scholarly journals Review on Drug Utilization Assessment of Cephalosporin

2021 ◽  
pp. 260-265
Author(s):  
Awais Ahmed Juno ◽  
Mirza Tasawer Baig ◽  
Aisha Jabeen ◽  
Shahzada Azam Khan ◽  
Saleem Ahmed Khoso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Observational Studies ◽  
Antimicrobial Agents ◽  
Standard Of Living ◽  
Health Campaigns ◽  
Microbial Resistance ◽  
High Rise ◽  
Public Health Campaigns ◽  
High Level ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Primary Healthcare Centers

Pediatric is the field of medicine that is concerned with the health of infants, children and adolescents. Globally, many infectious diseases have been controlled in the 20th century by improving People’s standard of living through public health campaigns and the use of various antimicrobial agents. Evidence suggests that the manner in which Primary Healthcare centers prescribe drugs has contributed to the high rise in Anti-Microbial Resistance (AMR). The extent of the resistance is determined by the site of antibiotic application and in this study oral usage of antibiotics was found to be the highest contributor to Anti-Microbial Resistance.  A systematic review of the published literature on the conduct and reporting of meta-analyses in observational studies was done using databases searched included MEDLINE, Educational Resources Information Center, PsycLIT (http://www.wesleyan.edu/libr), Google Scholar, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts and the Current Index to Statistics. It was concluded that most of the articles reported that cephalosporin were widely used antibiotics and therefore its use must be rational; to avoid its abuse which may result to high level of resistance.

scholarly journals Trustworthiness of Doctors from Public Health Campaigns

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jens Koed Madsen
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Message Content ◽  
Health Campaigns ◽  
Four Dimensions ◽  
Exploratory Factor Analyses ◽  
Ethical Stance ◽  
Public Health Campaigns ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
The Impact

Previous research concerning the effectiveness of public health campaigns have explored the impact of message design, message content, communication channel choice and other aspects of such campaigns. Meta analyses reported in the literature reveal, however, that the choice of endorsers in health campaigns remains unexplored. The present study addresses this gap in the literature by studying what makes doctors from public health campaigns appear trustworthy in the eyes of the receiver. The present research examines propensity for trust as well facets of trustworthiness of such expert doctors based on a survey carried out in the UK (155 respondents). Underlying factors of trustworthiness are explored to gain more insight into the understanding of how trust may affect the public’s belief updating and the formation of intentions. Exploratory factor analyses suggest four dimensions of trustworthiness. Multiple regression analyses demonstrate that these factors explain almost 70% of the variance in the participants’ expressed trust in doctors from public health campaigns. Doctors’ ethical stance and their care for the health of the general population appear to be more important for perceived trustworthiness than their actual professional background, although their abilities and competences are closely related to ethics and benevolence. For policy makers this has important implications when selecting endorsers for public health campaigns in order to design effective health related communication, for example to combat obesity.

scholarly journals Reducing expectations for antibiotics in primary care: a randomised experiment to test the response to fear-based messages about antimicrobial resistance

BMC Medicine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurence S. J. Roope ◽  
Sarah Tonkin-Crine ◽  
Natalie Herd ◽  
Susan Michie ◽  
Koen B. Pouwels ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Antimicrobial Resistance ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Self Management ◽  
Health Campaigns ◽  
Influenza Like Illness ◽  
Online Panel ◽  
Public Health Campaigns ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
To Receive

Abstract Background To reduce inappropriate antibiotic use, public health campaigns often provide fear-based information about antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Meta-analyses have found that fear-based campaigns in other contexts are likely to be ineffective unless respondents feel confident they can carry out the recommended behaviour (‘self-efficacy’). This study aimed to test the likely impact of fear-based messages, with and without empowering self-efficacy elements, on patient consultations/antibiotic requests for influenza-like illnesses, using a randomised design. Methods We hypothesised that fear-based messages containing empowering information about self-management without antibiotics would be more effective than fear alone, particularly in a pre-specified subgroup with low AMR awareness. Four thousand respondents from an online panel, representative of UK adults, were randomised to receive three different messages about antibiotic use and AMR, designed to induce fear about AMR to varying degrees. Two messages (one ‘strong-fear’, one ‘mild-fear’) also contained empowering information regarding influenza-like symptoms being easily self-managed without antibiotics. The main outcome measures were self-reported effect of information on likelihood of visiting a doctor and requesting antibiotics, for influenza-like illness, analysed separately according to whether or not the AMR information was ‘very/somewhat new’ to respondents, pre-specified based on a previous (non-randomised) survey. Results The ‘fear-only’ message was ‘very/somewhat new’ to 285/1000 (28.5%) respondents, ‘mild-fear-plus-empowerment’ to 336/1500 (22.4%), and ‘strong-fear-plus-empowerment’ to 388/1500 (25.9%) (p = 0.002). Of those for whom the respective information was ‘very/somewhat new’, only those given the ‘strong-fear-plus-empowerment’ message said they would be less likely to request antibiotics if they visited a doctor for an influenza-like illness (p < 0.0001; 182/388 (46.9%) ‘much less likely’/‘less likely’, versus 116/336 (34.5%) with ‘mild-fear-plus-empowerment’ versus 85/285 (29.8%) with ‘fear-alone’). Those for whom the respective information was not ‘very/somewhat new’ said they would be less likely to request antibiotics for influenza-like illness (p < 0.0001) across all messages (interaction p < 0.0001 versus ‘very/somewhat new’ subgroup). The three messages had analogous self-reported effects on likelihood of visiting a doctor and in subgroups defined by believing antibiotics would ‘definitely/probably’ help an influenza-like illness. Results were reproduced in an independent randomised survey (additional 4000 adults). Conclusions Fear could be effective in public campaigns to reduce inappropriate antibiotic use, but should be combined with messages empowering patients to self-manage symptoms effectively without antibiotics.

scholarly journals Is there a difference in body size dissatisfaction between the patients with obesity seeking and not seeking treatment for obesity?

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wojciech Gruszka ◽  
Aleksander J. Owczarek ◽  
Mateusz Glinianowicz ◽  
Monika Bąk-Sosnowska ◽  
Jerzy Chudek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Obesity Treatment ◽  
Health Campaigns ◽  
Negative Attitudes ◽  
Figure Rating Scale ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Body Size Dissatisfaction ◽  
Public Health Campaigns ◽  
High Level

Abstract Background Various factors motivate people to undertake treatment for obesity. Among others they include health benefits, willingness to please others, and dissatisfaction with one’s appearance. The present study aimed to assess body size dissatisfaction in patients with obesity seeking and not seeking treatment for obesity. Methods Two-hundred-sixteen adult subjects (154 women, 62 men) including 80 people with BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 starting treatment for obesity (BMI 35.7 ± 5.3 kg/m2) and 136 volunteers with obesity (BMI 34.7 ± 4.3 kg/m2) not seeking treatment for obesity, were enrolled. Body size satisfaction was assessed using the Figure Rating Scale adapted by Stunkard. Results Patients with obesity starting obesity treatment had more often a high level of body size dissatisfaction than volunteers with obesity not seeking the treatment (p <  0.001). There was a significant difference in the distribution of body size dissatisfaction in women (p <  0.05), but not in men (p = 0.47). Conclusion Patients with obesity, especially women, seeking obesity treatment more often represent a high level of body size dissatisfaction than volunteers with obesity not seeking treatment for obesity. This implies the need for public health campaigns to address negative attitudes or misconceptions about obesity and its treatment. Placing more attention and emphasis on body size dissatisfaction in more vulnerable women with obesity may help to define personal motivations and goals, strengthen the doctor-patient relationship and better adapt therapeutic strategies.

Promoting Hearing Loss Prevention in Audiology Practice

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
David C. Byrne ◽  
Christa L. Themann ◽  
Deanna K. Meinke ◽  
Thais C. Morata ◽  
Mark R. Stephenson
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sound Level ◽  
Health Campaigns ◽  
Loss Prevention ◽  
Hearing Conservation ◽  
Prevention Services ◽  
Occupational Programs ◽  
Strategic Position ◽  
Public Health Campaigns ◽  
Self Protection

An audiologist should be the principal provider and advocate for all hearing loss prevention activities. Many audiologists equate hearing loss prevention with industrial audiology and occupational hearing conservation programs. However, an audiologist’s involvement in hearing loss prevention should not be confined to that one particular practice setting. In addition to supervising occupational programs, audiologists are uniquely qualified to raise awareness of hearing risks, organize public health campaigns, promote healthy hearing, implement intervention programs, and monitor outcomes. For example, clinical audiologists can show clients how to use inexpensive sound level meters, noise dosimeters, or phone apps to measure noise levels, and recommend appropriate hearing protection. Audiologists should identify community events that may involve hazardous exposures and propose strategies to minimize risks to hearing. Audiologists can help shape the knowledge, beliefs, motivations, attitudes, and behaviors of individuals toward self-protection. An audiologist has the education, tools, opportunity, and strategic position to facilitate or promote hearing loss surveillance and prevention services and activities. This article highlights real-world examples of the various roles and substantial contributions audiologists can make toward hearing loss prevention goals.

scholarly journals Validity of observational evidence on putative risk and protective factors: appraisal of 3744 meta-analyses on 57 topics

BMC Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Perrine Janiaud ◽  
Arnav Agarwal ◽  
Ioanna Tzoulaki ◽  
Evropi Theodoratou ◽  
Konstantinos K. Tsilidis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protective Factors ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Prediction Interval ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Small Study ◽  
Study Heterogeneity ◽  
Large Heterogeneity ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
No Gold Standard

Abstract Background The validity of observational studies and their meta-analyses is contested. Here, we aimed to appraise thousands of meta-analyses of observational studies using a pre-specified set of quantitative criteria that assess the significance, amount, consistency, and bias of the evidence. We also aimed to compare results from meta-analyses of observational studies against meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and Mendelian randomization (MR) studies. Methods We retrieved from PubMed (last update, November 19, 2020) umbrella reviews including meta-analyses of observational studies assessing putative risk or protective factors, regardless of the nature of the exposure and health outcome. We extracted information on 7 quantitative criteria that reflect the level of statistical support, the amount of data, the consistency across different studies, and hints pointing to potential bias. These criteria were level of statistical significance (pre-categorized according to 10−6, 0.001, and 0.05 p-value thresholds), sample size, statistical significance for the largest study, 95% prediction intervals, between-study heterogeneity, and the results of tests for small study effects and for excess significance. Results 3744 associations (in 57 umbrella reviews) assessed by a median number of 7 (interquartile range 4 to 11) observational studies were eligible. Most associations were statistically significant at P < 0.05 (61.1%, 2289/3744). Only 2.6% of associations had P < 10−6, ≥1000 cases (or ≥20,000 participants for continuous factors), P < 0.05 in the largest study, 95% prediction interval excluding the null, and no large between-study heterogeneity, small study effects, or excess significance. Across the 57 topics, large heterogeneity was observed in the proportion of associations fulfilling various quantitative criteria. The quantitative criteria were mostly independent from one another. Across 62 associations assessed in both RCTs and in observational studies, 37.1% had effect estimates in opposite directions and 43.5% had effect estimates differing beyond chance in the two designs. Across 94 comparisons assessed in both MR and observational studies, such discrepancies occurred in 30.8% and 54.7%, respectively. Conclusions Acknowledging that no gold-standard exists to judge whether an observational association is genuine, statistically significant results are common in observational studies, but they are rarely convincing or corroborated by randomized evidence.

The Dietary Inflammatory Index and Human Health: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Marx ◽  
Nicola Veronese ◽  
Jaimon T Kelly ◽  
Lee Smith ◽  
Meghan Hockey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Disease ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Dietary Inflammatory Index ◽  
Credibility Assessment ◽  
Umbrella Review ◽  
Inflammatory Index ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Study Designs

ABSTRACT Numerous observational studies have investigated the role of the Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII®) in chronic disease risk. The aims of this umbrella review and integrated meta-analyses were to systematically synthesize the observational evidence reporting on the associations between the DII and health outcomes based on meta-analyses, and to assess the quality and strength of the evidence for each associated outcome. This umbrella review with integrated meta-analyses investigated the association between the DII and a range of health outcomes based on meta-analyses of observational data. A credibility assessment was conducted for each outcome using the following criteria: statistical heterogeneity, 95% prediction intervals, evidence for small-study effect and/or excess significance bias, as well as effect sizes and P values using calculated random effects meta-analyses. In total, 15 meta-analyses reporting on 38 chronic disease-related outcomes were included, incorporating a total population of 4,360,111 subjects. Outcomes (n = 38) were examined through various study designs including case-control (n = 8), cross-sectional (n = 5), prospective (n = 5), and combination (n = 20) study designs. Adherence to a pro-inflammatory dietary pattern had a significant positive association with 27 (71%) of the included health outcomes (P value &lt; 0.05). Using the credibility assessment, Class I (Convincing) evidence was identified for myocardial infarction only, Class II (Highly suggestive) evidence was identified for increased risk of all-cause mortality, overall risk of incident cancer, and risk of incident site-specific cancers (colorectal, pancreatic, respiratory, and oral cancers) with increasing (more pro-inflammatory) DII score. Most outcomes (n = 31) presented Class III (Suggestive) or lower evidence (Weak or No association). Pro-inflammatory dietary patterns were nominally associated with an increased risk of many chronic disease outcomes. However, the strength of evidence for most outcomes was limited. Further prospective studies are required to improve the precision of the effect size.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document