Evidence-Centered Design in Assessment Development

BACKGROUND The foray of Covid-19 around the globe is sure to have instigated worries in many humans, and lockdown measures may well have created their own worries. Sweden, in contrast to most other countries, had first relied on voluntary measures, but had to change its policy in the face of an increasing number of infections. OBJECTIVE The aim was to better understand the worried reactions to the virus and the lockdown measures. To grasp the reactions, their development over time was studied. METHODS Results were based on an unbalanced panel sample of 261 Swedish participants filling in 3218 interview questionnaires by smartphone in a 7-week period in 2020. Causal factors considered in this study include the perceived severity of an infection, the susceptibility of a person to the threat posed by the virus, the perceived efficacy of safeguarding measures and the assessment of government action against the spread of Covid-19. The effect of these factors on worries was traced in two analytical steps: the effects at the beginning of the study, and the effect on the trend during the study. RESULTS Findings confirmed that the hypothesized causal factors (severity of infection, susceptibility to the threat of the virus, efficacy of safeguarding and the assessment of government preventive action did indeed affect worries. CONCLUSIONS The results confirmed earlier research in a very special case and demonstrated the usefulness of a different study design, which takes a longitudinal perspective, and a new type of data analysis borrowed from multi-level study design.

Download Full-text

Profile of student misconceptions: limited scale trial of diagnostic assessment development based on science literacy

Journal of Physics Conference Series ◽

10.1088/1742-6596/1918/5/052080 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 1918 (5) ◽

pp. 052080

Author(s):

S Masfuah ◽

F Fakhriyah

Keyword(s):

Science Literacy ◽

Diagnostic Assessment ◽

Assessment Development ◽

Student Misconceptions ◽

Limited Scale

Download Full-text

Efficacy of Alprostadil in Preventing Contrast-Induced Nephropathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Angiology ◽

10.1177/00033197211004412 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 000331972110044

Author(s):

Hongling Xu ◽

Hongye Wang ◽

Chuang Zhang ◽

Jun Xiao ◽

Ning Hua ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Meta Analysis ◽

China National Knowledge Infrastructure ◽

Contrast Induced Nephropathy ◽

Serum Cystatin ◽

Assessment Development ◽

Neutrophil Gelatinase Associated Lipocalin ◽

Knowledge Infrastructure ◽

Evidence Evaluation ◽

Biological Medicine ◽

Neutrophil Gelatinase

This study aimed to determine the efficacy of alprostadil in preventing contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN). Eligible studies were searched using the keywords through the databases of PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, China Biological Medicine Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Vanfun. Quality evaluation of the included studies was conducted according to international evidence evaluation and recommended Grades of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation standards. We included 29 studies with 5623 patients. Compared with hydration, 10 µg/d alprostadil or 20 µg/d alprostadil plus hydration significantly decreased the incidence of CIN. Compared with hydration, alprostadil plus hydration significantly reduced serum creatinine and blood urea nitrogen at 24, 48, and 72 hours and 7 days after coronary angiography (CAG). Alprostadil (20 µg/d) plus hydration significantly decreased serum cystatin versus hydration at 24, 48, and 72 hours after CAG. Compared with hydration, alprostadil plus hydration significantly increased glomerular filtration rate at 24 and 72 hours after CAG. Alprostadil plus hydration significantly decreased neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin levels compared to hydration at 24, 48, and 72 hours after CAG. Alprostadil plus hydration significantly decreased urine macroglobulin versus hydration at 24 and 48 hours after CAG.

Download Full-text

Comparative Efficacy of Antifungal Agents Used in the Treatment of Oropharyngeal Candidiasis among HIV-Infected Adults: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Journal of Fungi ◽

10.3390/jof7080637 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 7 (8) ◽

pp. 637

Author(s):

Shamala Gopal Rajadurai ◽

Mari Kannan Maharajan ◽

Sajesh K. Veettil ◽

Divya Gopinath

Keyword(s):

Antifungal Agents ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Oropharyngeal Candidiasis ◽

Mycological Cure ◽

Comparative Efficacy ◽

Assessment Development ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Favorable Safety ◽

Grade Approach

The objective of this study was to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of different antifungal agents used for the treatment of oropharyngeal candidiasis (OPC) in adult patients with HIV. A systematic search was performed on the four major databases (Medline, Embase, CENTRAL and Scopus) to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of antifungal agents in HIV patients with OPC. A network meta-analysis was performed from the data extracted from the selected studies. The agents were ranked according using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to determine the quality of evidence. A total of 15 trials were included in the quantitative analysis involving the data from a total of 2883 participants. Fluconazole was ranked as the most effective antifungal agent to achieve clinical cure (SUCRA = 0.87) in OPC followed by posaconazole and itraconazole. Posaconazole was ranked the most efficacious agent in achieving mycological cure (SUCRA = 0.81), followed by fluconazole. While nystatin was ranked the safest, the effect estimates of none of the other systemic antifungal agents were significantly higher than fluconazole. Based on the available evidence, fluconazole can be considered as the most effective drug in the treatment of OPC among HIV-infected adults and has a favorable safety profile, followed by posaconazole.

Download Full-text

A living WHO guideline on drugs to prevent covid-19

BMJ ◽

10.1136/bmj.n526 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. n526

Author(s):

François Lamontagne ◽

Thomas Agoritsas ◽

Reed Siemieniuk ◽

Bram Rochwerg ◽

Jessica Bartoszko ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Guideline Development ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

World Health ◽

Policy And Practice ◽

Assessment Development ◽

Research Priority ◽

Health Organization ◽

Almost All ◽

Drug Interventions

Abstract Clinical question What is the role of drugs in preventing covid-19? Why does this matter? There is widespread interest in whether drug interventions can be used for the prevention of covid-19, but there is uncertainty about which drugs, if any, are effective. The first version of this living guideline focuses on the evidence for hydroxychloroquine. Subsequent updates will cover other drugs being investigated for their role in the prevention of covid-19. Recommendation The guideline development panel made a strong recommendation against the use of hydroxychloroquine for individuals who do not have covid-19 (high certainty). How this guideline was created This living guideline is from the World Health Organization (WHO) and provides up to date covid-19 guidance to inform policy and practice worldwide. Magic Evidence Ecosystem Foundation (MAGIC) provided methodological support. A living systematic review with network analysis informed the recommendations. An international guideline development panel of content experts, clinicians, patients, an ethicist and methodologists produced recommendations following standards for trustworthy guideline development using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Understanding the new recommendation The linked systematic review and network meta-analysis (6 trials and 6059 participants) found that hydroxychloroquine had a small or no effect on mortality and admission to hospital (high certainty evidence). There was a small or no effect on laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (moderate certainty evidence) but probably increased adverse events leading to discontinuation (moderate certainty evidence). The panel judged that almost all people would not consider this drug worthwhile. In addition, the panel decided that contextual factors such as resources, feasibility, acceptability, and equity for countries and healthcare systems were unlikely to alter the recommendation. The panel considers that this drug is no longer a research priority and that resources should rather be oriented to evaluate other more promising drugs to prevent covid-19. Updates This is a living guideline. New recommendations will be published in this article and signposted by update notices to this guideline. Readers note This is the first version of the living guideline for drugs to prevent covid-19. It complements the WHO living guideline on drugs to treat covid-19. When citing this article, please consider adding the update number and date of access for clarity.

Download Full-text

Can Vaccination Trigger Autoimmune Disorders? A Meta-Analysis

Vaccines ◽

10.3390/vaccines9080821 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 (8) ◽

pp. 821

Author(s):

Marek Petráš ◽

Ivana Králová Lesná ◽

Jana Dáňová ◽

Alexander M. Čelko

Keyword(s):

Meta Analysis ◽

Autoimmune Disorders ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Extensive Literature ◽

Primary Analysis ◽

Measures Of Association ◽

Assessment Development ◽

Extensive Literature Search ◽

The Stability

Vaccination as an important tool in the fight against infections has been suggested as a possible trigger of autoimmunity over the last decades. To confirm or refute this assumption, a Meta-analysis of Autoimmune Disorders Association With Immunization (MADAWI) was conducted. Included in the meta-analysis were a total of 144 studies published in 1968–2019 that were available in six databases and identified by an extensive literature search conducted on 30 November 2019. The risk of bias classification of the studies was performed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. The strength of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. While our primary analysis was conducted in terms of measures of association employed in studies with a low risk of bias, the robustness of the MADAWI outcome was tested using measures independent of each study risk of bias. Additionally, subgroup analyses were performed to determine the stability of the outcome. The pooled association of 0.99 (95% confidence interval, 0.97–1.02), based on a total of 364 published estimates, confirmed an equivalent occurrence of autoimmune disorders in vaccinated and unvaccinated persons. The same level of association reported by studies independently of the risk of bias was supported by a sufficient number of studies, and no serious limitation, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision, and publication bias. A sensitivity analysis did not reveal any discrepancy in the primary result. Current common vaccination is not the cause of any of the examined autoimmune disorders in the medium and long terms.

Download Full-text

Allergische Rhinitis: Zugang zu Allergen-Immuntherapie erleichtert

Karger Kompass Dermatologie ◽

10.1159/000509474 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 8 (3) ◽

pp. 107-108

Author(s):

Vera Mahler

Keyword(s):

Allergic Rhinitis ◽

Real World ◽

Simple Algorithm ◽

Allergische Rhinitis ◽

Assessment Development ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Real World Evidence ◽

Increasing Trend ◽

Chamber Studies ◽

Selection Of

The selection of pharmacotherapy for patients with allergic rhinitis aims to control the disease and depends on many factors. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines have considerably improved the treatment of allergic rhinitis. However, there is an increasing trend toward use of real-world evidence to inform clinical practice, especially because randomized controlled trials are often limited with regard to the applicability of results. The Contre les Maladies Chroniques pour un Vieillissement Actif (MACVIA) algorithm has proposed an allergic rhinitis treatment by a consensus group. This simple algorithm can be used to step up or step down allergic rhinitis treatment. Next-generation guidelines for the pharmacologic treatment of allergic rhinitis were developed by using existing GRADE-based guidelines for the disease, real-world evidence provided by mobile technology, and additive studies (allergen chamber studies) to refine the MACVIA algorithm.

Download Full-text