Putting the Patient First: A Scoping Review of Patient Desires in Canada

Patient-centred care is a key priority for governments, providers and stakeholders, yet little is known about the care preferences of patient groups. We completed a scoping review that yielded 193 articles for analysis. Five health states were used to account for the diversity of possible preferences based on health needs. Five broad themes were identified and expressed differently across the health states, including personalized care, navigation, choice, holistic care and care continuity. Patients' perspectives must be considered to meet the diverse needs of targeted patient groups, which can inform health system planning, quality improvement initiatives and targeting of investments.

The Inclusion of Minority Groups in Clinical Trials: Problems of Under Representation and Under Reporting of Data

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the representation of minority groups in randomized control trials (RCTs), and the frequency with which this information is reported.

STUDY DESIGN

Reviewers collected data on the racial/ethnic composition of study samples from all RCTs published in six leading medical journals in 1999.

RESULTS

Of the 280 RCTs, most (204, 71.3%) provided no information on the race/ethnicity of participants. Of the 89 U.S.-based RCTs, 50 (56.1%) reported their minority distribution. Relative to other trials, those funded by the National Institute of Health (NIH) (n = 52) were more likely to report race/ethnicity data (55.8% vs. 23.7%; x2 = 20.9, p <_0.001) and to include nonwhite participants (13.5 % vs. 12.5%; x2=22.7, p<_0.001).

CONCLUSION

Minority groups are currently under-represented in clinical trials. Information on the race and ethnicity of clinical trial participants is currently underreported in six leading medical journals. Reporting of minority group information was significantly better only in NIH funded trials, which also were more likely to include nonwhite participants. This suggests that mandatory reporting policies may have a positive effect on both reporting and representation.

Relation between randomized controlled trials published in leading general medical journals and the global burden of disease

BACKGROUND

More than two-thirds of the world's population live in low-income countries, where health priorities are different from those of people living in more affluent parts of the world. We evaluated the relation between the global burden of disease and conditions or diseases studied in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in general medical journals.

METHODS

A MEDLINE search identified 373 RCTs that had been published in 6 international peer-reviewed general medical journals in 1999. Manual review excluded non-RCTs, brief reports and trials in which the unit of randomization was not the patient; 286 RCTs remained eligible for analysis. We identified the RCTs that studied any of the 40 leading causes of the global burden of disease. Five of these conditions were considered unsuitable for study with an RCT design and were excluded from subsequent analysis. To provide a practical perspective, we asked 12 experts working with international health organizations to rate the relevance to global health of the articles that studied any of the top 10 causes of the global burden of disease, as measured by disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) and mortality, using a 5-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

Among the 286 RCTs in our sample, 124 (43.4%) addressed 1 of the 35 leading causes of the global burden of disease. Of these, ischemic heart disease, HIV/AIDS and cerebrovascular disease were the most commonly studied conditions. Ninety articles (31.5%) studied 1 of the top 10 causes of the global burden of disease. The mean rating (and standard deviation) for international health relevance assigned by experts was 2.6 (1.5) out of 5. Only 14 (16%) of the 90 trials received a rating of 4 or greater, indicating high relevance to international health. Almost half of the 40 leading causes of the global burden of disease were not studied by any trial.

INTERPRETATION

Many conditions or diseases common internationally are underrepresented in RCTs published in leading general medical journals. Trials published in these journals that studied one of these high-priority conditions were generally rated as being of little relevance to international health.

Chronic recurrent multifocal osteomyelitis: clinical outcomes after more than five years of follow-up

OBJECTIVE

To determine the clinical outcomes of children with chronic recurrent multifocal osteomyelitis (CRMO).

STUDY DESIGN

Inception cohorts of children with CRMO were established at two tertiary pediatric centers. Outcome data were obtained through review of hospital charts, interview and examination of patients, and completion of questionnaires by patients.

RESULTS

Of 45 eligible subjects, 23 (51%) were assessed. Median time since diagnosis was 13 years (range, 6-25). At evaluation, 6 (26%) had active disease; 18 (78%) had Health Assessment Questionnaire scores of 0 (no/minimal physical disability), and 5 had scores >0. Some impairment was seen in all domains of measurement of quality-of-life test, especially those concerning nonphysical aspects of health. Six (26%) subjects continued to have pain as a result of CRMO. Associated medical problems included arthritis in 6, sacroiliitis in 3, psoriasis in 5, recurrent pustular rashes in 2, and inflammatory bowel disease in 3.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term clinical outcomes for children with CRMO appear to be generally good, with most subjects having no evidence of disease activity or sequelae. However, a number of subjects had persistent disease and, therefore, remain at risk of physical and psychologic complications. Further research is required to identify patients at risk for persistent disease, and to determine therapies that may prevent morbidity.