Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Verbal autopsies with physician assignment of cause of death (COD) are commonly used in settings where medical certification of deaths is uncommon. It remains unanswered if automated algorithms can replace physician assignment. Methods We randomized verbal autopsy interviews for deaths in 117 villages in rural India to either physician or automated COD assignment. Twenty-four trained lay (non-medical) surveyors applied the allocated method using a laptop-based electronic system. Two of 25 physicians were allocated randomly to independently code the deaths in the physician assignment arm. Six algorithms (Naïve Bayes Classifier (NBC), King-Lu, InSilicoVA, InSilicoVA-NT, InterVA-4, and SmartVA) coded each death in the automated arm. The primary outcome was concordance with the COD distribution in the standard physician-assigned arm. Four thousand six hundred fifty-one (4651) deaths were allocated to physician (standard), and 4723 to automated arms. Results The two arms were nearly identical in demographics and key symptom patterns. The average concordances of automated algorithms with the standard were 62%, 56%, and 59% for adult, child, and neonatal deaths, respectively. Automated algorithms showed inconsistent results, even for causes that are relatively easy to identify such as road traffic injuries. Automated algorithms underestimated the number of cancer and suicide deaths in adults and overestimated other injuries in adults and children. Across all ages, average weighted concordance with the standard was 62% (range 79–45%) with the best to worst ranking automated algorithms being InterVA-4, InSilicoVA-NT, InSilicoVA, SmartVA, NBC, and King-Lu. Individual-level sensitivity for causes of adult deaths in the automated arm was low between the algorithms but high between two independent physicians in the physician arm. Conclusions While desirable, automated algorithms require further development and rigorous evaluation. Lay reporting of deaths paired with physician COD assignment of verbal autopsies, despite some limitations, remains a practicable method to document the patterns of mortality reliably for unattended deaths. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02810366. Submitted on 11 April 2016.

Background & objectives: Cause of death assignment from verbal autopsy (VA) questionnaires is conventionally accomplished through physician review. However, since recently, computer softwares have been developed to assign the cause of death. The present study evaluated the performance of computer software in assigning the cause of death from the VA, as compared to physician review. Methods: VA of 600 adult deaths was conducted using open- and close-ended questionnaires in Nandpur Kalour Block of Punjab, India. Entire VA forms were used by two physicians independently to assign the cause of death using the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD)-10 codes. In case of disagreement between them, reconciliation was done, and in cases of persistent disagreements finally, adjudication was done by a third physician. InterVA-4-generated causes from close-ended questionnaires were compared using Kappa statistics with causes assigned by physicians using a questionnaire having both open- and close-ended questions. At the population level, Cause-Specific Mortality Fraction (CSMF) accuracy and P-value from McNemar's paired Chi-square were calculated. CSMF accuracy indicates the absolute deviation of a set of proportions of causes of death out of the total number of deaths between the two methods. Results: The overall agreement between InterVA-4 and physician coding was 'fair' (κ=0.42; 95% confidence interval 0.38, 0.46). CSMF accuracy was found to be 0.71. The differences in proportions from the two methods were statistically different as per McNemar's paired Chi-square test for ischaemic heart diseases, liver cirrhosis and maternal deaths. Interpretation & conclusions: In comparison to physicians, assignment of causes of death by InterVA- 4 was only 'fair'. Hence, it may be appropriate to continue with physician review as the optimal option available in the current scenario.

Coverage of civil registration and vital statistics varies globally, with most deaths in Africa and Asia remaining either unregistered or registered without cause of death. One important constraint has been a lack of fit-for-purpose tools for registering deaths and assigning causes in situations where no doctor is involved. Verbal autopsy (interviewing care-givers and witnesses to deaths and interpreting their information into causes of death) is the only available solution. Automated interpretation of verbal autopsy data into cause of death information is essential for rapid, consistent and affordable processing. Verbal autopsy archives covering 54 182 deaths from five African and Asian countries were sourced on the basis of their geographical, epidemiological and methodological diversity, with existing physician-coded causes of death attributed. These data were unified into the WHO 2012 verbal autopsy standard format, and processed using the InterVA-4 model. Cause-specific mortality fractions from InterVA-4 and physician codes were calculated for each of 60 WHO 2012 cause categories, by age group, sex and source. Results from the two approaches were assessed for concordance and ratios of fractions by cause category. As an alternative metric, the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed ranks test with two one-sided tests for stochastic equivalence was used. The overall concordance correlation coefficient between InterVA-4 and physician codes was 0.83 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.91) and this increased to 0.97 (95% CI 0.96 to 0.99) when HIV/AIDS and pulmonary TB deaths were combined into a single category. Over half (53%) of the cause category ratios between InterVA-4 and physician codes by source were not significantly different from unity at the 99% level, increasing to 62% by age group. Wilcoxon tests for stochastic equivalence also demonstrated equivalence. These findings show strong concordance between InterVA-4 and physician-coded findings over this large and diverse data set. Although these analyses cannot prove that either approach constitutes absolute truth, there was high public health equivalence between the findings. Given the urgent need for adequate cause of death data from settings where deaths currently pass unregistered, and since the WHO 2012 verbal autopsy standard and InterVA-4 tools represent relatively simple, cheap and available methods for determining cause of death on a large scale, they should be used as current tools of choice to fill gaps in cause of death data.

ABSTRACTDespite their ubiquitous presence, placebos and placebo effects retain an ambiguous and unsettling presence in biomedicine. Specifically focused on chronic pain, this review examines the effect of placebo treatment under three distinct frameworks: double blind, deception, and open label honestly prescribed. These specific conditions do not necessarily differentially modify placebo outcomes. Psychological, clinical, and neurological theories of placebo effects are scrutinized. In chronic pain, conscious expectation does not reliably predict placebo effects. A supportive patient-physician relationship may enhance placebo effects. This review highlights “predictive coding” and “bayesian brain” as emerging models derived from computational neurobiology that offer a unified framework to explain the heterogeneous evidence on placebos. These models invert the dogma of the brain as a stimulus driven organ to one in which perception relies heavily on learnt, top down, cortical predictions to infer the source of incoming sensory data. In predictive coding/bayesian brain, both chronic pain (significantly modulated by central sensitization) and its alleviation with placebo treatment are explicated as centrally encoded, mostly non-conscious, bayesian biases. The review then evaluates seven ways in which placebos are used in clinical practice and research and their bioethical implications. In this way, it shows that placebo effects are evidence based, clinically relevant, and potentially ethical tools for relieving chronic pain.

Objective Physician wellness (well-being) is recognized for its intrinsic importance and impact on patient care, but it is a construct that lacks conceptual clarity. The authors conducted a systematic review to characterize the conceptualization of physician wellness in the literature by synthesizing definitions and measures used to operationalize the construct. Methods A total of 3057 references identified from PubMed, Web of Science, and a manual reference check were reviewed for studies that quantitatively assessed the “wellness” or “well-being” of physicians. Definitions of physician wellness were thematically synthesized. Measures of physician wellness were classified based on their dimensional, contextual, and valence attributes, and changes in the operationalization of physician wellness were assessed over time (1989–2015). Results Only 14% of included papers (11/78) explicitly defined physician wellness. At least one measure of mental, social, physical, and integrated well-being was present in 89, 50, 49, and 37% of papers, respectively. The number of papers operationalizing physician wellness using integrated, general-life well-being measures (e.g., meaning in life) increased [ X 2  = 5.08, p  = 0.02] over time. Changes in measurement across mental, physical, and social domains remained stable over time. Conclusions Conceptualizations of physician wellness varied widely, with greatest emphasis on negative moods/emotions (e.g., burnout). Clarity and consensus regarding the conceptual definition of physician wellness is needed to advance the development of valid and reliable physician wellness measures, improve the consistency by which the construct is operationalized, and increase comparability of findings across studies. To guide future physician wellness assessments and interventions, the authors propose a holistic definition.

ObjectiveBreaking bad news about life-threatening and possibly terminal conditions is a crucial part of paediatric care for children in this situation. Little is known about how the parents of children with life-threatening conditions experience communication of bad news. The objective of this study is to analyse parents’ experiences (barriers and facilitators) of communication of bad news.DesignA qualitative study consisting of a constant comparative analysis of in-depth interviews conducted with parents.SettingThe Netherlands.ParticipantsSixty-four parents—bereaved and non-bereaved—of 44 children (aged 1–12 years, 61% deceased) with a life-threatening condition.InterventionsNone.ResultsBased on parents’ experiences, the following 10 barriers to the communication of bad news were identified: (1) a lack of (timely) communication, (2) physicians’ failure to ask parents for input, (3) parents feel unprepared during and after the conversation, (4) a lack of clarity about future treatment, (5) physicians’ failure to voice uncertainties, (6) physicians’ failure to schedule follow-up conversations, (7) presence of too many or unknown healthcare professionals, (8) parental concerns in breaking bad news to children, (9) managing indications of bad news in non-conversational contexts, and (10) parents’ misunderstanding of medical terminology.ConclusionsThis study shows healthcare professionals how parents experience barriers in bad news conversations. This mainly concerns practical aspects of communication. The results provide practical pointers on how the communication of bad news can be improved to better suit the needs of parents. From the parents’ perspective, the timing of conversations in which they were informed that their child might not survive was far too late. Sometimes, no such conversations ever took place.

Objective According to the diagnosis-related group (DRG) requirement, issues of diagnosis and procedure coding in the gastroenterology department of our hospital were analyzed and improvement plans were proposed to lay the foundation for effective implementation of DRGs. Methods The title page of case-history of 1600 patients admitted to the Department of Gastroenterology of this hospital from January 1, 2021 to December 31, 2021 was sampled as a data source, and the primary and other diagnostic codes, operation or procedure codes involved in the title page of case-history were categorized and statistically analyzed. Results Of the 531 cases treated with gastrointestinal endoscopy in our hospital in 2021, coding errors were identified in 66 cases and unsuccessful DRG enrollment in 35 cases, including 14 cases with incorrect coding of the primary diagnosis (8 cases with unsuccessful DRG enrollment), 37 cases with incorrect coding of the primary operation (23 cases with unsuccessful DRG enrollment), and 8 cases with incorrect coding of both the primary diagnosis and the primary operation (4 cases with unsuccessful DRG enrollment). Analysis of 66 inpatient cases with coding problems showed a total of 167 deficiencies, including 36 deficiencies in major diagnoses, 84 deficiencies in other diagnoses, and 47 deficiencies in surgery or operation coding. Conclusion The accuracy of coding of disease diagnosis and surgical operation is the basis for the smooth implementation of DRGs. The medical staff of this hospital has poor cognition of DRGs coding and fails to recognize the important role of the title page of case-history quality to DRGs system, and their attention to DRGs and knowledge base of disease classification coding should be improved. In addition, the high incidence of coding errors, especially the omission of disease diagnosis, requires increased training of physicians and nurses on clinical knowledge and requirements for DRGs medical records, thereby improving the quality of medical cases and ensuring the accuracy of DRGs information.

Background Empathy is the cornerstone of high-quality medical education and clinical practice. It not only serves as a vital link for establishing trust-based doctor-patient relationships but also significantly impacts patients' treatment compliance and recovery outcomes. In medical education, an empathetic approach can cultivate future medical professionals' humanistic care awareness, enabling them to better understand patients' physical and mental sufferings.However, the understanding and cultivation of empathy vary remarkably across different cultural backgrounds.Thus, there is an urgent need to conduct in-depth research to clarify these issues and promote the better development of empathy-based medical education. Methods A total of 24 participants, including medical students, practicing doctors, and medical teachers, were recruited for this study. Semi-structured interviews were employed as the data-collection method. Each interview lasted approximately 30–60 min, and all interviews were audio-recorded and then transcribed verbatim.For data analysis, a three-level coding approach was adopted. The analysis was independently conducted by two members of the research team to ensure reliability and consistency. Results This study delves into empathy ability within medical education. The theme analysis yields significant results: the definition of empathy involves basic understanding with distinct emotional and cognitive emphases, multi-dimensional attributes showcasing empathy's roles in clinical scenarios, and the need for regulation due to its contradictoriness. Expression of empathy hinges on establishing doctor-patient trust and communication, with diverse expression ways and impacts on treatment and relationships. Influencing factors encompass educational background, clinical environment, and individual differences. Strategies for cultivation include teacher guidance, varied methods, and curriculum integration in the first classroom, and activity practice and values guidance in the second. These findings offer valuable insights and practical implications for enhancing empathy in medical education. Conclusions This study's core findings from cross-group analysis of medical students, doctors, and teachers show empathy in medical education is complex and multi-dimensional, involving emotional and cognitive empathy. Empathy abilities change dynamically during medical education, with students initially having high emotional empathy and later developing stronger cognitive empathy. Cultural differences in empathy, like between Western and traditional Chinese medicine, offer new perspectives. Practical implications include: designing curricula to cover both empathy types and adding cross-cultural content; using diverse teaching methods and optimizing clinical internships; organizing teacher training and improving teaching skills; establishing a comprehensive evaluation system with timely feedback. These insights and suggestions guide enhancing empathy in medical education.

Objective: Errors in cause and manner of death on death certificates are common and affect families, mortality statistics, and public health research. The primary objective of this study was to characterize errors in the cause and manner of death on death certificates completed by non–Medical Examiners. A secondary objective was to determine the effects of errors on national mortality statistics. Methods: We retrospectively compared 601 death certificates completed between July 1, 2015, and January 31, 2016, from the Vermont Electronic Death Registration System with clinical summaries from medical records. Medical Examiners, blinded to original certificates, reviewed summaries, generated mock certificates, and compared mock certificates with original certificates. They then graded errors using a scale from 1 to 4 (higher numbers indicated increased impact on interpretation of the cause) to determine the prevalence of minor and major errors. They also compared International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes on original certificates with those on mock certificates. Results: Of 601 original death certificates, 319 (53%) had errors; 305 (51%) had major errors; and 59 (10%) had minor errors. We found no significant differences by certifier type (physician vs nonphysician).We did find significant differences in major errors in place of death (P < .001). Certificates for deaths occurring in hospitals were more likely to have major errors than certificates for deaths occurring at a private residence (59% vs 39%, P < .001). A total of 580 (93%) death certificates had a change in ICD-10 codes between the original and mock certificates, of which 348 (60%) had a change in the underlying cause-of-death code. Conclusions: Error rates on death certificates in Vermont are high and extend to ICD-10 coding, thereby affecting national mortality statistics. Surveillance and certifier education must expand beyond local and state efforts. Simplifying and standardizing underlying literal text for cause of death may improve accuracy, decrease coding errors, and improve national mortality statistics.

Background Using correct pronouns is an impactful way to establish affirming environments for transgender and nonbinary (TGNB) patients. However, physicians often report struggling with this. Objective This study set out to conduct an initial root cause analysis of factors contributing to medical students and physicians failing to use TGNB patients’ correct pronouns. Methods A 10-item Qualtrics survey was sent to medical students, residents, and physicians practicing in Central Ohio. Participants were asked to describe perceived challenges or barriers colleagues have regarding correctly using TGNB patients’ correct pronouns. A directed content analysis of participant responses was performed utilizing a fishbone diagram root cause analysis tool as a basis for conceptualizing and categorizing barriers. All coding was completed by independent reviewers utilizing a consensus reconciliation methodology. Results Of 928 survey respondents, 763 met the study inclusion criteria, of which 453 provided analyzable responses. Of these 453, attendings with five or more years of practice (32.5%) and medical students (27.4%) made up the two largest demographic categories. 1.7% of respondents identified as transgender, nonbinary, and/or genderqueer, and 64% identified as heterosexual/straight. Five core barrier categories were identified: documentation, patient care, environment, knowledge, and individuals. Sub-categories were also identified, including lack of documentation, discomfort, medical culture, lack of standardization, prejudice, and assumptions. Conclusion The study identifies important barriers to medical professionals correctly using TGNB patients’ pronouns. The root cause analysis conducted as part of this study demonstrates the necessity of multi-pronged, system-level interventions to support ensuring TGNB patients are addressed using the correct pronouns.