Royal Victoria Hospital
Hospital / health systemBelfast, United Kingdom
Research output, citation impact, and the most-cited recent papers from Royal Victoria Hospital (United Kingdom). Aggregated across the NobleBlocks index of 300M+ scholarly works.
Top-cited papers from Royal Victoria Hospital
BACKGROUND: In patients with multivessel coronary artery disease who are undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary angiography is the standard method for guiding the placement of the stent. It is unclear whether routine measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR; the ratio of maximal blood flow in a stenotic artery to normal maximal flow), in addition to angiography, improves outcomes. METHODS: In 20 medical centers in the United States and Europe, we randomly assigned 1005 patients with multivessel coronary artery disease to undergo PCI with implantation of drug-eluting stents guided by angiography alone or guided by FFR measurements in addition to angiography. Before randomization, lesions requiring PCI were identified on the basis of their angiographic appearance. Patients assigned to angiography-guided PCI underwent stenting of all indicated lesions, whereas those assigned to FFR-guided PCI underwent stenting of indicated lesions only if the FFR was 0.80 or less. The primary end point was the rate of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization at 1 year. RESULTS: The mean (+/-SD) number of indicated lesions per patient was 2.7+/-0.9 in the angiography group and 2.8+/-1.0 in the FFR group (P=0.34). The number of stents used per patient was 2.7+/-1.2 and 1.9+/-1.3, respectively (P<0.001). The 1-year event rate was 18.3% (91 patients) in the angiography group and 13.2% (67 patients) in the FFR group (P=0.02). Seventy-eight percent of the patients in the angiography group were free from angina at 1 year, as compared with 81% of patients in the FFR group (P=0.20). CONCLUSIONS: Routine measurement of FFR in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease who are undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents significantly reduces the rate of the composite end point of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization at 1 year. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00267774.)
BACKGROUND: The preferred initial treatment for patients with stable coronary artery disease is the best available medical therapy. We hypothesized that in patients with functionally significant stenoses, as determined by measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) plus the best available medical therapy would be superior to the best available medical therapy alone. METHODS: In patients with stable coronary artery disease for whom PCI was being considered, we assessed all stenoses by measuring FFR. Patients in whom at least one stenosis was functionally significant (FFR, ≤0.80) were randomly assigned to FFR-guided PCI plus the best available medical therapy (PCI group) or the best available medical therapy alone (medical-therapy group). Patients in whom all stenoses had an FFR of more than 0.80 were entered into a registry and received the best available medical therapy. The primary end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization. RESULTS: Recruitment was halted prematurely after enrollment of 1220 patients (888 who underwent randomization and 332 enrolled in the registry) because of a significant between-group difference in the percentage of patients who had a primary end-point event: 4.3% in the PCI group and 12.7% in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio with PCI, 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19 to 0.53; P<0.001). The difference was driven by a lower rate of urgent revascularization in the PCI group than in the medical-therapy group (1.6% vs. 11.1%; hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.30; P<0.001); in particular, in the PCI group, fewer urgent revascularizations were triggered by a myocardial infarction or evidence of ischemia on electrocardiography (hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.43; P<0.001). Among patients in the registry, 3.0% had a primary end-point event. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable coronary artery disease and functionally significant stenoses, FFR-guided PCI plus the best available medical therapy, as compared with the best available medical therapy alone, decreased the need for urgent revascularization. In patients without ischemia, the outcome appeared to be favorable with the best available medical therapy alone. (Funded by St. Jude Medical; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01132495.).
Free radical production occurs continuously in all cells as part of normal cellular function. However, excess free radical production originating from endogenous or exogenous sources might play a role in many diseases. Antioxidants prevent free radical induced tissue damage by preventing the formation of radicals, scavenging them, or by promoting their decomposition. This article reviews the basic chemistry of free radical formation in the body, the consequences of free radical induced tissue damage, and the function of antioxidant defence systems, with particular reference to the development of atherosclerosis.
The Fifth International Workshop-Conference on Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) was held in Chicago, IL, 11–13 November 2005 under the sponsorship of the American Diabetes Association. The meeting provided a forum for review of new information concerning GDM in the areas of pathophysiology, epidemiology, perinatal outcome, long-range implications for mother and her offspring, and management strategies. New information and recommendations related to each of these major topics are summarized in the report that follows. The issues regarding strategies and criteria for the detection and diagnosis of GDM were not reviewed or discussed in detail, since it is anticipated that the Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) study will provide data in mid-2007 that will foster the development of criteria for the diagnosis of GDM that are based on perinatal outcomes. Thus, for the interim, the participants of the Fifth International Workshop-Conference on GDM endorsed a motion to continue use of the definition, classification criteria, and strategies for detection and diagnosis of GDM that were recommended at the Fourth Workshop-Conference. Those guidelines are reproduced (with minor modifications) in this article in appendix Tables 1 and 2. The invited lectures, topical discussions, and posters presented at the conference and the invited manuscripts that appear in this issue of Diabetes Care served as the basis for the following summary and recommendations. ### Pathophysiology #### General considerations. Current diagnostic criteria assign the diagnosis of GDM to women with glucose levels in the upper ∼5–10% of the population distribution. The hyperglycemia varies in severity from glucose concentrations that would be diagnostic of diabetes outside of pregnancy to concentrations that are asymptomatic and only slightly above normal, but associated with some increased risk of fetal morbidity. Like all forms of hyperglycemia, GDM is characterized by insulin levels that are insufficient to meet insulin demands. The causes of pancreatic β-cell dysfunction that …
The selection of appropriate outcomes or domains is crucial when designing clinical trials in order to compare directly the effects of different interventions in ways that minimize bias. If the findings are to influence policy and practice then the chosen outcomes need to be relevant and important to key stakeholders including patients and the public, health care professionals and others making decisions about health care. There is a growing recognition that insufficient attention has been paid to the outcomes measured in clinical trials. These issues could be addressed through the development and use of an agreed standardized collection of outcomes, known as a core outcome set, which should be measured and reported, as a minimum, in all trials for a specific clinical area. Accumulating work in this area has identified the need for general guidance on the development of core outcome sets. Key issues to consider in the development of a core outcome set include its scope, the stakeholder groups to involve, choice of consensus method and the achievement of a consensus.
Host-mediated lung inflammation is present 1 , and drives mortality 2 , in the critical illness caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Host genetic variants associated with critical illness may identify mechanistic targets for therapeutic development 3 . Here we report the results of the GenOMICC (Genetics Of Mortality In Critical Care) genome-wide association study in 2,244 critically ill patients with COVID-19 from 208 UK intensive care units. We have identified and replicated the following new genome-wide significant associations: on chromosome 12q24.13 (rs10735079, P = 1.65 10 -8 ) in a gene cluster that encodes antiviral restriction enzyme activators (OAS1, OAS2 and OAS3); on chromosome 19p13.2 (rs74956615, P = 2.3 10 -8 ) near the gene that encodes tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2); on chromosome 19p13.3 (rs2109069, P = 3.98 10 -12 ) within the gene that encodes dipeptidyl peptidase 9 (DPP9); and on chromosome 21q22.1 (rs2236757, P = 4.99 10 -8 ) in the interferon receptor gene IFNAR2. We identified potential targets for repurposing of licensed medications: using Mendelian randomization, we found evidence that low expression of IFNAR2, or high expression of TYK2, are associated with life-threatening disease; and transcriptome-wide association in lung tissue revealed that high expression of the monocyte-macrophage chemotactic receptor CCR2 is associated with severe COVID-19. Our results identify robust genetic signals relating to key host antiviral defence mechanisms and mediators of inflammatory organ damage in COVID-19. Both mechanisms may be amenable to targeted treatment with existing drugs. However, large-scale randomized clinical trials will be essential before any change to clinical practice.
Suicide is a major public health concern accounting for 800 000 deaths globally each year. Although there have been many advances in understanding suicide risk in recent decades, our ability to predict suicide is no better now than it was 50 years ago. There are many potential explanations for this lack of progress, but the absence, until recently, of comprehensive theoretical models that predict the emergence of suicidal ideation distinct from the transition between suicidal ideation and suicide attempts/suicide is key to this lack of progress. The current article presents the integrated motivational-volitional (IMV) model of suicidal behaviour, one such theoretical model. We propose that defeat and entrapment drive the emergence of suicidal ideation and that a group of factors, entitled volitional moderators (VMs), govern the transition from suicidal ideation to suicidal behaviour. According to the IMV model, VMs include access to the means of suicide, exposure to suicidal behaviour, capability for suicide (fearlessness about death and increased physical pain tolerance), planning, impulsivity, mental imagery and past suicidal behaviour. In this article, we describe the theoretical origins of the IMV model, the key premises underpinning the model, empirical tests of the model and future research directions.This article is part of the theme issue 'Evolutionary thanatology: impacts of the dead on the living in humans and other animals'.
BACKGROUND: Following publication of the PRISMA statement, the UK Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) at the University of York in England began to develop an international prospective register of systematic reviews with health-related outcomes. The objectives were to reduce unplanned duplication of reviews and provide transparency in the review process, with the aim of minimizing reporting bias. METHODS: An international advisory group was formed and a consultation undertaken to establish the key items necessary for inclusion in the register and to gather views on various aspects of functionality. This article describes the development of the register, now called PROSPERO, and the process of registration. RESULTS: PROSPERO offers free registration and free public access to a unique prospective register of systematic reviews across all areas of health from all around the world. The dedicated web-based interface is electronically searchable and available to all prospective registrants. At the moment, inclusion in PROSPERO is restricted to systematic reviews of the effects of interventions and strategies to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor health conditions, for which there is a health-related outcome.Ideally, registration should take place before the researchers have started formal screening against inclusion criteria but reviews are eligible as long as they have not progressed beyond the point of completing data extraction.The required dataset captures the key attributes of review design as well as the administrative details necessary for registration.Submitted registration forms are checked against the scope for inclusion in PROSPERO and for clarity of content before being made publicly available on the register, rejected, or returned to the applicant for clarification.The public records include an audit trail of major changes to planned methods, details of when the review has been completed, and links to resulting publications when provided by the authors. CONCLUSIONS: There has been international support and an enthusiastic response to the principle of prospective registration of protocols for systematic reviews and to the development of PROSPERO.In October 2011, PROSPERO contained 200 records of systematic reviews being undertaken in 26 countries around the world on a diverse range of interventions.
In October 2002, a workshop was held in Ancona, Italy, to reach a Consensus on the management of Cushing's syndrome. The workshop was organized by the University of Ancona and sponsored by the Pituitary Society, the European Neuroendocrine Association, and the Italian Society of Endocrinology. Invited international participants included almost 50 leading endocrinologists with specific expertise in the management of Cushing's syndrome. The consensus statement on diagnostic criteria and the diagnosis and treatment of complications of this syndrome reached at the workshop is hereby summarized.
These guidelines provide a practical and evidence-based resource for the management of patients with Barrett's oesophagus and related early neoplasia. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument was followed to provide a methodological strategy for the guideline development. A systematic review of the literature was performed for English language articles published up until December 2012 in order to address controversial issues in Barrett's oesophagus including definition, screening and diagnosis, surveillance, pathological grading for dysplasia, management of dysplasia, and early cancer including training requirements. The rigour and quality of the studies was evaluated using the SIGN checklist system. Recommendations on each topic were scored by each author using a five-tier system (A+, strong agreement, to D+, strongly disagree). Statements that failed to reach substantial agreement among authors, defined as >80% agreement (A or A+), were revisited and modified until substantial agreement (>80%) was reached. In formulating these guidelines, we took into consideration benefits and risks for the population and national health system, as well as patient perspectives. For the first time, we have suggested stratification of patients according to their estimated cancer risk based on clinical and histopathological criteria. In order to improve communication between clinicians, we recommend the use of minimum datasets for reporting endoscopic and pathological findings. We advocate endoscopic therapy for high-grade dysplasia and early cancer, which should be performed in high-volume centres. We hope that these guidelines will standardise and improve management for patients with Barrett's oesophagus and related neoplasia.
INTRODUCTION: Age-associated cognitive decline-or normal (non-pathological, normative, usual) cognitive ageing-is an important human experience which differs in extent between individuals. The determinants of the differences in age-related cognitive decline are not fully understood. Progress in the field is taking place across many areas of biomedical and psychosocial sciences. AREAS OF AGREEMENT AND CONTROVERSY: The phenotype of normal cognitive ageing is well described. Some mental capabilities are well maintained into old age. From early adulthood, there are declines in mental domains such as processing speed, reasoning, memory and executive functions, some of which is underpinned by a decline in a general cognitive factor. There are contributions to understanding individual differences in normal cognitive ageing from genetics, general health and medical disorders such as atherosclerotic disease, biological processes such as inflammation, neurobiological changes, diet and lifestyle. Many of these effect sizes are small; some are poorly replicated; and in some cases, there is the possibility of reverse causation, with prior cognitive ability causing the supposed 'cause' of cognitive ability in old age. EMERGING AREAS FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: Genome-wide scans are a likely source to establish genetic contributions. The role of vascular factors in cognitive ageing is increasingly studied and understood. The same applies to diet, biomarkers such as inflammation and lifestyle factors such as exercise. There are marked advances in brain imaging, affording better in vivo studies of brain correlates of cognitive changes. There is growing appreciation that factors affecting general bodily ageing also influence cognitive functions in old age.
As management of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) advances, clinicians must continually revise their current practice. We report the fourth update of "European Guidelines for the Management of RDS" by a European panel of experienced neonatologists and an expert perinatal obstetrician based on available literature up to the end of 2018. Optimising outcome for babies with RDS includes prediction of risk of preterm delivery, need for appropriate maternal transfer to a perinatal centre and timely use of antenatal steroids. Delivery room management has become more evidence-based, and protocols for lung protection including initiation of CPAP and titration of oxygen should be implemented immediately after birth. Surfactant replacement therapy is a crucial part of management of RDS, and newer protocols for its use recommend early administration and avoidance of mechanical ventilation. Methods of maintaining babies on non-invasive respiratory support have been further developed and may cause less distress and reduce chronic lung disease. As technology for delivering mechanical ventilation improves, the risk of causing lung injury should decrease, although minimising time spent on mechanical ventilation using caffeine and, if necessary, postnatal steroids are also important considerations. Protocols for optimising general care of infants with RDS are also essential with good temperature control, careful fluid and nutritional management, maintenance of perfusion and judicious use of antibiotics all being important determinants of best outcome.
BACKGROUND: In cooperation with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative, the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) initiative aimed to develop a guideline on how to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes (i.e., constructs or domains) included in a "Core Outcome Set" (COS). A COS is an agreed minimum set of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials of a specific disease or trial population. METHODS: Informed by a literature review to identify potentially relevant tasks on outcome measurement instrument selection, a Delphi study was performed among a panel of international experts, representing diverse stakeholders. In three consecutive rounds, panelists were asked to rate the importance of different tasks in the selection of outcome measurement instruments, to justify their choices, and to add other relevant tasks. Consensus was defined as being achieved when 70 % or more of the panelists agreed and when fewer than 15 % of the panelists disagreed. RESULTS: Of the 481 invited experts, 120 agreed to participate of whom 95 (79 %) completed the first Delphi questionnaire. We reached consensus on four main steps in the selection of outcome measurement instruments for COS: Step 1, conceptual considerations; Step 2, finding existing outcome measurement instruments, by means of a systematic review and/or a literature search; Step 3, quality assessment of outcome measurement instruments, by means of the evaluation of the measurement properties and feasibility aspects of outcome measurement instruments; and Step 4, generic recommendations on the selection of outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a COS (consensus ranged from 70 to 99 %). CONCLUSIONS: This study resulted in a consensus-based guideline on the methods for selecting outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a COS. This guideline can be used by COS developers in defining how to measure core outcomes.
Abstract The genetic make-up of an individual contributes to the susceptibility and response to viral infection. Although environmental, clinical and social factors have a role in the chance of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and the severity of COVID-19 1,2 , host genetics may also be important. Identifying host-specific genetic factors may reveal biological mechanisms of therapeutic relevance and clarify causal relationships of modifiable environmental risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection and outcomes. We formed a global network of researchers to investigate the role of human genetics in SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity. Here we describe the results of three genome-wide association meta-analyses that consist of up to 49,562 patients with COVID-19 from 46 studies across 19 countries. We report 13 genome-wide significant loci that are associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection or severe manifestations of COVID-19. Several of these loci correspond to previously documented associations to lung or autoimmune and inflammatory diseases 3–7 . They also represent potentially actionable mechanisms in response to infection. Mendelian randomization analyses support a causal role for smoking and body-mass index for severe COVID-19 although not for type II diabetes. The identification of novel host genetic factors associated with COVID-19 was made possible by the community of human genetics researchers coming together to prioritize the sharing of data, results, resources and analytical frameworks. This working model of international collaboration underscores what is possible for future genetic discoveries in emerging pandemics, or indeed for any complex human disease.
UNLABELLED: This paper presents the development and content of a person-centred nursing framework. BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE: Person-centred is a widely used concept in nursing and health care generally, and a range of literature articulates key components of person-centred nursing. This evidence base highlights the links between this approach and previous work on therapeutic caring. METHODS: The framework was developed through an iterative process and involved a series of systematic steps to combine two existing conceptual frameworks derived from empirical studies. The process included the mapping of original conceptual frameworks against the person-centred nursing and caring literature, critical dialogue to develop a combined framework, and focus groups with practitioners and co-researchers in a larger person-centred nursing development and research project to test its face validity. FINDINGS: The person-centred nursing framework comprises four constructs -prerequisites, which focus on the attributes of the nurse; the care environment, which focuses on the context in which care is delivered; person-centred processes, which focus on delivering care through a range of activities; and expected outcomes, which are the results of effective person-centred nursing. The relationship between the constructs suggests that, to deliver person-centred outcomes, account must be taken of the prerequisites and the care environment that are necessary for providing effective care through the care processes. CONCLUSION: The framework described here has been tested in a development and research project in an acute hospital setting. Whilst there is an increasing empirical base for person-centred nursing, as yet little research has been undertaken to determine its outcomes for patients and nurses. The framework developed can be described as a mid-range theory. Further testing of the framework through empirical research is required to establish its utility for nursing practice and research.
BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that in patients with stable coronary artery disease and stenosis, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) performed on the basis of the fractional flow reserve (FFR) would be superior to medical therapy. METHODS: In 1220 patients with stable coronary artery disease, we assessed the FFR in all stenoses that were visible on angiography. Patients who had at least one stenosis with an FFR of 0.80 or less were randomly assigned to undergo FFR-guided PCI plus medical therapy or to receive medical therapy alone. Patients in whom all stenoses had an FFR of more than 0.80 received medical therapy alone and were included in a registry. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization within 2 years. RESULTS: The rate of the primary end point was significantly lower in the PCI group than in the medical-therapy group (8.1% vs. 19.5%; hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26 to 0.57; P<0.001). This reduction was driven by a lower rate of urgent revascularization in the PCI group (4.0% vs. 16.3%; hazard ratio, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.38; P<0.001), with no significant between-group differences in the rates of death and myocardial infarction. Urgent revascularizations that were triggered by myocardial infarction or ischemic changes on electrocardiography were less frequent in the PCI group (3.4% vs. 7.0%, P=0.01). In a landmark analysis, the rate of death or myocardial infarction from 8 days to 2 years was lower in the PCI group than in the medical-therapy group (4.6% vs. 8.0%, P=0.04). Among registry patients, the rate of the primary end point was 9.0% at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable coronary artery disease, FFR-guided PCI, as compared with medical therapy alone, improved the outcome. Patients without ischemia had a favorable outcome with medical therapy alone. (Funded by St. Jude Medical; FAME 2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01132495.).
BACKGROUND: Targeted temperature management is recommended for patients after cardiac arrest, but the supporting evidence is of low certainty. METHODS: In an open-label trial with blinded assessment of outcomes, we randomly assigned 1900 adults with coma who had had an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac or unknown cause to undergo targeted hypothermia at 33°C, followed by controlled rewarming, or targeted normothermia with early treatment of fever (body temperature, ≥37.8°C). The primary outcome was death from any cause at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included functional outcome at 6 months as assessed with the modified Rankin scale. Prespecified subgroups were defined according to sex, age, initial cardiac rhythm, time to return of spontaneous circulation, and presence or absence of shock on admission. Prespecified adverse events were pneumonia, sepsis, bleeding, arrhythmia resulting in hemodynamic compromise, and skin complications related to the temperature management device. RESULTS: A total of 1850 patients were evaluated for the primary outcome. At 6 months, 465 of 925 patients (50%) in the hypothermia group had died, as compared with 446 of 925 (48%) in the normothermia group (relative risk with hypothermia, 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94 to 1.14; P = 0.37). Of the 1747 patients in whom the functional outcome was assessed, 488 of 881 (55%) in the hypothermia group had moderately severe disability or worse (modified Rankin scale score ≥4), as compared with 479 of 866 (55%) in the normothermia group (relative risk with hypothermia, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.09). Outcomes were consistent in the prespecified subgroups. Arrhythmia resulting in hemodynamic compromise was more common in the hypothermia group than in the normothermia group (24% vs. 17%, P<0.001). The incidence of other adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with coma after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, targeted hypothermia did not lead to a lower incidence of death by 6 months than targeted normothermia. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; TTM2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02908308.).
BACKGROUND: There is no consensus method for determining progression of disability in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) when each patient has had only a single assessment in the course of the disease. METHODS: Using data from two large longitudinal databases, the authors tested whether cross-sectional disability assessments are representative of disease severity as a whole. An algorithm, the Multiple Sclerosis Severity Score (MSSS), which relates scores on the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) to the distribution of disability in patients with comparable disease durations, was devised and then applied to a collection of 9,892 patients from 11 countries to create the Global MSSS. In order to compare different methods of detecting such effects the authors simulated the effects of a genetic factor on disability. RESULTS: Cross-sectional EDSS measurements made after the first year were representative of overall disease severity. The MSSS was more powerful than the other methods the authors tested for detecting different rates of disease progression. CONCLUSION: The Multiple Sclerosis Severity Score (MSSS) is a powerful method for comparing disease progression using single assessment data. The Global MSSS can be used as a reference table for future disability comparisons. While useful for comparing groups of patients, disease fluctuation precludes its use as a predictor of future disability in an individual.
These guidelines update previous guidance published in 2005. They have been revised by a group who are members of the UK and Ireland Neuroendocrine Tumour Society with endorsement from the clinical committees of the British Society of Gastroenterology, the Society for Endocrinology, the Association of Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland (and its Surgical Specialty Associations), the British Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology and others. The authorship represents leaders of the various groups in the UK and Ireland Neuroendocrine Tumour Society, but a large amount of work has been carried out by other specialists, many of whom attended a guidelines conference in May 2009. We have attempted to represent this work in the acknowledgements section. Over the past few years, there have been advances in the management of neuroendocrine tumours, which have included clearer characterisation, more specific and therapeutically relevant diagnosis, and improved treatments. However, there remain few randomised trials in the field and the disease is uncommon, hence all evidence must be considered weak in comparison with other more common cancers.
Royal College of Nursing Institute, Oxford, United Kingdom. Corresponding author: Jo Rycroft-Malone, PhD, MSc, BSc(Hons), RN, Royal College of Nursing, Radcliffe Infirmary, Woodstock Rd, Oxford OX2 6HE, United Kingdom (e-mail: [email protected]). The PARIHS framework is the culmination of a project team's work. Kitson, Harvey, and McCormack conceived the framework, first published in 1998. Since that time, a larger project team, led by Jo Rycroft-Malone, has shaped its ongoing development and refinement. Project team: Alison Kitson, BSc(Hons), DPhil, RN, FRCN—executive director of nursing, honorary professorship, Royal College of Nursing, London, UK; Gill Harvey, BNursing, PhD, RHV, RGN, DN—senior lecturer in healthcare and public sector management, Centre for Healthcare Management, University of Manchester, UK; Kate Seers, BSc(Hons), PhD, RGN—honorary professor and head of research, RCN Institute, Oxford, UK; Brendan McCormack, BSc(Hons)Nursing, DPHIL (Oxon), PGCEA, RGN, RMN—professor of nursing research, University of Ulster and Royal Hospitals Trust, Belfast, UK; and Angie Titchen, MSc, DPhil (Oxon), MCSP—senior research and development fellow, RCN Institute, Oxford, UK.