scholarly journals Effects of training on quality of peer review: randomised controlled trial

BMJ ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 328 (7441) ◽  
pp. 673 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Schroter ◽  
Nick Black ◽  
Stephen Evans ◽  
James Carpenter ◽  
Fiona Godlee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Group Score ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Quality Instrument

AbstractObjective To determine the effects of training on the quality of peer review.Design Single blind randomised controlled trial with two intervention groups receiving different types of training plus a control group.Setting and participants Reviewers at a general medical journal.Interventions Attendance at a training workshop or reception of a self taught training package focusing on what editors want from reviewers and how to critically appraise randomised controlled trials.Main outcome measures Quality of reviews of three manuscripts sent to reviewers at four to six monthly intervals, evaluated using the validated review quality instrument; number of deliberate major errors identified; time taken to review the manuscripts; proportion recommending rejection of the manuscripts.Results Reviewers in the self taught group scored higher in review quality after training than did the control group (score 2.85 v 2.56; difference 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 0.44; P = 0.001), but the difference was not of editorial significance and was not maintained in the long term. Both intervention groups identified significantly more major errors after training than did the control group (3.14 and 2.96 v 2.13; P < 0.001), and this remained significant after the reviewers' performance at baseline assessment was taken into account. The evidence for benefit of training was no longer apparent on further testing six months after the interventions. Training had no impact on the time taken to review the papers but was associated with an increased likelihood of recommending rejection (92% and 84% v 76%; P = 0.002).Conclusions Short training packages have only a slight impact on the quality of peer review. The value of longer interventions needs to be assessed.

scholarly journals Nurse-based secondary preventive follow-up by telephone reduced recurrence of cardiovascular events: a randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna-Lotta Irewall ◽  
Anders Ulvenstam ◽  
Anna Graipe ◽  
Joachim Ögren ◽  
Thomas Mooe
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Randomised Controlled

AbstractEnhanced follow-up is needed to improve the results of secondary preventive care in patients with established cardiovascular disease. We examined the effect of long-term, nurse-based, secondary preventive follow-up by telephone on the recurrence of cardiovascular events. Open, randomised, controlled trial with two parallel groups. Between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2014, consecutive patients (n = 1890) admitted to hospital due to stroke, transient ischaemic attack (TIA), or acute coronary syndrome (ACS) were included. Participants were randomised (1:1) to nurse-based telephone follow-up (intervention, n = 944) or usual care (control, n = 946) and followed until 31 December 2017. The primary endpoint was a composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, cardiac revascularisation, and cardiovascular death. The individual components of the primary endpoint, TIA, and all-cause mortality were analysed as secondary endpoints. The assessment of outcome events was blinded to study group assignment. After a mean follow-up of 4.5 years, 22.7% (n = 214) of patients in the intervention group and 27.1% (n = 256) in the control group reached the primary composite endpoint (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68–0.97; ARR 4.4%, 95% CI 0.5–8.3). Secondary endpoints did not differ significantly between groups. Nurse-based secondary preventive follow-up by telephone reduced the recurrence of cardiovascular events during long-term follow-up.

The Nature stroke study; NASTRU - A randomised controlled trial of nature-based post-stroke fatigue rehabilitation

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna María Pálsdóttir ◽  
Kjerstin Stigmar ◽  
Bo Norrving ◽  
Patrik Grahn ◽  
Ingemar F Petersson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Standard Care ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Perceived Value ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Post Stroke ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Fatigue is common after stroke and contributes to disability and impaired quality of life. Currently, there is insufficient evidence on the efficacy of any intervention for post-stroke fatigue. The aim of the study was to examine whether 10 weeks Nature-based rehabilitation (NRB) as add-on to standard care may improve post-stroke fatigue, perceived value of everyday occupations, function, activity and participation compared to standard care only (Clinical Trial.gov Identifier: NCT02435043, 2012/352, 05-06-2015). The study was carried out as a single blinded two-armed randomised controlled trial. Stroke survivors identified through routine 3-month follow-up visit (sub-acute) or medical records (chronic stroke > 1 year earlier) were randomised to Standard care + NBR or Standard care only. Blinded evaluations were conducted at follow-up 8 and 14 months after randomisation. The primary outcomes were post-stroke fatigue (Mental Fatigue Scale, total score) and perceived value of everyday occupations (Oval-pd) 8 months after randomisation. About a quarter of the screened patients were eligible; half accepted to participate and 101 were randomised, mean age 67 years, 60% female. The patients with sub-acute stroke were highly compliant with the intervention. Fatigue decreased to a value below the suggested cut-off for mental fatigue (<10.5) in the intervention group but not in the control group; no statistically significant differences were found though between the groups. Conclusion: NASTRU is the first randomised study on NBR for patients with post stroke fatigue. NBR was feasible and well tolerated. The study was underpowered due to difficulties in recruiting participants. No significant differences were detected between intervention and control group. A larger RCT is warranted. Keywords: clinical trial, enriched environment, everyday occupations, horticulture therapy, quality of life.

scholarly journals Effect of an intensive patient educational programme on the quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a single-blind randomised controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e000376
Author(s):  
Sivakami Janahiraman ◽  
Chan Yen Tay ◽  
Jie Min Lee ◽  
Wen Ling Lim ◽  
Chun Hoe Khiew ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Tertiary Hospital ◽  
Educational Programme ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Experimental Group

ObjectivePreprocedural bowel preparation is necessary for optimal colonoscopy visualisation. However, it is challenging to achieve high-quality bowel preparation among patients scheduled for colonoscopy. This study aims to evaluate the impact of an intensive patient educational programme on the quality of bowel preparation.DesignAn accessor-blinded randomised controlled trial was carried out at the outpatient surgical clinic of a tertiary hospital. Patients were randomly assigned to the control group (received standard written and verbal instructions) or the experimental group (received an intensive and structured educational programme). All subjects completed a questionnaire before colonoscopy to assess their compliance, acceptability, and tolerability towards bowel preparation regime. Quality of bowel preparation was determined using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS).ResultsA total of 300 subjects who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were recruited. The experimental group had a significantly higher proportion of good quality bowel preparation than the control group (98.7% vs 52.3%, p<0.001). The median total BBPS score was also significantly higher in the experimental group (8 vs 5, p<0.001). Factors associated with good quality of bowel preparation included educational programme (OR: 22.79, 95% CI: 4.23 to 122.85, p<0.001), compliance to bowel cleansing agent (OR: 24.98, 95% CI 3.12 to 199.71, p<0.001), very difficult acceptability of preparation (OR: 0.11, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.38, p<0.001), tolerability towards bowel preparation (OR: 4.98, 95% CI 1.44 to 17.20, p<0.011) and hypomotility drugs (OR: 3.03, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.91, p<0.05).ConclusionAn intensive patient educational programme can significantly improve the quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

scholarly journals Mindful gratitude journaling: psychological distress, quality of life and suffering in advanced cancer: a randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
pp. bmjspcare-2021-003068
Author(s):  
Ting Ting Tan ◽  
Maw Pin Tan ◽  
Chee Loong Lam ◽  
Ee Chin Loh ◽  
David Paul Capelle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Psychological Distress ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Randomised Controlled

ContextNumerous studies have shown that gratitude can reduce stress and improve quality of life.ObjectiveOur study aimed to examine the effect of mindful gratitude journaling on suffering, psychological distress and quality of life of patients with advanced cancer.MethodsWe conducted a parallel-group, blinded, randomised controlled trial at the University of Malaya Medical Centre, Malaysia. Ninety-two adult patients with advanced cancer, and an overall suffering score ≥4/10 based on the Suffering Pictogram were recruited and randomly assigned to either a mindful gratitude journaling group (N=49) or a routine journaling group (N=43).ResultsAfter 1 week, there were significant reductions in the overall suffering score from the baseline in both the intervention group (mean difference in overall suffering score=−2.0, 95% CI=−2.7 to −1.4, t=−6.125, p=0.000) and the control group (mean difference in overall suffering score=−1.6, 95% CI=−2.3 to −0.8, t=−4.106, p=0.037). There were also significant improvements in the total Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale score (mean difference=−3.4, 95% CI=−5.3 to −1.5, t=−3.525, p=0.000) and the total Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being score (mean difference=7.3, 95% CI=1.5 to 13.1, t=2.460, p=0.014) in the intervention group after 7 days, but not in the control group.ConclusionThe results provide evidence that 7 days of mindful gratitude journaling could positively affect the state of suffering, psychological distress and quality of life of patients with advanced cancer.Trial registration numberThe trial was registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN1261800172191) and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

scholarly journals Effect of dexamethasone in patients with ARDS and COVID-19 – prospective, multi-centre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial (REMED trial): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Maláska ◽  
Jan Stašek ◽  
František Duška ◽  
Martin Balík ◽  
Jan Máca ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Secondary Objective ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract ObjectivesThe primary objective of this study is to test the hypothesis that administration of dexamethasone 20 mg is superior to a 6 mg dose in adult patients with moderate or severe ARDS due to confirmed COVID-19. The secondary objective is to investigate the efficacy and safety of dexamethasone 20 mg versus dexamethasone 6 mg. The exploratory objective of this study is to assess long-term consequences on mortality and quality of life at 180 and 360 days.

scholarly journals Virtual reality for relatives of ICU patients to improve psychological sequelae: study protocol for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. e049704
Author(s):  
Johan H Vlake ◽  
Jasper van Bommel ◽  
Evert-Jan Wils ◽  
Tim Korevaar ◽  
Merel E Hellemons ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Virtual Reality ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Icu Patients ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionIntensive care unit (ICU) admission of a relative might lead to psychological distress and complicated grief (post-intensive care syndrome–family; PICS-F). Evidence suggests that increased distress during ICU stay increases risk of PICS-F, resulting in difficulty returning to their normal lives after the ICU experience. Effective interventions to improve PICS-F are currently lacking. In the present trial, we hypothesised that information provision using ICU-specific Virtual Reality for Family members/relatives (ICU-VR-F) may improve understanding of the ICU and subsequently improve psychological well-being and quality of life in relatives of patients admitted to the ICU.Methods and analysisThis multicentre, clustered randomised controlled trial will be conducted from January to December 2021 in the mixed medical-surgical ICUs of four hospitals in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. We aim to include adult relatives of 160 ICU patients with an expected ICU length of stay over 72 hours. Participants will be randomised clustered per patient in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention or control group. Participants allocated to the intervention group will receive ICU-VR-F, an information video that can be watched in VR, while the control group will receive usual care. Initiation of ICU-VR-F will be during their hospital visit unless participants cannot visit the hospital due to COVID-19 regulations, then VR can be watched digitally at home. The primary objective is to study the effect of ICU-VR-F on psychological well-being and quality of life up to 6 months after the patients’ ICU discharge. The secondary outcome is the degree of understanding of ICU treatment and ICU modalities.Ethics and disseminationThe Medical Ethics Committee of the Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, approved the study and local approval was obtained from each participating centre (NL73670.078.20). Our findings will be disseminated by presentation of the results at (inter)national conferences and publication in scientific, peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNetherlands Trial Register (TrialRegister.nl, NL9220).

scholarly journals Evaluation of teaching an integrated case formulation approach on the quality of case formulations: randomised controlled trial

2012 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 140-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed Abbas ◽  
Ruth Walton ◽  
Allan Johnston ◽  
Millicent Chikoore
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Case Formulation ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Aims and methodThis paper introduces a new approach to producing case formulations, the integrated case formulation (ICF) approach, and a rating scale, the Case Formulation Scale (CFS). Twenty-four psychiatrists participated in a single-blind randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of teaching using this new approach. The intervention group (n = 12) received teaching about using ICF, whereas the control group (n = 12) received teaching as usual. The scores on the CFS were compared before and after teaching.ResultsPrior to teaching, psychiatric trainees had poor scores on the CFS. The CFS score for the group taught the ICF approach improved five times more than the control group.Clinical implicationsThis study demonstrates that case formulation skills can be taught. With further improvements, the ICF approach might be useful in the teaching of case formulation.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of the ABCDEF bundle on delirium, functional outcomes and quality of life in intensive care patients: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial with embedded process evaluation

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e044814
Author(s):  
Kellie Sosnowski ◽  
Marion Mitchell ◽  
Marie Cooke ◽  
Hayden White ◽  
Lynette Morrison ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Process Evaluation ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Abcdef Bundle ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionHospital mortality for critically ill patients has decreased significantly throughout the developed world over the past two decades, attributable to improvements in the quality of intensive care, advances in critical care medicine and technologies that provide long-term multiorgan support. However, the long-term outcomes of intensive care unit (ICU) survivors is emerging as a real issue. Cognitive and physical impairments suffered by ICU survivors are common including profound weakness, pain and delirium which are inextricably linked. This study aims to determine the effectiveness of the Assess, prevent and manage pain; Both spontaneous awakening and spontaneous breathing trials; Choice of sedation and analgesia; Delirium: assess, prevent and manage; Early mobility and exercise; Family engagement and empowerment (ABCDEF) bundle in reducing ICU-related short-term and long-term consequences of critical illness through a randomised controlled trial (RCT).Methods and analysisThe study will be a single-centre, prospective RCT. A total of 150 participants will be recruited and randomised to either receive the ABCDEF bundle protocol or non-protocolised standard care for the duration of the participant’s admission in the ICU. The primary outcome is delirium status measured using the Confusion Assessment Measure for ICU (CAM-ICU). Secondary outcomes include physical function measured by the Functional Independence Measure and quality of life measured by the European Quality of Life five dimensions, five-level questionnaire. A mixed-method process evaluation will contribute to understanding the experience of health teams who implement the ABCDEF bundle into practice.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was provided by the Metro South Health Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) (EC00167) and the Griffith University’s HREC prior to study commencement.Study results will be disseminated by presentations at conferences and via publications to peer-review journals.Trial registration numberACTRN12620000736943; Pre-results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document