
McMaster University Medical Centre
Hospital / health systemHamilton, Ontario, Canada
Research output, citation impact, and the most-cited recent papers from McMaster University Medical Centre (Canada). Aggregated across the NobleBlocks index of 300M+ scholarly works.
Top-cited papers from McMaster University Medical Centre
Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.
priate starting point for consultation by specialists. Substantial overlap exists among the patients whom these guidelines address and those discussed in the recently published guidelines for health care-associated pneumonia (HCAP). Pneumonia in nonambulatory residents of nursing homes and other long-term care facilities epidemiologically mirrors hospital-acquired pneumonia and should be treated according to the HCAP guidelines. However, certain other patients whose conditions are included in the designation of HCAP are better served by management in accordance with CAP guidelines with concern for specific pathogens.
BACKGROUND: The direct oral thrombin inhibitor dabigatran has a predictable anticoagulant effect and may be an alternative therapy to warfarin for patients who have acute venous thromboembolism. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial involving patients with acute venous thromboembolism who were initially given parenteral anticoagulation therapy for a median of 9 days (interquartile range, 8 to 11), we compared oral dabigatran, administered at a dose of 150 mg twice daily, with warfarin that was dose-adjusted to achieve an international normalized ratio of 2.0 to 3.0. The primary outcome was the 6-month incidence of recurrent symptomatic, objectively confirmed venous thromboembolism and related deaths. Safety end points included bleeding events, acute coronary syndromes, other adverse events, and results of liver-function tests. RESULTS: A total of 30 of the 1274 patients randomly assigned to receive dabigatran (2.4%), as compared with 27 of the 1265 patients randomly assigned to warfarin (2.1%), had recurrent venous thromboembolism; the difference in risk was 0.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.8 to 1.5; P<0.001 for the prespecified noninferiority margin). The hazard ratio with dabigatran was 1.10 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.84). Major bleeding episodes occurred in 20 patients assigned to dabigatran (1.6%) and in 24 patients assigned to warfarin (1.9%) (hazard ratio with dabigatran, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.48), and episodes of any bleeding were observed in 205 patients assigned to dabigatran (16.1%) and 277 patients assigned to warfarin (21.9%; hazard ratio with dabigatran, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.85). The numbers of deaths, acute coronary syndromes, and abnormal liver-function tests were similar in the two groups. Adverse events leading to discontinuation of the study drug occurred in 9.0% of patients assigned to dabigatran and in 6.8% of patients assigned to warfarin (P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: For the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism, a fixed dose of dabigatran is as effective as warfarin, has a safety profile that is similar to that of warfarin, and does not require laboratory monitoring. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00291330.)
This paper is a revision and update of the recommendations developed following the 1st (Vienna 2001), 2nd (Prague 2004) and 3rd (Zurich 2008) International Consensus Conferences on Concussion in Sport and is based on the deliberations at the 4th International Conference on Concussion in Sport held in Zurich, November 2012.1–3 \n \nThe new 2012 Zurich Consensus statement is designed to build on the principles outlined in the previous documents and to develop further conceptual understanding of this problem using a formal consensus-based approach. A detailed description of the consensus process is outlined at the end of this document under the Background section. This document is developed primarily for use by physicians and healthcare professionals who are involved in the care of injured athletes, whether at the recreational, elite or professional level.
Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document—intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement—has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.
BACKGROUND: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, defined by the presence of heparin-dependent IgG antibodies, typically occurs five or more days after the start of heparin therapy and can be complicated by thrombotic events. The frequency of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and of heparin-dependent IgG antibodies, as well as the relative risk of each in patients given low-molecular-weight heparin, is unknown. METHODS: We obtained daily platelet counts in 665 patients in a randomized, double-blind clinical trial comparing unfractionated heparin with low-molecular-weight heparin as prophylaxis after hip surgery. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia was defined as a decrease in the platelet count below 150,000 per cubic millimeter that began five or more days after the start of heparin therapy, and a positive test for heparin-dependent IgG antibodies. We also tested a representative subgroup of 387 patients for heparin-dependent IgG antibodies regardless of their platelet counts. RESULTS: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia occurred in 9 of 332 patients who received unfractionated heparin and in none of 333 patients who received low-molecular-weight heparin (2.7 percent vs. 0 percent; P = 0.0018). Eight of the 9 patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia also had one or more thrombotic events (venous in 7 and arterial in 1), as compared with 117 of 656 patients without heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (88.9 percent vs. 17.8 percent; odds ratio, 36.9; 95 percent confidence interval, 4.8 to 1638; P < 0.001). In the subgroup of 387 patients, the frequency of heparin-dependent IgG antibodies was higher among patients who received unfractionated heparin (7.8 percent, vs. 2.2 percent among patients who received low-molecular-weight heparin; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, associated thrombotic events, and heparin-dependent IgG antibodies are more common in patients treated with unfractionated heparin than in those treated with low-molecular-weight heparin.
Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.
Network meta-analysis (NMA), combining direct and indirect comparisons, is increasingly being used to examine the comparative effectiveness of medical interventions. Minimal guidance exists on how to rate the quality of evidence supporting treatment effect estimates obtained from NMA. We present a four-step approach to rate the quality of evidence in each of the direct, indirect, and NMA estimates based on methods developed by the GRADE working group. Using an example of a published NMA, we show that the quality of evidence supporting NMA estimates varies from high to very low across comparisons, and that quality ratings given to a whole network are uninformative and likely to mislead.
After almost two decades of intensive research, low-molecular-weight heparins have established their niche as an important class of antithrombotic compounds. The demonstration that these compounds are safe and effective for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism has led to the licensing of several of them in Europe and North America. In addition, danaparoid sodium, which is a mixture of dermatan sulfate, heparan sulfate, and chondroitin sulfate, is often used for the treatment of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia.1 Low-molecular-weight heparins have replaced unfractionated heparin in many parts of Europe but are only now finding their place in North America. Their use is . . .
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review associations between intake of saturated fat and trans unsaturated fat and all cause mortality, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and associated mortality, coronary heart disease (CHD) and associated mortality, ischemic stroke, and type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews, and CINAHL from inception to 1 May 2015, supplemented by bibliographies of retrieved articles and previous reviews. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Observational studies reporting associations of saturated fat and/or trans unsaturated fat (total, industrially manufactured, or from ruminant animals) with all cause mortality, CHD/CVD mortality, total CHD, ischemic stroke, or type 2 diabetes. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study risks of bias. Multivariable relative risks were pooled. Heterogeneity was assessed and quantified. Potential publication bias was assessed and subgroup analyses were undertaken. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate quality of evidence and certainty of conclusions. RESULTS: For saturated fat, three to 12 prospective cohort studies for each association were pooled (five to 17 comparisons with 90,501-339,090 participants). Saturated fat intake was not associated with all cause mortality (relative risk 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.09), CVD mortality (0.97, 0.84 to 1.12), total CHD (1.06, 0.95 to 1.17), ischemic stroke (1.02, 0.90 to 1.15), or type 2 diabetes (0.95, 0.88 to 1.03). There was no convincing lack of association between saturated fat and CHD mortality (1.15, 0.97 to 1.36; P=0.10). For trans fats, one to six prospective cohort studies for each association were pooled (two to seven comparisons with 12,942-230,135 participants). Total trans fat intake was associated with all cause mortality (1.34, 1.16 to 1.56), CHD mortality (1.28, 1.09 to 1.50), and total CHD (1.21, 1.10 to 1.33) but not ischemic stroke (1.07, 0.88 to 1.28) or type 2 diabetes (1.10, 0.95 to 1.27). Industrial, but not ruminant, trans fats were associated with CHD mortality (1.18 (1.04 to 1.33) v 1.01 (0.71 to 1.43)) and CHD (1.42 (1.05 to 1.92) v 0.93 (0.73 to 1.18)). Ruminant trans-palmitoleic acid was inversely associated with type 2 diabetes (0.58, 0.46 to 0.74). The certainty of associations between saturated fat and all outcomes was "very low." The certainty of associations of trans fat with CHD outcomes was "moderate" and "very low" to "low" for other associations. CONCLUSIONS: Saturated fats are not associated with all cause mortality, CVD, CHD, ischemic stroke, or type 2 diabetes, but the evidence is heterogeneous with methodological limitations. Trans fats are associated with all cause mortality, total CHD, and CHD mortality, probably because of higher levels of intake of industrial trans fats than ruminant trans fats. Dietary guidelines must carefully consider the health effects of recommendations for alternative macronutrients to replace trans fats and saturated fats.
[First paragraph] A clearly-framed question creates the structure and delineates the approach to defining research objectives, conducting systematic reviews and developing health guidance (Guyatt et al., 2011; Armstrong et al., 2007). To assess the association between exposures and outcomes, including in the field of nutrition, environmental and occupational health, the concept of defining the Population (including animal species), Exposure, Comparator, and Outcomes (PECO) as pillars of the question is increasingly accepted (Morgan et al., 2016; Morgan et al., n.d.). Thus, the PECO defines the objectives of the review or guideline. Furthermore, the PECO informs the study design or inclusion and exclusion criteria for a review, as well as facilitating the interpretation of the directness of the findings based on how well the actual research findings represent the original question.
The investigation of many hemostatic defects in the newborn is limited by the lack of normal reference values. This study was designed to determine the postnatal development of the human coagulation system in the healthy full-term infant. Consecutive mothers of healthy full-term infants born at St Joseph's Hospital in the city of Hamilton were approached for consent. One hundred eighteen full-term infants (37 to 42 weeks' gestational age) were entered into the study. Demographic information and a 2-mL blood sample were obtained in the postnatal period on days 1, 5, 30, 90, and 180. Between 40 and 79 full-term infants were studied on each day for each of the coagulation tests. Plasma was fractionated and stored at -70 degrees C for batch assaying of the following tests: prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time, thrombin clotting time, and factor assays (biologic): fibrinogen, II, V, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, XII, and high-molecular weight kininogen. Factor XIII subunits A and S, von Willebrand factor, and the inhibitors antithrombin III, alpha 2-antiplasmin, alpha 2-macroglobulin, alpha 1-antitrypsin, C1 esterase inhibitor, protein C, and protein S were measured immunologically. Plasminogen, prekallikrein, and heparin cofactor II were measured by using chromogenic substrates. The large number of infants studied at each time point allowed us to determine the following: the range of normal for each test at five time points in the postnatal period; that coagulation tests vary with the postnatal age of the infant; that different coagulation factors show different postnatal patterns of maturation; and that near-adult values are achieved for most components by 6 months of life. In summary, this large cohort of infants studied consecutively in the postnatal period allowed us to determine the normal development of the human coagulation system in the full-term infant.
DESCRIPTION: A multidisciplinary group of 34 experts from 15 countries developed this update and expansion of the recommendations on the management of acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) from 2003. METHODS: The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) process and independent ethics protocols were used. Sources of data included original and published systematic reviews; randomized, controlled trials; and abstracts up to October 2008. Quality of evidence and strength of recommendations have been rated by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommendations emphasize early risk stratification, by using validated prognostic scales, and early endoscopy (within 24 hours). Endoscopic hemostasis remains indicated for high-risk lesions, whereas data support attempts to dislodge clots with hemostatic, pharmacologic, or combination treatment of the underlying stigmata. Clips or thermocoagulation, alone or with epinephrine injection, are effective methods; epinephrine injection alone is not recommended. Second-look endoscopy may be useful in selected high-risk patients but is not routinely recommended. Preendoscopy proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy may downstage the lesion; intravenous high-dose PPI therapy after successful endoscopic hemostasis decreases both rebleeding and mortality in patients with high-risk stigmata. Although selected patients can be discharged promptly after endoscopy, high-risk patients should be hospitalized for at least 72 hours after endoscopic hemostasis. For patients with UGIB who require a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, a PPI with a cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor is preferred to reduce rebleeding. Patients with UGIB who require secondary cardiovascular prophylaxis should start receiving acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) again as soon as cardiovascular risks outweigh gastrointestinal risks (usually within 7 days); ASA plus PPI therapy is preferred over clopidogrel alone to reduce rebleeding.
The American Heart Association (AHA) and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) have each published guidelines for cardiovascular disease prevention: the ADA has issued separate recommendations for each of the cardiovascular risk factors in patients with diabetes, and the AHA has shaped primary and secondary guidelines that extend to patients with diabetes. This statement will attempt to harmonize the recommendations of both organizations where possible but will recognize areas in which AHA and ADA recommendations differ.
Transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta1 has been implicated in the pathogenesis of fibrosis based upon its matrix-inducing effects on stromal cells in vitro, and studies demonstrating increased expression of total TGF-beta1 in fibrotic tissues from a variety of organs. The precise role in vivo of this cytokine in both its latent and active forms, however, remains unclear. Using replication-deficient adenovirus vectors to transfer the cDNA of porcine TGF-beta1 to rat lung, we have been able to study the effect of TGF-beta1 protein in the respiratory tract directly. We have demonstrated that transient overexpression of active, but not latent, TGF-beta1 resulted in prolonged and severe interstitial and pleural fibrosis characterized by extensive deposition of the extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins collagen, fibronectin, and elastin, and by emergence of cells with the myofibroblast phenotype. These results illustrate the role of TGF-beta1 and the importance of its activation in the pulmonary fibrotic process, and suggest that targeting active TGF-beta1 and steps involved in TGF-beta1 activation are likely to be valuable antifibrogenic therapeutic strategies. This new and versatile model of pulmonary fibrosis can be used to study such therapies.
The extent to which a clinician should believe and act on the results of subgroup analyses of data from randomized trials or meta-analyses is controversial. Guidelines are provided in this paper for making these decisions. The strength of inference regarding a proposed difference in treatment effect among subgroups is dependent on the magnitude of the difference, the statistical significance of the difference, whether the hypothesis preceded or followed the analysis, whether the subgroup analysis was one of a small number of hypotheses tested, whether the difference was suggested by comparisons within or between studies, the consistency of the difference, and the existence of indirect evidence that supports the difference. Application of these guidelines will assist clinicians in making decisions regarding whether to base a treatment decision on overall results or on the results of a subgroup analysis.
BACKGROUND: Efforts to assist patients with adherence to prescribed, self-administered medications might improve the benefits and efficiency of health care. OBJECTIVE: To update an ongoing review summarising the results of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to help patients follow prescriptions for medications, focusing on trials that measured both adherence and clinical outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: Computerised searches to July 1998 in MEDLINE, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA), PsychInfo, Sociofile, and HSTAR; bibliographies in articles on patient adherence; articles in the reviewers' personal collections; and contact with authors. SELECTION CRITERIA: Articles were selected if they reported an unconfounded RCT of an intervention to improve adherence with prescribed medications, measuring both medication adherence and treatment outcome, with at least 80% follow-up of each group studied and, for long-term treatments, at least six months follow-up for studies with positive initial findings. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Information on study design features, interventions and controls, and findings were extracted by one reviewer (PM) and a research assistant and confirmed by two of the other reviewers. The studies were too disparate to warrant meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: For short-term treatments, one study, of counselling and written information, showed an effect on adherence and clinical outcome. Ten of 19 interventions for long-term treatments reported in 17 RCTs were associated with improvements in adherence, but only nine interventions led to improvements in treatment outcomes. Almost all of the interventions that were effective for long-term care were complex, including combinations of more convenient care, information, counselling, reminders, self-monitoring, reinforcement, family therapy, and other forms of additional supervision or attention. Even the most effective interventions did not lead to large improvements in adherence and treatment outcomes. Two studies showed that telling patients about adverse effects of treatment did not affect their adherence. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The full benefits of medications cannot be realised at currently achievable levels of adherence. Current methods of improving adherence for chronic health problems are mostly complex and not very effective. More studies of innovative approaches to assist patients to follow medication prescriptions are needed.
OBJECTIVES: The clinical and economic burden of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is significant. Recurrent CDI management has emerged as a major challenge with suboptimal response to standard therapy. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has been used as a treatment to reconstitute the normal microbial homeostasis and break the cycle of antibiotic agents that may further disrupt the microbiome. Given the lack of randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) and limitations in previous systematic reviews, we aimed to conduct a systematic review with robust methods to determine the efficacy and safety profile of FMT in CDI. METHODS: An electronic search was conducted using MEDLINE (1946-March 2012), EMBASE (1974-March 2012) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2012). The search strategy was not limited by language. Abstract data were excluded and only completed studies that underwent the full, rigorous peer-review process were included. Studies that used FMT via any delivery modality for laboratory or endoscopically proven CDI with clinical resolution as primary outcome were included. A sample size of 10 or more patients was a further criterion. Elements of the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination checklist and the National Institute of Clinical Excellence quality assessment for case series checklist were employed to determine study quality. Eligibility assessment and data extraction were performed by two independent researchers. Both unweighted pooled resolution rates (UPR) and weighted pooled resolution rates (WPR) were calculated with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) for overall studies, as well as predefined subgroups. RESULTS: Eleven studies with a total of 273 CDI patients treated with FMT were identified; no RCTs were found as none have been published. Two-hundred and forty-five out of 273 patients experienced clinical resolution (UPR 89.7%; WPR 89.1% (95% CI 84 to 93%)). There was no statistically significant heterogeneity between studies (Cochran Q test P=0.13, I(2)=33.7%). A priori subgroup analysis suggested that lower gastrointestinal FMT delivery (UPR 91.4%; WPR 91.2% (95% CI 86 to 95%)) led to a trend towards higher clinical resolution rates than the upper gastrointestinal route (UPR 82.3%; WPR 80.6% (95% CI 69-90%)) (proportion difference of WPR was 10.6% (95% CI -0.6 to 22%)). No difference in clinical outcomes was detected between anonymous vs. patient selected donors. There were no reported adverse events associated with FMT and follow-up was variable from weeks to years. CONCLUSIONS: FMT holds considerable promise as a therapy for recurrent CDI but well-designed, RCTs and long-term follow-up registries are still required. These are needed to identify the right patient, efficacy and safety profile of FMT before this approach can be widely advocated.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the measurement properties of an Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire. The study design was an 8-wk unblinded single cohort with assessments at 0, 4, and 8 wk. Thirty-nine adults with symptomatic asthma and a wide range of airway responsiveness and medication requirements were enrolled from previous studies and through notices in the local media. Those with inadequately controlled asthma were offered an inhaled steroid (budesonide). Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, spirometry, a clinical asthma control questionnaire, medication requirements, airway responsiveness to methacholine, the Sickness Impact Profile, and the Rand questionnaire were recorded at each visit. Patients kept daily diaries of peak flow rates and medications. The Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire was able to detect changes in patients who responded to treatment or who had natural fluctuations in their asthma (p < 0.001) and to differentiate these patients from those who remained stable (p < 0.001). The Questionnaire was reproducible in patients who were stable (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.92). There were significant longitudinal and cross-sectional correlations between asthma quality of life and other measures of both clinical asthma and generic quality of life. We conclude that the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire has good measurement properties and that it is valid as both an evaluative and a discriminative instrument. It measures the component of asthma most important to patients, and it should be considered for inclusion in all asthma studies.
OBJECTIVE: Existing criteria for the classification of gout have suboptimal sensitivity and/or specificity, and were developed at a time when advanced imaging was not available. The current effort was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for gout. METHODS: An international group of investigators, supported by the American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism, conducted a systematic review of the literature on advanced imaging of gout, a diagnostic study in which the presence of monosodium urate monohydrate (MSU) crystals in synovial fluid or tophus was the gold standard, a ranking exercise of paper patient cases, and a multi-criterion decision analysis exercise. These data formed the basis for developing the classification criteria, which were tested in an independent data set. RESULTS: The entry criterion for the new classification criteria requires the occurrence of at least one episode of peripheral joint or bursal swelling, pain, or tenderness. The presence of MSU crystals in a symptomatic joint/bursa (ie, synovial fluid) or in a tophus is a sufficient criterion for classification of the subject as having gout, and does not require further scoring. The domains of the new classification criteria include clinical (pattern of joint/bursa involvement, characteristics and time course of symptomatic episodes), laboratory (serum urate, MSU-negative synovial fluid aspirate), and imaging (double-contour sign on ultrasound or urate on dual-energy CT, radiographic gout-related erosion). The sensitivity and specificity of the criteria are high (92% and 89%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The new classification criteria, developed using a data-driven and decision-analytic approach, have excellent performance characteristics and incorporate current state-of-the-art evidence regarding gout.