but not captured directly by quality-adjusted life-years. This article seeks to provide methodologically sound ways to incorporate additional health-related outcomes, focusing on budget-constrained healthcare systems, in which using standard welfare economics methods are often eschewed. METHODS The analysis develops standard extra-welfarist approaches to maximizing aggregate health, subject to fixed-budget constraints, using Lagrange multiplier methods. Then, additional valuable health-related outcomes, eg, reduced caregiver burden, real option value, and market- and non-market productivity are introduced. The article also introduces a social welfare function approach to illuminate how disability, disease severity and other equity-related issues can be incorporated into complete welfare measures. RESULTS Resulting analysis, fully developed in an Appendix in Supplemental Materials found at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.02.005 and summarized in the main text, show that understanding how average and marginal healthcare costs increase with output and how health augments "additional values" provides ways to assess willingness to pay for them in these fixed-budget situations. CONCLUSIONS In budget-constrained healthcare systems, only from actual budget allocations can values both of health itself and "additional values" be inferred. These methods, combined with methodologically sound social welfare functions, demonstrate how to move from "health" to "welfare" in measuring the value of increased healthcare use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charles E Phelps
- Department of Economics, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA; Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA; Department of Political Science, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Gauvreau CL, Schreyer L, Gibson PJ, Koo A, Ungar WJ, Regier D, Chan K, Hayeems R, Gibson J, Palmer A, Peacock S, Denburg AE. Development of a Value Assessment Framework for Pediatric Health Technologies Using Multicriteria Decision Analysis: Expanding the Value Lens for Funding Decision Making. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2024; 27:879-888. [PMID: 38548179 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2024.03.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2023] [Revised: 03/07/2024] [Accepted: 03/19/2024] [Indexed: 04/20/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES A health technology assessment (HTA) does not systematically account for the circumstances and needs of children and youth. To supplement HTA processes, we aimed to develop a child-tailored value assessment framework using a multicriteria decision analysis approach. METHODS We constructed a multicriteria-decision-analysis-based model in multiple phases to create the Comprehensive Assessment of Technologies for Child Health (CATCH) framework. Using a modified Delphi process with stakeholders having broad disciplinary and geographic variation (N = 23), we refined previously generated criteria and developed rank-based weights. We established a criterion-pertinent scoring rubric for assessing incremental benefits of new drugs. Three clinicians independently assessed comprehension by pilotscoring 9 drugs. We then validated CATCH for 2 childhood cancer therapies through structured deliberation with an expert panel (N = 10), obtaining individual scores, consensus scores, and verbal feedback. Analyses included descriptive statistics, thematic analysis, exploratory disagreement indices, and sensitivity analysis. RESULTS The modified Delphi process yielded 10 criteria, based on absolute importance/relevance and agreed importance (median disagreement indices = 0.34): Effectiveness, Child-specific Health-related Quality of Life, Disease Severity, Unmet Need, Therapeutic Safety, Equity, Family Impacts, Life-course Development, Rarity, and Fair Share of Life. Pilot scoring resulted in adjusted criteria definitions and more precise score-scaling guidelines. Validation panelists endorsed the framework's key modifiers of value. Modes of their individual prescores aligned closely with deliberative consensus scores. CONCLUSIONS We iteratively developed a value assessment framework that captures dimensions of child-specific health and nonhealth gains. CATCH could improve the richness and relevance of HTA decision making for children in Canada and comparable health systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cindy L Gauvreau
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids) Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Leighton Schreyer
- Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Paul J Gibson
- McMaster Children's Hospital, Hamilton, ON, Canada; Pediatric Oncology Group of Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Alicia Koo
- Department of Pharmacy, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Wendy J Ungar
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids) Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Dean Regier
- BC Cancer Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Kelvin Chan
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Robin Hayeems
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids) Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Jennifer Gibson
- Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Antonia Palmer
- Ac4orn: Advocacy for Canadian Childhood Cancer Research Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Canada; Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Avram E Denburg
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids) Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Division of Haematology/Oncology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Dakin H, Tsiachristas A. Rationing in an Era of Multiple Tight Constraints: Is Cost-Utility Analysis Still Fit for Purpose? APPLIED HEALTH ECONOMICS AND HEALTH POLICY 2024; 22:315-329. [PMID: 38329700 PMCID: PMC7615833 DOI: 10.1007/s40258-023-00858-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/14/2023] [Indexed: 02/09/2024]
Abstract
Cost-utility analysis may not be sufficient to support reimbursement decisions when the assessed health intervention requires a large proportion of the healthcare budget or when the monetary healthcare budget is not the only resource constraint. Such cases include joint replacement, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) interventions and settings where all resources are constrained (e.g. post-COVID-19 or in low/middle-income countries). Using literature on health technology assessment, rationing and reimbursement in healthcare, we identified seven alternative frameworks for simultaneous decisions about (dis)investment and proposed modifications to deal with multiple resource constraints. These frameworks comprised constrained optimisation; cost-effectiveness league table; 'step-in-the-right-direction' approach; heuristics based on effective gradients; weighted cost-effectiveness ratios; multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA); and programme budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA). We used numerical examples to demonstrate how five of these alternative frameworks would operate. The modified frameworks we propose could be used in local commissioning and/or health technology assessment to supplement standard cost-utility analysis for interventions that have large budget impact and/or are subject to additional constraints.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Helen Dakin
- Health Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, Old Road Campus, Headington, OX3 7LF, Oxford, UK.
| | - Apostolos Tsiachristas
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Takhar P, Geirnaert M, Gavura S, Beca J, Mercer RE, Denburg A, Muñoz C, Tadrous M, Parmar A, Dionne F, Boehm D, Chambers C, Craig E, Trudeau M, Cheung MC, Houlihan J, McDonald V, Pechlivanoglou P, Taylor M, Wasylenko E, Wranik WD, Chan KKW. Application of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) to Prioritize Real-World Evidence Studies for Health Technology Management: Outcomes and Lessons Learned by the Canadian Real-World Evidence for Value of Cancer Drugs (CanREValue) Collaboration. Curr Oncol 2024; 31:1876-1898. [PMID: 38668044 PMCID: PMC11049582 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31040141] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/10/2024] [Revised: 02/09/2024] [Accepted: 03/27/2024] [Indexed: 04/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is a value assessment tool designed to help support complex decision-making by incorporating multiple factors and perspectives in a transparent, structured approach. We developed an MCDA rating tool, consisting of seven criteria evaluating the importance and feasibility of conducting potential real-world evidence (RWE) studies aimed at addressing uncertainties stemming from initial cancer drug funding recommendations. In collaboration with the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health's Provincial Advisory Group, a validation exercise was conducted to further evaluate the application of the rating tool using RWE proposals varying in complexity. Through this exercise, we aimed to gain insight into consensus building and deliberation processes and to identify efficiencies in the application of the rating tool. An experienced facilitator led a multidisciplinary committee, consisting of 11 Canadian experts, through consensus building, deliberation, and prioritization. A total of nine RWE proposals were evaluated and prioritized as low (n = 4), medium (n = 3), or high (n = 2) priority. Through an iterative process, efficiencies and recommendations to improve the rating tool and associated procedures were identified. The refined MCDA rating tool can help decision-makers prioritize important and feasible RWE studies for research and can enable the use of RWE for the life-cycle evaluation of cancer drugs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pam Takhar
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, ON M5G 2L3, Canada; (P.T.); (S.G.); (J.B.); (R.E.M.); (C.M.)
| | | | - Scott Gavura
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, ON M5G 2L3, Canada; (P.T.); (S.G.); (J.B.); (R.E.M.); (C.M.)
| | - Jaclyn Beca
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, ON M5G 2L3, Canada; (P.T.); (S.G.); (J.B.); (R.E.M.); (C.M.)
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, ON M5G 2L3, Canada
| | - Rebecca E. Mercer
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, ON M5G 2L3, Canada; (P.T.); (S.G.); (J.B.); (R.E.M.); (C.M.)
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, ON M5G 2L3, Canada
- Evaluative Clinical Services, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON M4N 3M3, Canada;
| | - Avram Denburg
- Division of Haematology/Oncology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON M5G 1X8, Canada
| | - Caroline Muñoz
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, ON M5G 2L3, Canada; (P.T.); (S.G.); (J.B.); (R.E.M.); (C.M.)
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, ON M5G 2L3, Canada
| | - Mina Tadrous
- Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3M2, Canada;
- Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, ON M5S 1B2, Canada
| | - Ambica Parmar
- Division of Medical Oncology & Hematology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M3, Canada; (A.P.); (M.T.)
- Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1A8, Canada
| | | | - Darryl Boehm
- Saskatchewan Cancer Agency, Regina, SK S4W 0G3, Canada;
| | | | - Erica Craig
- New Brunswick Cancer Network, Fredericton, NB E3B 5G8, Canada;
| | - Maureen Trudeau
- Division of Medical Oncology & Hematology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M3, Canada; (A.P.); (M.T.)
| | - Matthew C. Cheung
- Evaluative Clinical Services, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON M4N 3M3, Canada;
- Division of Medical Oncology & Hematology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M3, Canada; (A.P.); (M.T.)
- Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1A8, Canada
| | | | - Valerie McDonald
- Independent Patient Representative, Toronto, ON M6G 2V3, Canada;
| | - Petros Pechlivanoglou
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON M5G 1X8, Canada;
| | | | - Eric Wasylenko
- Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada;
- John Dossetor Health Ethics Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2R7, Canada
| | - Wiesława Dominika Wranik
- Department of Public and International Affairs, Faculty of Management, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS B3H 4R2, Canada;
- Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS B3H 4R2, Canada
| | - Kelvin K. W. Chan
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, ON M5G 2L3, Canada; (P.T.); (S.G.); (J.B.); (R.E.M.); (C.M.)
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, ON M5G 2L3, Canada
- Evaluative Clinical Services, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON M4N 3M3, Canada;
- Division of Medical Oncology & Hematology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M3, Canada; (A.P.); (M.T.)
- Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1A8, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Baird TA, Wright DR, Britto MT, Lipstein EA, Trout AT, Hayatghaibi SE. Patient Preferences in Diagnostic Imaging: A Scoping Review. THE PATIENT 2023; 16:579-591. [PMID: 37667148 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-023-00646-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/22/2023] [Indexed: 09/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND As new diagnostic imaging technologies are adopted, decisions surrounding diagnostic imaging become increasingly complex. As such, understanding patient preferences in imaging decision making is imperative. OBJECTIVES We aimed to review quantitative patient preference studies in imaging-related decision making, including characteristics of the literature and the quality of the evidence. METHODS The Pubmed, Embase, EconLit, and CINAHL databases were searched to identify studies involving diagnostic imaging and quantitative patient preference measures from January 2000 to June 2022. Study characteristics that were extracted included the preference elicitation method, disease focus, and sample size. We employed the PREFS (Purpose, Respondents, Explanation, Findings, Significance) checklist as our quality assessment tool. RESULTS A total of 54 articles were included. The following methods were used to elicit preferences: conjoint analysis/discrete choice experiment methods (n = 27), contingent valuation (n = 16), time trade-off (n = 4), best-worst scaling (n = 3), multicriteria decision analysis (n = 3), and a standard gamble approach (n = 1). Half of the studies were published after 2016 (52%, 28/54). The most common scenario (n = 39) for eliciting patient preferences was cancer screening. Computed tomography, the most frequently studied imaging modality, was included in 20 studies, and sample sizes ranged from 30 to 3469 participants (mean 552). The mean PREFS score was 3.5 (standard deviation 0.8) for the included studies. CONCLUSIONS This review highlights that a variety of quantitative preference methods are being used, as diagnostic imaging technologies continue to evolve. While the number of preference studies in diagnostic imaging has increased with time, most examine preventative care/screening, leaving a gap in knowledge regarding imaging for disease characterization and management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Trey A Baird
- University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Davene R Wright
- Division of Child Health Research and Policy, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Maria T Britto
- University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
- Department of Pediatrics, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
- Division of Adolescent Medicine, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
- James M. Anderson Center for Health Systems Excellence, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Ave, Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA
| | - Ellen A Lipstein
- University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
- Department of Pediatrics, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
- James M. Anderson Center for Health Systems Excellence, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Ave, Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA
| | - Andrew T Trout
- University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
- Department of Pediatrics, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
- Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Shireen E Hayatghaibi
- University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
- James M. Anderson Center for Health Systems Excellence, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Ave, Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA.
- Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
| |
Collapse
|