What gives a stroke publication impact? Assessing traditional and alternative metrics of scientific impact for papers published in the journal Stroke

Background: The ‘impact’ of a scientific paper is a measure of influence in its field. In recent years, traditional, citation-based measures of impact have been complemented by Altmetrics, which quantify outputs including social media footprint. As authors and research institutions seek to increase their visibility both within and beyond the academic community, it is important to identify and compare the determinants of traditional and alternative metrics. We explored this using Stroke – a leading journal in its field. Methods: We described the impact of original research papers published in Stroke (2015-2016) using citation count and Altmetric Attention Score (Altmetrics). Using these two metrics as our outcomes, we assessed univariable and multivariable associations with 21 plausibly relevant publication features. We set the significance threshold at p<0.01. Results: Across 911 papers published in Stroke, there was an average citation count of 21.60 (±17.40) and Altmetric score of 17.99 (±47.37). The two impact measures were weakly correlated (r=0.15, p<0.001). Citations were independently associated with five publication features at a significance level of p<0.01: Time Since Publication (beta=0.87), Number of Authors (beta=0.22), Publication Type (beta=6.76), Number of Previous Publications (beta=0.01) and Editorial (beta=9.45). For Altmetrics, we observed a trend for independent associations with: Time Since Publication (beta=-0.25, p=0.02), Number of References (beta=0.32, p=0.02) and Country of Affiliation (beta=8.59, p=0.01). Our models explained 21% and 3% of variance in citations and Altmetrics, respectively. Conclusion: Papers published in Stroke have impact. Certain aspects of content and format may contribute to impact, but these differ for traditional measures and Altmetrics, and explain only a very modest proportion of variance in the latter. Citation counts and Altmetrics seem to represent different constructs and, therefore, should be used in conjunction to allow a more comprehensive assessment of publication impact.

Symptom burden of people with progressive ataxia, and its wider impact on their friends and relatives: a cross-sectional study

Background: Progressive ataxias are complex disorders that result in a wide variety of symptoms. Whilst we currently have a relatively good understanding of the symptom patterns associated with the various types of ataxia, and how these diseases progress over time, their impact on the person with ataxia is less well understood. In addition, little is known about how carers, friends and families are affected by them. This paper aims to provide preliminary information on the presence and impact of medical symptoms and day-to-day challenges on people with ataxia and their friends and relatives. Method: Data were extracted from a survey by Ataxia UK for their members. The views of 366 people with ataxia and 52 friends and relatives are reported. Data were analysed for the entire groups, as well as for the three most common ataxia types represented in the sample, Friedreich’s ataxia, inherited ataxia (excluding Friedreich’s ataxia), and cerebellar ataxia of unknown cause. Results: The survey confirmed the symptom patterns described in previous research, but further showed that the impact of these symptoms can vary across ataxia populations. Similar findings were observed for day-to-day challenges. Friends and relatives experienced similar challenges to people with ataxia, indicating that support provided has to consider those supporting people with ataxia as well as the patient. Respondents also highlighted limitations in terms of accessing support services, and not all services were able to cater fully to their specific needs. Conclusion: This study begins to provide information that can be used in further research to explore the needs of people with ataxia and their carers, friends, and relatives. Such research will support treatment trial design, ensuring patients’ needs are considered, help to tailor support services to their needs, and ensure health care professionals have the necessary skills to fully address them.

Research Evaluating Staff Training Online for Resilience (RESTORE): Protocol for a single-arm feasibility study of an online Acceptance and Commitment Therapy intervention to improve staff wellbeing in palliative care settings

Background Palliative care workers commonly experience workplace stress and distress. General stressors include unmanageable workloads and staff shortages. Stressors specific to palliative care include regular exposure to death, loss and grief. The COVID pandemic exacerbated exhaustion and burnout across the healthcare system, including for those providing palliative care. Evidence based psychological support interventions, tailored to the needs and context of palliative care workers, are needed. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) is an established form of cognitive behavioural therapy which uses behavioural psychology, values, acceptance, and mindfulness techniques to improve mental health and wellbeing. ACT is effective in improving workplace wellbeing in many occupational settings. Our study examines the acceptability and feasibility of an online ACT-based intervention to improve mental health and wellbeing in staff caring for people with an advanced progressive illness. Methods A single-arm feasibility trial. We will seek to recruit 30 participants to take part in an 8- week online ACT-based intervention, consisting of three synchronous facilitated group sessions and five asynchronous self-directed learning modules. We will use convergent mixed methods to evaluate the feasibility of the intervention. Quantitative feasibility outcomes will include participant recruitment and retention rates, alongside completion rates of measures assessing stress, quality of life, wellbeing, and psychological flexibility. Focus groups and interviews will explore participant perspectives on the intervention. We will run a stakeholder workshop to further refine the intervention and identify outcomes for use in a future evaluation. Results We will describe participant perspectives on intervention acceptability, format, content, and perceived impact alongside rates of intervention recruitment, retention, and outcome measure completion. Conclusion We will show whether a brief, online ACT intervention is acceptable to, and feasible for palliative care workers. Findings will be used to further refine the intervention and provide essential information on outcome assessment prior to a full-scale evaluation.

What do we know about the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on hospices? A collaborative multi-stakeholder knowledge synthesis

Background: Prior to undertaking a study looking at the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic upon lived experiences of hospice services in the West Midlands, we sought to identify the range of issues that hospice service users and providers faced between March 2020 and July 2021, and to provide a report that can be accessed and understood by all interested stakeholders. Methods: We undertook a collaborative multi-stakeholder approach for scoping the range of potential issues and synthesising knowledge. This involved a review of available literature; a focus group with hospice stakeholders; and a collaborative knowledge exchange panel. Results: The literature on the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospices remains limited, but it is developing a picture of a service that has had to rapidly adapt the way it provides care and support to its service users, during a period when it faced many fundamental challenges to established ways of providing these services. Conclusions: The impacts of many of the changes on hospices have not been fully assessed. It is also not known what the effects upon the quality of care and support are for those with life-limiting conditions and those that care for them. We found that the pandemic has presented a new normative and service context in which quality of care and life itself was valued that is, as yet, poorly understood.

Prior elicitation of the efficacy and tolerability of Methotrexate and Mycophenolate Mofetil in Juvenile Localised Scleroderma

Background Evidence is lacking for safe and effective treatments for juvenile localised scleroderma (JLS). Methotrexate (MTX) is commonly used first line and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) second line, despite a limited evidence base. A head to head trial of these two medications would provide data on relative efficacy and tolerability. However, a frequentist approach is difficult to deliver in JLS, because of the numbers needed to sufficiently power a trial. A Bayesian approach could be considered. Methods An international consensus meeting was convened including an elicitation exercise where opinion was sought on the relative efficacy and tolerability of MTX compared to MMF to produce prior distributions for a future Bayesian trial. Secondary aims were to achieve consensus agreement on critical aspects of a future trial. Results An international group of 12 clinical experts participated. Opinion suggested superior efficacy and tolerability of MMF compared to MTX; where most likely value of efficacy of MMF was 0.70 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-0.90) and of MTX was 0.68 (95% CI 0.41-0.8). The most likely value of tolerability of MMF was 0.77 (95% CI 0.3-0.94) and of MTX was 0.62 (95% CI 0.32-0.84). The wider CI for MMF highlights that experts were less sure about relative efficacy and tolerability of MMF compared to MTX. Despite using a Bayesian approach, power calculations still produced a total sample size of 240 participants, reflecting the uncertainty amongst experts about the performance of MMF. Conclusions Key factors have been defined regarding the design of a future Bayesian approach clinical trial including elicitation of prior opinion of the efficacy and tolerability of MTX and MMF in JLS. Combining further efficacy data on MTX and MMF with prior opinion could potentially reduce the pre-trial uncertainty so that, when combined with smaller trial sample sizes a compelling evidence base is available.

A feasibility pilot study of the effects of neurostimulation on dysphagia recovery in Parkinson’s Disease

Introduction: Dysphagia often occurs during Parkinson’s disease (PD) and can have severe consequences. Recently, neuromodulatory techniques have been used to treat neurogenic dysphagia. Here we aimed to compare the neurophysiological and swallowing effects of three different types of neurostimulation, 5 Hertz (Hz) repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), 1 Hz rTMS and pharyngeal electrical stimulation (PES). Method: 12 PD patients with dysphagia were randomised to receive either 5 Hz rTMS, 1 Hz rTMS, or PES. In a cross-over design, patients were assigned to one intervention and received both real and sham stimulation. Patients received a baseline videofluoroscopic (VFS) assessment of their swallowing, enabling penetration aspiration scores (PAs) to be calculated for: thin fluids, paste, solids and cup drinking. Swallowing timing measurements were also performed on thin fluid swallows only. They then had baseline recordings of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) from both pharyngeal and (as a control) abductor pollicis brevis (APB) cortical areas using single-pulse TMS. Subsequently, the intervention was administered and post interventional TMS recordings were taken at 0 and 30 minutes followed by a repeat VFS within 60 minutes of intervention. Results: All interventions were well tolerated. Due to lower than expected recruitment, statistical analysis of the data was not undertaken. However, with respect to PAs swallowing timings and MEP amplitudes, there was visual separation in a positive direction between active and sham groups for all interventions. Conclusion: PES, 5 Hz rTMS and 1 Hz rTMS are tolerable interventions in PD related dysphagia. Due to small patient numbers no definitive conclusions could be drawn from the data with respect to individual interventions improving swallowing function and comparative effectiveness between interventions. Larger future studies are needed to further explore the efficacy of these neuromodulatory treatments in Parkinson’s Disease associated dysphagia.

A rapid review of the overuse of antibiotics during the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons learned and recommendations for the future

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had severe implications on healthcare systems and the patients affected by this infectious disease. To improve outcomes for patients with COVID-19 and limit future antimicrobial resistance, there is continued urgency to improve our understanding of the rates and causative agents of secondary bacterial infections in patients with COVID‑19, and recognise whether antibiotics are being overused in patients prior to and following COVID-19 diagnosis. This article presents the results of a rapid review comparing reported rates of secondary bacterial infections with rates of antibiotic use in patients with COVID-19 predominantly in a hospital setting, within the context of treatment guidelines and recommendations. The review revealed rates of antibiotic use in patients with COVID-19 of 37–100%, far outweighing rates of secondary bacterial infections which were typically below 20%. There was a lack of consistent reporting of causative microorganisms of secondary infections, and the distinction between bacterially- and virally-induced sepsis was rarely made. Early in the pandemic, healthcare agencies published treatment guidelines recognising the importance of antimicrobial stewardship. However, many are yet to provide updated guidance detailing the most appropriate antibiotics to treat patients with concurrent COVID-19 and secondary bacterial infections in a way which limits the emergence of drug-resistant infections and does not negatively impact patient outcomes. Without significant improvements to the testing and reporting of causative organisms and corresponding updates to antimicrobial treatment guidelines, there is a risk of worsened clinical outcomes and increased burden on healthcare systems from antimicrobial resistance during the remainder of the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

Validation of the 4AT tool for delirium assessment in specialist palliative care settings: protocol of a prospective diagnostic test accuracy study

Background: Delirium is a serious and distressing neuropsychiatric condition, which is prevalent across all palliative care settings. Hypoactive delirium is particularly common, but difficult to recognize, partly due to overlapping symptoms with depression and dementia. Delirium screening tools can lead to earlier identification and hence better management of patients. The 4AT (4 ‘A’s Test) is a brief tool for delirium detection, designed for use in clinical practice. It has been validated in 17 studies in over 3,700 patients. The test is currently used in specialist palliative care units, but has not been validated in this setting. The aim of the study is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the 4AT for delirium detection against a reference standard, in hospice inpatients. Methods: 240 participants will be recruited from the inpatient units of two hospices in Scotland. If a patient lacks capacity to consent, agreement will be sought from a legal proxy. Each participant will complete the 4AT and a reference standard assessment based on the diagnostic delirium criteria in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). This will be supplemented by tests of cognition and attention, including reverse days of the week, counting down from 20 to 1, Vigilance 'A', the Observational Scale for Level of Arousal, the modified Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale and the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98. The assessments will be conducted in a randomized order by two independent clinicians, who will be blinded to the results until both are complete. Primary outcomes will be the sensitivity and specificity of the 4AT in detecting delirium. Discussion: The findings will inform clinical practice regarding delirium assessment in palliative care settings. Trial registration: ISRCTN ISRCTN97417474 (21/02/2020).

Protocol for a scoping review of measurement of sleep in mild cognitive impairment and early dementia

Background: Sleep abnormalities are increasingly recognised to emerge early in dementia, at or before the Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) phase. Abnormal sleep accelerates cognitive decline and may directly contribute to pathophysiology. Its accurate measurement is therefore crucial, firstly to characterise sleep abnormalities in early disease potentially facilitating earlier identification of those at risk of dementia and secondly to test sleep intervention efficacy. However, it is our a priori hypothesis that sleep outcomes are reported heterogeneously inhibiting side-by-side comparison of study findings. As a translational step towards informing choice and decisions on optimal measures, this scoping review will describe measurement tools utilised and sleep parameters currently reported in early dementia and MCI. Methods: This scoping review follows the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis for Scoping Reviews. The search strategy consists of an electronic search of the CINAHL Plus, Embase, Medline, Psychinfo and British Nursing Index databases and date limited to articles published from 2000. Search results will be merged using reference management software and duplicates removed. 10% of returned titles and abstracts will be checked by each reviewing member to ensure continuity of decision making. Full-texts will be reviewed by at least two reviewers with discrepancies resolved by whole team consensus. A PRISMA flow diagram will document the selection process. Extracted data will be analysed and reported narratively. Discussion: This scoping review will identify which sleep parameters are reported and the means by which they are measured in people with MCI or early dementia. We intend to explore differences in reporting practice within group subsets, e.g. by dementia and study subtype. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is not required due to absence of human participants. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant academic conferences. The search strategy will be made available publicly for transparency.

A collaborative approach to exercise provision for people with Parkinson’s – a feasibility and acceptability study of the PDConnect programme

Background: Exercise has been shown to be beneficial for people with Parkinson’s (PwP), slowing the rate of decline of motor and non-motor symptoms, with emerging evidence associating exercise with a neuroprotective effect. Current exercise provision is time-limited, and delivered in the absence of strategies to support long-term adherence to exercise. With a growing Parkinson’s population, there is a need to develop long-term sustainable approaches to exercise delivery. The primary aim of this study is to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a multicomponent intervention (PDConnect) aimed at promoting physical activity, and self-management for PwP. Methods: A convergent fixed parallel mixed methods design study will be undertaken. The study aims to recruit 30 PwP, who will be randomly allocated into two groups: (i) the usual care group will receive physiotherapy once a week for six weeks delivered via Microsoft Teams. (ii) The PDConnect group will receive physiotherapy once a week for six weeks which combines exercise, education and behaviour change interventions delivered by NHS Parkinson’s specialist physiotherapists via Microsoft Teams. This will be followed by 12 weekly sessions of group exercise delivered on Microsoft Teams by fitness instructors specially trained in Parkinson’s. Participants will be then contacted by the fitness instructors once per month for three months by video conferencing to support exercise engagement. Primary feasibility data will be collected during the study, with acceptability assessed via semi-structured interviews at the end. Secondary outcomes encompassing motor, non-motor and health and well-being measures will be assessed at baseline, at six, 18, and 30 weeks. Discussion: This pilot study will establish whether PDConnect is feasible and acceptable to PwP. This will provide a platform for a larger evaluation to assess the effectiveness of PDConnect at increasing exercise participation and self-management within the Parkinson’s Community. Trial registration: Registered on ISRCTN (ISRCTN11672329, 4th June 2020).