scholarly journals The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Network Antibiotics and Childhood Growth Study: Implementing Patient Data Linkage

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 438-444
Author(s):  
Melanie Canterberry ◽  
Alan F. Kaul ◽  
Satyender Goel ◽  
Pi-I Debby Lin ◽  
Jason P. Block ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (Supp) ◽  
pp. 303-310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley Wennerstrom ◽  
Benjamin F. Springgate ◽  
Felica Jones ◽  
Diana Meyers ◽  
Norris Henderson ◽  
...  

The Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) supports patient-centered clinical comparative effectiveness research (CER) including health disparities and engagement portfolios. In 2013, PCORI launched the Pipeline to Proposal (P2P) mechanism to support development of nov­el patient- and stakeholder-centered part­nerships focused on designing clinical CER funding proposals. By providing a tiered structure of successive small contracts and technical assistance, the P2P mechanism encourages development of new research partnerships among diverse stakeholders. As a comparatively new field, patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) has few well-delineated methods for engaging patients and other non-scientists in effective teams with academics or clinicians to develop and implement rigorous, scientific research pro­posals. Community partnered participatory research (CPPR) provides a useful frame­work for structuring new partnerships.In this article we highlight the origins, de­velopment, and prospects of three current examples of funded P2P initiatives based in New Orleans and Los Angeles. We outline how these projects – Prisoner to Patient, the NOLA Partnership, and Resilience Among African American Men – use CPPR principles. We also describe how they have collaborated with, and contributed to, a two-way learning and knowledge exchange among members of the PCORI-funded Community and Patient Partnered Research Network. Lessons learned may be ap­plicable to other groups planning to create new partnerships focused on implementing PCOR.Ethn Dis. 2018;28(Suppl 2):303- 310; doi:10.18865/ed.28.S2.303.


2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. S194-S195
Author(s):  
Karen Coleman ◽  
Neely Williams ◽  
Jane Anau ◽  
Caroline Apovian ◽  
Anita Courcoulas ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 607-611 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. N. Kho ◽  
D. M. Hynes ◽  
S. Goel ◽  
A. E. Solomonides ◽  
R. Price ◽  
...  

Brain Injury ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 548-555
Author(s):  
Vani A. Rao ◽  
Kathleen T. Bechtold ◽  
David B. Arciniegas ◽  
Quincy M. Samus ◽  
Jennifer Albrecht ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 485-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arlene E Chung ◽  
Robert S Sandler ◽  
Millie D Long ◽  
Sean Ahrens ◽  
Jessica L Burris ◽  
...  

The Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America Partners Patient-Powered Research Network (PPRN) seeks to advance and accelerate comparative effectiveness and translational research in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). Our IBD-focused PCORnet PPRN has been designed to overcome the major obstacles that have limited patient-centered outcomes research in IBD by providing the technical infrastructure, patient governance, and patient-driven functionality needed to: 1) identify, prioritize, and undertake a patient-centered research agenda through sharing person-generated health data; 2) develop and test patient and provider-focused tools that utilize individual patient data to improve health behaviors and inform health care decisions and, ultimately, outcomes; and 3) rapidly disseminate new knowledge to patients, enabling them to improve their health. The Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America Partners PPRN has fostered the development of a community of citizen scientists in IBD; created a portal that will recruit, retain, and engage members and encourage partnerships with external scientists; and produced an efficient infrastructure for identifying, screening, and contacting network members for participation in research.


BMJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. m4435
Author(s):  
Bridget Gaglio ◽  
Michelle Henton ◽  
Amanda Barbeau ◽  
Emily Evans ◽  
David Hickam ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
J Redfern ◽  
K Hyun ◽  
D Brieger ◽  
D Chew ◽  
J French ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of disease burden globally. With advancements in medical and surgical care more people are surviving initial acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and are in need of secondary prevention and cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Increasing availability of high quality individual-level data linkage provides robust estimates of outcomes long-term. Purpose To compare 3 year outcomes amongst ACS survivors who did and did not participate in Australian CR programs. Methods SNAPSHOT ACS follow-up study included 1806 patients admitted to 232 hospitals who were followed-up by data linkage (cross-jurisdictional morbidity, national death index, Pharmaceutical Benefit Schedule) at 6 and 36 months to compare those who did/not attend CR. Results In total, the cohort had a mean age of 65.8 (13.4) years, 60% were male, only 25% (461/1806) attended CR. During index admission, attendees were more likely to have had PCI (39% v 14%, p<0.001), CABG (11% v 2%, p<0.001) and a diagnosis of STEMI (21% v 5%, p<0.001) than those who did not attend. However, there was no significant difference between CR attendees/non-attendees for risk factors (LDL-cholesterol, smoking, obesity). Only 19% of eligible women attended CR compared to 30% of men (p<0.001). At 36 months, there were fewer deaths amongst CR attendees (19/461, 4.1%) than non-attendees (116/1345, 8.6%) (p=0.001). CR attendees were more likely to have repeat ACS, PCI, CABG at both 6 and 36 months (Table). At 36 months, CR attendees were more likely to have been prescribed antiplatelets (78% v 53%, p<0.001), statins (91% 73%, p<0.001), beta-blockers (11% v 13%, p=0.002) and ACEI/ARBs (72% v 61%, p<0.001) than non-attendees. Conclusions Amongst Australian ACS survivors, participation in CR was associated with less likelihood of death and increased prescription of pharmacotherapy. However, attendance at CR was associated with higher rates of repeat ACS and revascularisation. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Foundation. Main funding source(s): New South Wales Cardiovascular Research Network, National Heart Foundation


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document