Explore the vast range of titles available.

Intensive care survivors often experience post-intensive care sequelae, which are frequently gathered together under the term “post-intensive care syndrome” (PICS). The consequences of PICS on quality of life, health-related costs and hospital readmissions are real public health problems. In the present Viewpoint, we summarize current knowledge and gaps in our understanding of PICS and approaches to management.

Background Clinical questionnaires are mainly applied as screening tools for identification of the Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients. Little attention has been paid to assess the body functions and health status of the patients. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) was designed for better understanding and describing functioning and disability of patients. This study adopted the Brief ICF-Sleep Disorders and Obesity Core Set to evaluate the impairment of functioning and health status of OSA patients. Methods Five hundred ninety-two participants were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. Data were collected using Brief ICF-Sleep Disorders and Obesity Core Set Polysomnography was performed and basic characteristics of the patients were recorded. Results The scores for the component Body Functions and Code b130, b134, b140, b440, b530, s330, d160, d240, d450 of the two core sets were significantly different among the patients divided by apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) or oxygen saturation (SaO2) nadir, but the frequency of code s330, d160, d240, d450 was low. The Body Functions component of the both sets were closely related to neck circumference (NC), body mass index (BMI), apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) of the OSA patients. Body Functions of the Brief ICF-Sleep Disorders performed better with a threshold of 4 with sensitivity, specificity and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) as 0.62, 0.74, 0.68(AHI ≥ 5), 0.69, 0.63, 0.66 (AHI ≥ 15), 0.75, 0.56, 0.66 (AHI ≥ 30), 0.56, 0.70, 0.63 (SaO2 nadir≤90%), 0.67, 0.66, 0.66 (SaO2 nadir<85%), 0.71, 0.59, 0.65 (SaO2 nadir<80%), separately. Conclusion The Body Functions component of both two sets could be an evaluation tool of impairment of body functions for OSA patients. The Brief ICF-Sleep Disorders Body Functions component performed better with a threshold of 4 and might provide a new insight for physicians to assess OSA patients.

In May 2001, to integrate biological, psychological, and social aspects of human functioning, the World Health Assembly endorsed the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). The aim of this article is to describe the creation of Comprehensive and Brief ICF Core Sets for Hearing Loss. The core sets consist of the most relevant ICF categories for hearing loss. Four preparatory studies were carried out and presented at a consensus conference, resulting in a Comprehensive ICF Core Set for Hearing Loss, consisting of 117 ICF categories, and a Brief ICF Core Set for Hearing Loss, consisting of 27 categories (of the 117). The Comprehensive ICF Core Set for Hearing Loss can be a user-friendly tool for conducting comprehensive, multidisciplinary assessments. The Brief ICF Core Set can be used for many purposes, such as research and population studies. However, its most common use is by individuals seeking to provide a brief description and assessment of functioning of a person with hearing loss.

Congenital melanocytic naevi (CMN) are birthmarks that can cover large areas of the body. CMN can significantly impact individuals' lives due to perceived stigma, the risk for melanoma development and neurological complications. To treat and prevent these complications, adequate research and guidelines are needed. In this review, we present a summary of the Dutch multidisciplinary guideline and the lessons learned from the implementation and information developed additionally in collaboration with the patient association. We also introduce the core outcomes of the OCOMEN project to standardize outcomes for both research and care of CMN. The next step is the development of the instruments internationally.

Background Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer, defined as individuals aged 15–39 years at initial cancer diagnosis, form a unique population; they face age-specific issues as they transition to adulthood. This paper presents the protocol for the development of a core outcome set (COS) for AYAs with cancer. Methods The methodological standards from the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) and the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) for COS development will guide the development of the COS for AYAs with cancer. The project will consist of the following phases: (1) define the scope of the COS; (2) establish the need for a COS in this field (3) assemble an international, multi-stakeholder working group; (4) develop a detailed protocol; (5) determine “what to measure” (i.e., outcomes); (6) determine “how to measure” (i.e., measures); and (7) determine “case-mix” variables. Conclusions The development of a COS for AYAs with cancer will facilitate the implementation of efficient and relevant standards for data collection, both for clinical trials and in routine healthcare, thereby increasing the usefulness of these data to improve the value of the care given to these underserved young cancer patients.

Achieving equitable global health frameworks requires the intentional integration of diverse voices-both professional and lived-from across the high-resourced Global North (GN) and low-resourced South (GS). It is, however, rare that Core Set development using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) has equal data representation from both regions. Using the data from the development of Core Sets on deafblindness, we explored a unique opportunity, given the geographic distribution of data sources. We compared ICF category frequencies from the GN and GS across body structure, body function, activities and participation, and environmental factors. We divided the data from an expert survey (n = 105) and from interviews with deafblind individuals (n = 72) by country of origin into GN and GS using the Brandt Line, representing all six regions of the WHO (28 countries). Using the ICF coding system to identify perceived categories of functioning, aggregated frequencies of unique ICF categories were compared across ICF components and chapters using chi-square statistics. Survey data showed no significant geographic differences across activities and participation or environmental factors; however, qualitative interviews revealed significant deviations. For activities and participation, GN emphasized d9205 (socializing) and d940 (human rights), while GS highlighted d760 (family relationships). For environmental factors, GN focused on e5800 (health services) and e298 (environmental adaptations), whereas GS emphasized e5550 (associations), e310 (family), and e325 (community supports). Within the GN, survey and interview data also differed. Surveys emphasized e310, e315 and e320 (supports), while interviews highlighted e410, e425, e450, and e455 (attitudes). For activities and participation, d660 (assisting others) was more frequent in interviews. The GS showed significant within-region differences for e4 (attitudes), d9 (community, social and civic life) and d2 (general tasks and demands). Findings highlight the regional variations in activities and participation among individuals with deafblindness as they reflect differences in environmental factors. Rooted in cultural and resource differences, geographic region itself constitutes a key environmental factor. Expert perspectives may underrepresent differences in lived environmental realities of individuals with deafblindness. Future Core Set development will benefit from including more diverse sources.

The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative established a core outcome set (COS) for atopic eczema (AE) clinical trials in 2019. This set encompasses four core outcome domains and corresponding measurement instruments: clinical signs (EASI), patient-reported symptoms (POEM and NRS 11 point for worst itch over the last 24 h), quality of life (DLQI/CDLQI/IDQoLI), and long-term control (Recap or ADCT). Following its roadmap, the HOME initiative is now focused on supporting implementation of the COS. To identify barriers and facilitators to implementation of the COS, and to guide the effort to promote COS uptake, a virtual consensus meeting was held over 2 days (September 25–26, 2021) attended by 55 participants (26 healthcare professionals, 16 methodologists, 5 patients, 4 industry representatives, and 4 students). Implementation themes were identified by a pre-meeting survey distributed to HOME members, presentations, and whole-group discussion. Participants were divided into five multi-professional small groups which ranked their top 3 most important themes, followed by whole-group discussion and anonymous consensus voting (consensus criteria: < 30% disagreement). Three most important implementation themes were identified and agreed upon: (1) awareness and stakeholder engagement, (2) universal applicability of the COS, and (3) ensuring minimum administrative burden. Working groups to address these issues are now a priority for the HOME initiative. The results from this meeting will inform the development of a HOME Implementation Roadmap in an effort to support other COS groups planning for effective implementation of their core sets.

Background Methods for developing a core outcome or information set require involvement of key stakeholders to prioritise many items and achieve agreement as to the core set. The Delphi technique requires participants to rate the importance of items in sequential questionnaires (or rounds) with feedback provided in each subsequent round such that participants are able to consider the views of others. This study examines the impact of receiving feedback from different stakeholder groups, on the subsequent rating of items and the level of agreement between stakeholders. Methods Randomized controlled trials were nested within the development of three core sets each including a Delphi process with two rounds of questionnaires, completed by patients and health professionals. Participants rated items from 1 (not essential) to 9 (absolutely essential). For round 2, participants were randomized to receive feedback from their peer stakeholder group only (peer) or both stakeholder groups separately (multiple). Decisions as to which items to retain following each round were determined by pre-specified criteria. Results Whilst type of feedback did not impact on the percentage of items for which a participant subsequently changed their rating, or the magnitude of change, it did impact on items retained at the end of round 2. Each core set contained discordant items retained by one feedback group but not the other (3–22 % discordant items). Consensus between patients and professionals in items to retain was greater amongst those receiving multiple group feedback in each core set (65–82 % agreement for peer-only feedback versus 74–94 % for multiple feedback). In addition, differences in round 2 scores were smaller between stakeholder groups receiving multiple feedback than between those receiving peer group feedback only. Variability in item scores across stakeholders was reduced following any feedback but this reduction was consistently greater amongst the multiple feedback group. Conclusions In the development of a core outcome or information set, providing feedback within Delphi questionnaires from all stakeholder groups separately may influence the final core set and improve consensus between the groups. Further work is needed to better understand how participants rate and re-rate items within a Delphi process. Trial registration The three randomized controlled trials reported here were each nested within the development of a core information or outcome set to investigate processes in core outcome and information set development. Outcomes were not health-related and therefore trial registration was not applicable.

The concept of linear Diophantine fuzzy sets (LDFSs) is a new approach for modeling uncertainties in decision analysis. Due to the addition of reference or control parameters with membership and non-membership grades, LDFS is more flexible and reliable than existing concepts of intuitionistic fuzzy sets (IFSs), Pythagorean fuzzy sets (PFSs), and q-rung orthopair fuzzy sets (q-ROFSs). In this paper, the notions of linear Diophantine fuzzy soft rough sets (LDFSRSs) and soft rough linear Diophantine fuzzy sets (SRLDFSs) are proposed as new hybrid models of soft sets, rough sets, and LDFS. The suggested models of LDFSRSs and SRLDFSs are more flexible to discuss fuzziness and roughness in terms of upper and lower approximation operators. Certain operations on LDFSRSs and SRLDFSs have been established to discuss robust multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) for the selection of sustainable material handling equipment. For these objectives, some algorithms are developed for the ranking of feasible alternatives and deriving an optimal decision. Meanwhile, the ideas of the upper reduct, lower reduct, and core set are defined as key factors in the proposed MCDM technique. An application of MCDM is illustrated by a numerical example, and the final ranking in the selection of sustainable material handling equipment is computed by the proposed algorithms. Finally, a comparison analysis is given to justify the feasibility, reliability, and superiority of the proposed models.

Background Ankle osteoarthritis (OA) is a debilitating health condition that is increasing in prevalence. Currently, there are no evidence-based guidelines for managing ankle OA. One of the current challenges to establishing guidelines is the lack of a widely agreed-upon set of outcome measures that are consistently used in ankle OA research. Without a set of agreed-upon outcome measures, it is difficult to synthesise clinical trial outcomes through meta-analysis—an essential element of evidence-informed practice. In order to develop an appropriate set of outcome measures for ankle OA, it is important first to develop a core domain set. In this protocol, we describe the methodological approach that we will use to develop such a core domain set for ankle OA. Methods We established an international steering committee to guide the development of a core domain set for ankle OA. The core domain set development will follow a multi-staged approach consisting of three phases, involving participation by patients and clinicians/healthcare professionals. In phase 1, a list of candidate domains will be gleaned from (a) a scoping review of outcome measures used in ankle OA research, (b) qualitative interviews with individuals with ankle OA, and (c) qualitative interviews with healthcare professionals with expertise in ankle OA. In phase 2, the steering committee will review and generate a list of candidate domains from those gleaned in phase 1. In phase 3, this list of candidate domains will be considered in a Delphi process to reach a consensus on a core domain set. We anticipated this will involve 3 rounds of surveys. Conclusion This protocol describes the methods that will be used to develop a core domain set of health-related aspects for ankle OA. Importantly, it will include both healthcare professional and patient involvement. This is a prerequisite step to developing a core outcome set for ankle OA that should be reported in all clinical trials for ankle OA. The findings will be widely disseminated across peer-refereed publication(s) and national and international conferences, as well as via relevant professional societies, patient support group organisations, and social media platforms. Project registration This project is registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database on 17 March 2021. https://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1837 .