Health and Medical News and Resources

General interest items edited by Janice Flahiff

[News item] Only half of patients take their medications as prescribed: Are there interventions that will help them? — ScienceDaily

Only half of patients take their medications as prescribed: Are there interventions that will help them? — ScienceDaily.

From the news article

Date:November 20, 2014
Source:Wiley
Summary:The cost of patients not taking their medications as prescribed can be substantial in terms of their health. Although a large amount of research evidence has tried to address this problem, there are no well-established approaches to help them.

The cost of patients not taking their medications as prescribed can be substantial in terms of their health. Although a large amount of research evidence has tried to address this problem, there are no well-established approaches to help them, according to a new systematic review published in The Cochrane Library. The authors of the review examined data from 182 trials testing different approaches to increasing medication adherence and patient health. Even though the review included a significant number of the best studies to date, in most cases, trials had important problems in design, which made it hard to determine which approaches actually worked.

Only about half of all patients who are prescribed medication that they must administer themselves actually take their medication as prescribed. Many stop taking medication all together and others do not follow the instructions for taking it properly. This has been the case in many different diseases for at least the last half a century. In conditions where effective drug treatments are available, patients who take their medications as per their provider’s instructions can see a real difference to their health. However, when researchers in the field have tried to draw together evidence on this, they have found it unreliable and inconsistent.

November 28, 2014 Posted by | Medical and Health Research News | , , , , , | Leave a comment

In Clinical Trials About Half Of New Treatments Perform Better Than Existing Treatments

the-cochrane-library

the-cochrane-library (Photo credit: Wiley Asia Blog)

 

From the 18 October 2012 article at Medical News Today

 

On average, new treatments perform better in clinical trials only slightly more often than existing treatments, according to a new systematic review published in The Cochrane Library. The fact that experimental treatments are not more effective may seem disappointing, but the authors of the review say their findings satisfy an important ethical requirement for clinical trials.

Randomised trials compare the effects of one treatment to another. In a randomised trial patients are randomly allocated to different treatment groups to ensure that like will be compared with like. When a new treatment is being tested, it is hoped or even expected that it will be better than the established treatment with which it is being compared. These expectations lead to an ethical dilemma. If the researchers already know that one treatment is better, they would be knowingly allocating some people to an inferior treatment. If randomised trials are to be ethical, therefore, only half of new treatments should turn out to be better than existing ones.

 

Related Resources

 

 

Cochrane Reviews are systematic reviews of primary research in human health care and health policy, and are internationally recognised as the highest standard in evidence-based health care. They investigate the effects of interventions for prevention, treatment and rehabilitation. They also assess the accuracy of a diagnostic test for a given condition in a specific patient group and setting. They are published online in The Cochrane Library.

 

    • Browse Free Summaries

      Looking for the full text of these Cochrane Reviews? They may be available at your local public, academic, and medical libraries.  Call ahead and ask for a reference librarian. Many academic and medical libraries do serve the public, providing at least some basic services.

  • ClinicalTrials.gov

 

ClinicalTrials.gov is a registry and results database of publicly and privately supported clinical studies of human participants conducted around the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

October 18, 2012 Posted by | Medical and Health Research News | , , , , , | Leave a comment

UK Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) announces new partnership with PubMed Health

https://i1.wp.com/www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/techbull/so11/graphics/pm_health_fig1.gifCRD announces new partnership with PubMed Health.

From the 9 December press release (at Eureka News Alert)CRD announces new partnership with PubMed Health

A new partnership between the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) at the University of York and PubMed Health is launched today.

PubMed Health is a new online service provided by the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) at the US National Library of Medicine (NLM) – the world’s largest medical library. The service provides summaries and full text of selected systematic reviews and also provides information for consumers and clinicians based on those reviews

Systematic reviews are widely recognised as reliable sources of information about the effects of healthcare interventions. But as with individual research studies, they can be hard to find, may have flaws and can be difficult to interpret.

Since 1994, CRD has been producing and maintaining DARE, a database which uniquely provides access to over 11,000 abstracts of quality assessed and critically appraised systematic reviews. The database has become a key resource for health professionals and policy makers as it provides its users with a ‘bottom line’ on the overall validity and reliability of each review.

The new partnership involves CRD providing DARE content to PubMed Health.

Deputy Director of CRD Dr Amanda Sowden said: “CRD aims to produce and disseminate high quality evidence to inform health care decision making in the UK and internationally. Our partnership with PubMed Health is an exciting and prestigious development that will help give our database content truly global reach.”

 

—————

and…from the NLM (US National Library of Medicine’s December Technical Bulletin)

Update — PubMed Health December 2011 Release

With its December release, PubMed® Health grows to over 18,000 systematic reviews and health technology assessments in the last 10 years. With the inclusion of the Database of Reviews of Effects (DARE) from the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination in England, PubMed Health is getting close to comprehensive coverage of reliable systematic reviews on clinical effectiveness.

Other new features and content additions in this release include:

  • Evidence-based, regularly updated information on cancer for consumers and health professionals from the National Cancer Institute (NCI®) Physician Data Query (PDQ®) database.
  • Two full-text books under “Understanding research results” from the “Understand clinical effectiveness” tab:
    Irwig L, et al. Smart Health Choices: Making Sense of Health Advice. London: Hammersmith Press; 2008. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK63638/

    Evans I, et al. Testing Treatments: Better Research for Better Healthcare. 2nd edition. London: Pinter & Martin; 2011. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK66204/
  • Simplified and broadened — display of medical encyclopedia search results.

Addition of Over 12,000 Reviews from DARE

A new section in the “Contents” drop-down box on the homepage has been added for the DARE reviews (see Figure 1). This new content type rounds out PubMed Health’s coverage of systematic reviews on clinical effectiveness in the published biomedical literature, joining over 4,500 Cochrane reviews and hundreds of systematic reviews by health technology assessment agencies.

Screen capture of Contents drop-down box
Figure 1: Contents drop-down box.

DARE is a key database produced by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) and funded by England’s National Institute of Health Research. Information specialists at CRD regularly search an extensive group of electronic databases, supplemented by hand searching, to identify published systematic reviews that meet their set of scientific criteria.

For about half of the reviews that qualify for DARE, a CRD summary with critical appraisal of the scientific quality of the review is added. These may raise caveats about the reliability of the review, as in the example featured in Figure 2.

PubMed Health displays the title of the review and its citation (see #1 in Figure 2). For those reviews with a full CRD summary and appraisal, the conclusion is then displayed, followed by a link to the complete version (see #2 in Figure 2). This is followed by the abstract of the review itself, if one is included in PubMed (see #3 in Figure 2).

Screen capture of Example of a DARE review with CRD summary
Figure 2: Example of a DARE review with CRD summary.

Each PubMed Health record from DARE includes a link to an explanation of CRD’s process and assessment criteria.

Currently, DARE is added to weekly, and new records and summaries will appear shortly afterward in PubMed®Health. The records will not yet appear in PubMed.

Changes to Display of Search Results

DARE reviews are returned with all results, and can also be viewed under their own content type (see #1 in Figure 3).

Medical encyclopedia content has been simplified, with some content text also appearing (see #2 in Figure 3). Previously, only medical encyclopedia content for diseases and drugs were shown on the search results page. Relevant medical encyclopedia content for procedures and other types of searches now display.

The parallel “Clinical Queries” filter search for systematic reviews in PubMed remains (see #3 in Figure 3). This search continues to return results chronologically.

Screen capture of Search results
Figure 3: Search results.

NCI cancer information for patients and health professionals appears under the “For consumers” and “Clinical Guides” links, respectively.

Twitter followers can learn more about PubMed Health content and additions by following @PubMedHealth.

By Hilda Bastian
National Center for Biotechnology and Information

December 10, 2011 Posted by | Educational Resources (High School/Early College(, Finding Aids/Directories, Health Education (General Public), Librarian Resources, Professional Health Care Resources | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Database of Promoting Health Effectiveness Reviews (DoPHER)

 

Database of Promoting Health Effectiveness Reviews (DoPHER)
http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/webdatabases/Intro.aspx?ID=2

Focused coverage of systematic and non-systematic reviews of effectiveness
in health promotion and public health worldwide. This register currently
contains details of over 2,500 reviews of health promotion and public
health effectiveness.

There are many ways to search the reports through the Searchtab.
One may browse reports by clicking on the Reporttab, then Explore, and finally Generic Keywords ( focus of the report option)

 

August 28, 2010 Posted by | Public Health | , , , , , | Leave a comment

   

%d bloggers like this: