SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Evidential value”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

329 records · Page 19Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Using the OPTIMAL Theory to Optimize Aerodynamics in Respiratory Training for Healthy Adults and Individuals With Parkinson's Disease.

BACKGROUND: The OPTIMAL (Optimizing Performance Through Intrinsic Motivation and Attention for Learning) theory is a motor learning framework proposing that optimizing intrinsic motivation enhances motor performance and learning. The theory identifies three key components-Enhanced Expectancies (EE), Autonomy Support (AS) and External Focus of Attention (EF)-which facilitate more efficient, goal-directed movement. These components have been shown to improve motor outcomes in limb-based tasks; however, their application to respiratory training, particularly in clinical contexts such as voice and swallowing therapy in patients with Parkinson's disease (pwPD), has not yet been systematically explored. AIMS: This study aimed to investigate whether implementing OPTIMAL theory strategies during a respiratory muscle strength training (RMST) task improves immediate respiratory motor performance in healthy adults and pwPD. Additionally, we aimed to examine the effects of these strategies on motivation and cognitive engagement. METHODS: This quasi-randomized, single-session trial included 47 participants: Healthy CONTROL (n = 17), Healthy OPTIMAL (n = 16) and PD OPTIMAL (n = 14). Healthy participants were quasi-randomly assigned to either intervention or control conditions, whereas pwPD completed the intervention only. All participants completed a single respiratory session that included baseline, practice and retention phases. Outcome measures included peak expiratory flow, cough peak expiratory flow, cognitive engagement (EEG-based Cognitive Engagement Index) and self-administered motivation questionnaire. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: Exhalation force improved from baseline to retention in the Healthy OPTIMAL group (baseline: M = 296 L/min; retention: M = 338 L/min; p < 0.001) and the PD OPTIMAL group (baseline: M = 315 L/min; retention: M = 370 L/min; p < 0.0001), but not in the Healthy CONTROL group (p > 0.05). No significant changes in cough strength were observed in any group. No correlations were found between cognitive engagement and exhalation force or motivation scores. However, motivation increased more in the Healthy OPTIMAL group (Questionnaire 1: M = 57.2; Questionnaire 2: M = 60.7) and the PD OPTIMAL group (Questionnaire 1: M = 60.1; Questionnaire 2: M = 62.8) than in the Healthy CONTROL group (Questionnaire 1: M = 61.1; Questionnaire 2: M = 62.5). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Implementing the OPTIMAL theory enhances immediate respiratory motor performance in both healthy participants and pwPD. OPTIMAL theory has clinical value in voice and swallowing therapy, although further research is needed to establish long-term efficacy and clinical impact. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Motivation is a critical factor in rehabilitation. The OPTIMAL theory has been shown to improve both motivation and motor performance in limb-based tasks. Its impact on respiratory training, however, has not been previously examined. What this paper adds to the existing knowledge This study shows that applying OPTIMAL strategies during a respiratory muscle strength training task significantly improved peak expiratory flow in both healthy adults and people with Parkinson's disease. What are the potential or clinical implications of this work? Integrating the OPTIMAL theory principles into respiratory therapy may enhance motor outcomes, supporting voice, swallowing and cough rehabilitation.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Contact tracing for hepatitis C: perspectives of people with experience of substance use and hepatitis C on intervention acceptability.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic hepatitis C (HCV) is a major cause of cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. In the UK, the principal risk factor for HCV is injecting drug use. The introduction of direct acting anti-virals (DAA's) have transformed HCV care, with cure rates of over 95%. However, HCV is often asymptomatic, and reinfection is a concern. Modelling and real-life studies demonstrate the potential effectiveness of a contact tracing approach for finding people who have acquired HCV through injecting drug use. However, it is not used routinely in the UK. This qualitative study was undertaken to assess the acceptability of a contact tracing approach to identify people who have injected drugs with an index patient recently diagnosed with HCV. METHODS: Twelve people with lived or living experience of injecting drug use and an HCV diagnosis were interviewed using semi-structured interview topic guides. Participants were purposefully selected according to the inclusion criteria and to ensure there was an even spread of male and female participants. Sekhon's Theoretical Framework of Acceptability, incorporating seven components (affective attitude, burden, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity cost, perceived effectiveness, and self-efficacy) was used to analyse data from interview transcripts. RESULTS: A sample of 12 people who inject drugs in the UK indicated that a contact tracing approach was acceptable across two components of Sekhon's acceptability framework: affective attitude and ethicality. Participants broadly found the idea of tracing people who may be at risk of contracting HCV acceptable, and the approach aligned with their value systems. A contact tracing approach would help alleviate concerns about putting other people's lives at risk through HCV transmission and was seen as a 'sensible' way of finding people at risk. However, there were caveats to this acceptability. Contact tracing approaches delivered by mainstream health, or governmental organisations increased burden, opportunity costs and perceived effectiveness of a contact tracing approach for HCV, particularly within contexts of exclusion and criminalisation of people who inject drugs. Burden and opportunity costs were also affected by individual experiences and risks of violence, sexual violence and abuse. There was a lack of knowledge of contact tracing approaches amongst respondents, leading to a lack of intervention coherence and misunderstandings of what contact tracing was and how it would work. Trusted relationships with NGOs and HCV specialist nurses reduced burden and increased confidence and ability (self-efficacy) to engage with a contact tracing approach. CONCLUSION: People who inject drugs broadly perceive contact tracing as an acceptable method of finding people who are at risk of HCV. However, this acceptability is based on specific modes of delivery through trusted organisations. Findings further highlight the importance of naming and describing contact tracing approaches appropriately, as well as assessing and mitigating against potential risk to index patients, to increase self-efficacy and capacity to engage. Considering these findings, the potential for expanding existing contact tracing approaches should be explored to ensure the UK reaches and maintains its elimination targets.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of RIPK1 inhibitor, SAR443820, in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (HIMALAYA): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: RIPK1, a protein regulating inflammatory signalling and cell death, is implicated in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) pathophysiology. SAR443820 is a selective, oral, CNS-penetrant, reversible RIPK1 inhibitor. We aimed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of SAR443820 in participants with ALS. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial was conducted at 63 clinical sites in 13 countries (Belgium, Canada, China, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, the UK, and the USA). Adults (aged 18-80 years) with a diagnosis of possible ALS, clinically probable ALS, clinically probable laboratory-supported ALS, or clinically definite ALS, in accordance with the revised El Escorial World Federation of Neurology criteria, were randomly assigned (2:1) by use of a stratified block design (blocks of three) to receive either 20 mg SAR443820 orally twice per day or matching placebo in the 24-week double-blind period. Randomisation was done centrally using interactive response technology and stratified by geographical region of trial site, region of ALS onset, use of riluzole, use of edaravone, and use of the combination of sodium phenylbutyrate and taurursodiol. Participants, care providers, investigators, and outcomes assessors were masked to trial intervention. The primary outcome was a change in ALS Functional Rating Scale Revised (ALSFRS-R) total score from baseline to week 24 and was calculated for all participants who had an ALSFRS-R total score available at baseline and at week 24. Safety analyses included all randomly assigned participants receiving one dose or more of trial intervention. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05237284) and was terminated early. FINDINGS: Between April 13, 2022, and July 17, 2023, 397 participants were screened and 305 randomly assigned to SAR443820 (n=203) or placebo (n=102); six were excluded from the primary analysis due to missing baseline ALSFRS-R values. Mean age was 56·9 years (SD 11·5); 183 (60%) participants were male and 122 (40%) were female. Least squares mean change in ALSFRS-R from baseline to week 24 was -6·73 (95% CI -7·48 to -5·98) for SAR443820 group (n=169) and -6·32 (-7·36 to -5·27) for placebo group (n=87). There was no statistically significant difference between the study groups (least squares mean difference -0·41 [95% CI -1·71 to 0·88]). Participants in the SAR443820 group had higher incidence of adverse events (171 [85%] of 202 vs placebo 80 [78%] of 102) and treatment discontinuations (28 [14%] of 202 vs placebo five [5%] of 102), with elevated hepatic enzymes being the most common cause. Nine deaths occurred in the double-blind period (seven [3%] of 202 in the SAR443820 group and two [2%] of 102 in the placebo group); none was attributed to SAR443820. INTERPRETATION: SAR443820 did not show clinical benefit and was associated with higher hepatic enzyme increase, indicating that further clinical development of SAR443820 in ALS is not warranted. FUNDING: Sanofi.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Validation of a Turkish Translation of the Stress in Emergency Healthcare Professionals: The Stress Factors and Manifestations Scale.

AIM: The primary duties of emergency healthcare professionals (EHPs) are to provide emergency patient care to acutely ill and injured individuals. Due to the nature of their work, EHPs operate under constant stress, often requiring rapid decision-making, swift action, and the delivery of necessary medical care in life-or-death situations, sometimes under inadequately safe conditions. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine the validity and reliability of the Emergency Healthcare Professional Stress Factors and Symptoms (SEHP:SFMS) Scale in Turkish for identifying stress factors and symptoms in emergency medical care professionals providing emergency patient care services. DESIGN: A methodological study design was used in this study. METHODS: The study was conducted with the participation of 211 EHPs from employees working in emergency care institutions affiliated with the Muğla Provincial Health Directorate between November 2023 and June 2024. Data were collected via a face-to-face survey. Data were analysed using Lawshe content validity ratio, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin coefficient, Bartlett test, exploratory factor analysis, principal component analysis, Varimax factor rotation method, confirmatory factor analysis, Cronbach's α internal consistency coefficient, convergent validity, discriminant validity, test-retest, and Spearman correlation coefficient tests. RESULTS: The linguistic translation and cultural adaptation of the SEHP:SFMS showed strong performance. The scope validity index of the scale is 0.83. The item-total correlation values of the scale were found to be between 0.486 and 0.794, and the factor loadings were between 0.474 and 0.816. Confirmatory factor analysis fit indices: χ2 = 248.727; df = 101; n = 211; p = 0.000; χ2/df = 2.463; RMSEA = 0.083; CFI = 0.914, SRMR = 0.052, which was found to be compatible and acceptable with the proposed 3-factor model. The Cronbach's α reliability coefficient of the scale was 0.931, and the total variance was 61.97%. CONCLUSIONS: SEHP:SFMS is a valid and reliable tool to assess stress factors and symptoms of Turkish emergency healthcare professionals. Its use improves the quality of emergency care. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: These study findings have been used to create a tool with Turkish validity and reliability that allows for the examination of stress factors among healthcare professionals working in emergency and critical services. Identifying and reducing stress factors among healthcare professionals is crucial for the delivery of quality healthcare services. It can also be used to develop targeted interventions and ongoing strategies to facilitate improved clinical supervision and mentoring. IMPLICATION FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Nurses in emergency departments, which are among the most stressful, dynamic, intense, life-saving, and critical environments in healthcare institutions, and where life-saving treatment is administered, are at high risk of experiencing psychological trauma. Trauma experienced in the work environment is a significant problem for nursing. The consequences of trauma negatively affect nurses and institutions. Studies show that post-traumatic stress, anxiety, depression, and burnout are commonly observed in emergency department nurses. In this sense, understanding the stress and stress factors experienced by nurses can guide future interventions. The results of this study are considered important in making visible the stress and stress factors experienced by nurses in the emergency department, and also in guiding managers and nurses working in this field in terms of preventive and protective measures.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Methods for defining equity-stratifying variables: a systematic review of validation studies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Disease burden is often disproportionally higher among those who are socially disadvantaged by factors defined in the PROGRESS-Plus framework (ie, Place of residence, Race/ethnicity/culture/language, Occupation, Gender/sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status, and Social capital, with "Plus" covering features like age and disability). The accuracy and applicability of case definitions to identify these variables from administrative and clinical health data are unknown. We conducted a systematic review to explore how equity-stratifying variables, as categorized by the PROGRESS-Plus framework, have been defined and validated in epidemiologic studies using administrative health, population-level, or electronic health record (EHR) data. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched from the inception of the databases to 2024 for validation studies of equity-stratifying variables in adults using administrative health datasets, health registries, or EHR data. Titles and abstracts, followed by relevant full-text articles, were screened in duplicate by two reviewers for eligibility. The data sources utilized, algorithms employed, and their associated performance measures were extracted and synthesized from included studies. Given substantial heterogeneity in study design, equity-stratifying variable definition, and performance metrics, meta-analysis was not possible. RESULTS: Of the 9099 unique citations screened, 188 full texts were reviewed and 116 were included in this review. Most studies were published between 2019 and 2024 (n = 64, 55%) and were validation studies of race/ethnicity definitions that used race/ethnicity codes or surname list algorithms (n = 66, 57%). No studies examined religion. Regarding the reported performance measure estimates, the race/ethnicity/culture/language equity-stratifying variables category had the largest variability across sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), and Cohen's Kappa. Occupation validation studies had the lowest variation in sensitivity and PPV. CONCLUSION: Despite an increasing number of publications reporting on the validation of equity-stratifying variables relevant to the PROGRESS-Plus framework, performance measures varied widely across studies. The significant heterogeneity in equity-stratifying variable definitions and methods used to validate them support the need for further rigorous validation of equity-stratifying variables in administrative and clinical health data. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Disease burden is often higher in people who experience financial hardships, lower level of education, discrimination due to race/ethnicity, and unstable housing. These social factors can be considered health equity factors and are important for understanding health inequalities. Health researchers often use large datasets, such as hospital or electronic health records (EHRs), to study these health equity factors. However, it is not clear how accurately these data sources capture information about people's social circumstances and how these factors are defined. In this study, we reviewed existing research to understand how health equity factors have been defined across health data sources and how accurate they are at measuring aspects of health equity and social disadvantage. Of the more than 9000 studies we identified, we included 116 that met our criteria for this systematic review. Most included studies focused on identifying race and ethnicity, often using codes or surname-based methods. We found that the accuracy of these methods varied widely across studies, meaning results may not always be reliable or comparable. Overall, our findings show that there are inconsistencies in how social factors are defined and measured in health data. This makes it difficult to fully understand and address health inequalities using routinely collected health data. More work is needed to develop and validate better quality and more consistent methods for capturing these important social factors.

Humans↗