Project description:BackgroundOver the last 10-20 years, international guidelines and consensus statements for the management of common allergic diseases (e.g. allergic rhinitis and asthma) have been developed and disseminated worldwide. However, their impact on knowledge and standard of clinical practice among primary care physicians and specialists is unknown.ObjectiveTo investigate need for an improvement in the dissemination of international guidelines for the diagnosis and management of allergic rhinitis.MethodsSeven medical students who attended 3-day 1st International Basic Allergy Course (2010) took down all questions raised during the entire course. A systemic analysis of these questions was performed to identify areas for improvement in diagnosis and management of allergic diseases mainly in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) region.Results268 participants, 143 males and 125 females, comprising Ear, Nose and Throat (ENT) specialists (n = 106) and trainees (n = 34), general practitioners (n = 87), and other healthcare professionals (n = 41) attended the course. Of the 103 questions recorded, 59 were regarding treatment modalities in allergy practice such as immunotherapy (n = 38), pharmacologics (n = 15), nasal surgery (n = 2), and others (n = 4). 41 questions (39.8%) have answers based in the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma guidelines (2001 and 2008). Certain questions were selected for further analysis because they appeared to be (a) more commonly asked (e.g. immunotherapy) or (b) were deemed to be challenging or, even controversial (e.g. food allergy and differential diagnosis between vasovagal and anaphylaxis reaction), as the recommendations in current international guidelines were less well-defined.ConclusionOur study identified several problems that, if tackled, could help minimize confusion and provide better care for patients suffering from allergic diseases especially in the ASEAN region.
Project description:Using chlorophyll (Chl) a fluorescence many aspects of the photosynthetic apparatus can be studied, both in vitro and, noninvasively, in vivo. Complementary techniques can help to interpret changes in the Chl a fluorescence kinetics. Kalaji et al. (Photosynth Res 122:121-158, 2014a) addressed several questions about instruments, methods and applications based on Chl a fluorescence. Here, additional Chl a fluorescence-related topics are discussed again in a question and answer format. Examples are the effect of connectivity on photochemical quenching, the correction of F V /F M values for PSI fluorescence, the energy partitioning concept, the interpretation of the complementary area, probing the donor side of PSII, the assignment of bands of 77 K fluorescence emission spectra to fluorescence emitters, the relationship between prompt and delayed fluorescence, potential problems when sampling tree canopies, the use of fluorescence parameters in QTL studies, the use of Chl a fluorescence in biosensor applications and the application of neural network approaches for the analysis of fluorescence measurements. The answers draw on knowledge from different Chl a fluorescence analysis domains, yielding in several cases new insights.
Project description:As telehealth gains momentum as a service delivery model in the United States within the rehabilitation professions, regulatory and legal questions arise. This article examines the following questions: Is there a need to secure licenses in two states (i.e., where the practitioner resides, and where the client is located), before engaging in telehealth?Do state laws differ concerning if and how telehealth can occur?Do any states expressly disallow telehealth?Can services delivered through telehealth be billed the same way as services provided in-person?If practitioners fulfill the requirements to maintain licensure (e.g., continuing education obligations) in their state of residence, do they also need to fulfill the requirements to maintain licensure for the state in which the client resides?Will professional malpractice insurance cover services delivered through telehealth?Does a sole practitioner need to abide by HIPAA regulations?Responses to these questions are offered to raise awareness of the regulatory and legal implications associated with the use of a telehealth service delivery model within the professions of occupational therapy, physical therapy, speech-language pathology and audiology.
Project description:Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are commonly used oral factor Xa inhibitors in recent years. However, in some special clinical situations, the appropriate use of these anticoagulants may be of concern. In this article, we address the 5 commonly asked questions regarding their use for the treatment of venous thromboembolism, including in the setting of obesity, renal impairment, gastrointestinal (GI) malignancy, catheter-related thrombosis, and drug-drug interactions. Data on the use of DOACs in the presence of significant obesity or renal failure are mainly observational. Some DOACs are shown to have an increased risk of bleeding in patients with unresected luminal GI malignancy but not others, so selection of appropriate patients is the key. Furthermore, literature on the use of DOACs for catheter-related thrombosis or when drug-drug interactions are of concern is limited, and more research is welcome.
Project description:BackgroundChat Generative Pretrained Transformer (ChatGPT), a generative artificial intelligence chatbot, may have broad applications in healthcare delivery and patient education due to its ability to provide human-like responses to a wide range of patient queries. However, there is limited evidence regarding its ability to provide reliable and useful information on orthopaedic procedures. This study seeks to evaluate the accuracy and relevance of responses provided by ChatGPT to frequently asked questions (FAQs) regarding total knee replacement (TKR).MethodsA list of 50 clinically-relevant FAQs regarding TKR was collated. Each question was individually entered as a prompt to ChatGPT (version 3.5), and the first response generated was recorded. Responses were then reviewed by two independent orthopaedic surgeons and graded on a Likert scale for their factual accuracy and relevance. These responses were then classified into accurate versus inaccurate and relevant versus irrelevant responses using preset thresholds on the Likert scale.ResultsMost responses were accurate, while all responses were relevant. Of the 50 FAQs, 44/50 (88%) of ChatGPT responses were classified as accurate, achieving a mean Likert grade of 4.6/5 for factual accuracy. On the other hand, 50/50 (100%) of responses were classified as relevant, achieving a mean Likert grade of 4.9/5 for relevance.ConclusionChatGPT performed well in providing accurate and relevant responses to FAQs regarding TKR, demonstrating great potential as a tool for patient education. However, it is not infallible and can occasionally provide inaccurate medical information. Patients and clinicians intending to utilize this technology should be mindful of its limitations and ensure adequate supervision and verification of information provided.
Project description:Citizen science provides quantitative results to support environmental health assessments (EHAs), but standardized approaches do not currently exist to translate findings into actionable solutions. The emergence of low-cost portable sensor technologies and proliferation of publicly available datasets provides unparalleled access to supporting evidence; yet data collection, analysis, interpretation, visualization, and communication are subjective approaches that must be tailored to a decision-making audience capable of improving environmental health. A decade of collaborative efforts and two citizen science projects contributed to three lessons learned and a set of frequently asked questions (FAQs) that address the complexities of environmental health and interpersonal relations often encountered in citizen science EHAs. Each project followed a structured step-by-step process in order to compare and contrast methods and approaches. These lessons and FAQs provide advice to translate citizen science research into actionable solutions in the context of a diverse range of environmental health issues and local stakeholders.
Project description:BackgroundThis study aimed to assess the quality and readability of large language model-generated responses to frequently asked questions (FAQs) about Kienböck's disease (KD).MethodsNineteen FAQs about KD were selected, and the questions were divided into three categories: general knowledge, diagnosis, and treatment. The questions were inputted into the Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer 4 (ChatGPT4) webpage using the zero-shot prompting method, and the responses were recorded. Hand surgeons with at least 5 years of experience and advanced English proficiency were individually contacted over instant WhatsApp messaging and requested to assess the responses. The quality of each response was analyzed by 33 experienced hand surgeons using the Global Quality Scale (GQS). The readability was assessed with the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES).ResultsThe mean GQS score was 4.28 out of a maximum of 5 points. Most raters assessed the quality as good (270 of 627 responses; 43.1%) or excellent (260 of 627 responses; 41.5%). The mean FKGL was 15.5, and the mean FRES was 23.4, both of which are considered above the college graduate level. No statistically significant differences were found in the quality and readability of responses provided for questions related to general knowledge, diagnosis, and treatment.ConclusionsChatGPT-4 provided high-quality responses to FAQs about KD. However, the primary drawback was the poor readability of these responses. By improving the readability of ChatGPT's output, we can transform it into a valuable information resource for individuals with KD.Level of evidenceLevel IV, Observational study.
Project description:In 2014, atypical myopathy (AM) was linked to Acer pseudoplatanus (sycamore maple) in Europe. The emergence of this seasonal intoxication caused by a native tree has raised many questions. This manuscript aims at answering the five most frequently asked questions (FAQs) regarding (1) identification of toxic trees; reduction of risk at the level of (2) pastures and (3) equids; (4) the risk associated with pastures with sycamores that have always been used without horses being poisoned and (5) the length of the risk periods. Answers were found in a literature review and data gathered by AM surveillance networks. A guide is offered to differentiate common maple trees (FAQ1). In order to reduce the risk of AM at pasture level: Avoid humid pastures; permanent pasturing; spreading of manure for pasture with sycamores in the vicinity and avoid sycamore maple trees around pasture (FAQ2). To reduce the risk of AM at horse level: Reduce pasturing time according to weather conditions and to less than six hours a day during risk periods for horses on risk pasture; provide supplementary feeds including toxin-free forage; water from the distribution network; vitamins and a salt block (FAQ3). All pastures with a sycamore tree in the vicinity are at risk (FAQ4). Ninety-four percent of cases occur over two 3-month periods, starting in October and in March, for cases resulting from seeds and seedlings ingestion, respectively (FAQ5).