Meta-summaries effective for improving awareness and understanding of COVID-19 vaccine safety research.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Williams S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9676710 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Meta-summaries effective for improving awareness and understanding of COVID-19 vaccine safety research.
Williams Spencer S Lee Joy J Halperin Brett A BA Liao Joshua M JM Hsieh Gary G Reinecke Katharina K
Scientific reports 20221121 1
Despite the efficacy, safety, and availability of COVID-19 vaccines, a lack of awareness and trust of vaccine safety research remains an important barrier to public health. The goal of this research was to design and test online meta-summaries-transparent, interactive summaries of the state of relevant studies-to improve people's awareness and opinion of vaccine safety research. We used insights from a set of co-design interviews (n = 22) to develop meta-summaries to highlight metascientific inf ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4425825 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY:There is a need for the authors of research reports to be able to communicate their work clearly and effectively to readers who are not familiar with the research area. The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), along with a number of other funding bodies and journals, require researchers to write short lay summaries, often termed plain English summaries (PESs), to make research accessible to the general public. Because many researchers write using technical, specialised language, particularly in scientific reports, writing PESs can be challenging. In this study we looked at how to improve the quality of PESs. We took PESs which had been submitted to the NIHR Journals Library and asked authors to rewrite them using new guidance. We also asked an independent medical writer to edit the summaries. We measured the quality of these three versions (original summary, rewritten summary and edited summary) in two ways. First, we asked a group of people who were not specialists in the subject area to read and rate how easy the summaries were to understand. Secondly, we used a well-known measure called the Flesch reading ease score to assess how easy the PESs were to read. We found that there was no difference in how easy people found the summaries to understand across the three versions. However, the PESs that were rewritten by the authors and that were edited by the independent medical writer were both easier to read than the originals. This shows that PESs can be improved and for organisations who feel that employing an independent writer to edit summaries, providing clear, practical guidance to authors may be a cost-effective alternative. ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Plain English summaries (PES) or lay summaries are often included as part of research reports and journal articles. These summaries are vital to ensure that research findings are accessible and available to non-specialist audiences, for example patients and members of the public. Writing a PES requires the adoption of a different style than is generally used in a traditional scientific report, and researchers can find this challenging. This study explored two possible ways to improve the quality of PESs in the NIHR Journals Library: 1) Providing enhanced guidance to authors and asking them to rewrite the PES and 2) Employing an independent medical writer to edit the PES. METHODS:We compared the three versions of the PES (original, author rewritten and independent writer edited) to assess 1) how easy they were to understand and 2) how easy they were to read. In order to establish how easy PESs were to understand, a group of 60 public reviewers read a set of summaries and rated them on a four point scale from "Did not understand" to "Understood all". The Flesch reading ease score was used to measure how easy the summaries were to read. RESULTS:Results indicated no significant difference across the three versions of the PES in terms of ease of understanding. However, both the author rewritten and independent writer edited versions were significantly easier to read than the original. There was no significant difference in ease of reading between these two versions. CONCLUSION:These findings suggest that employing independent medical writers to edit PESs and providing clear, practical guidance to authors are two ways in which the readability of PESs could be improved. Results have implications for journal editors and publishers seeking to enhance accessibility and availability of research findings.
| S-EPMC5632836 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Participation of the public is an important and most effective approach for controlling the spread of novel coronavirus. However, considering its novel nature, it is important to create awareness among the public to be able to take timely preventive measures. On the contrary, misinformation and myths from online communities result in severe damages in mitigation of this novel disease. Objective: Focusing on these aspects, this manuscript reviews public awareness about COVID-19, myths surrounding it, its symptoms, treatment, transmission, importance of information sources, types of information to be considered in awareness campaigns, promotional channels, and their implications in Saudi Arabia. Methods: An online questionnaire-based survey was used for collecting data related to five major aspects related to COVID-19 and awareness creation process. The survey was accessed by 1,881 people, out of whom 741 people participated in the survey. However, 150 dropouts left the survey in between, as a result of which a final sample of 591 was achieved, indicating the response rate of 39.3% and a completion rate of 79.76%. Results: Awareness levels of the participants related to COVID-19, its means of transmission, preventive measures, symptoms, and treatment were identified to be moderate to high (60–80%). However, reliance on a few myths and violation of certain preventive measures were identified with majority of the participants (more than 60%). The Ministry of Health was identified to be the most reliable source of information followed by family and friends. Moreover, 15 types of information were identified to be highly relevant and important, which need to be effectively disseminated among the public through effective communication channels. Conclusions: Lack of awareness can result in serious outcomes in relation to COVID-19. Effective awareness campaigns including relevant information from reliable sources can improve the knowledge of people, and they must be effective in developing positive attitudes among the public toward adopting preventive measures.
| S-EPMC7530201 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vaccination delivery and efforts to counter vaccine hesitancy have become focal issues for family medicine teams as the COVID-19 pandemic has evolved. Conducting action research, our team developed an interactive web-based guide to improve clinical conversations around a broad range of vaccine hesitancies presented by patients. The paper presents a step-by-step account of the guide being codesigned with family physicians-its targeted end users-in a process that included validation interviews; role-play interviews; and user-tested design. The validation interviews sought to understand the pragmatic realities of vaccine hesitancy in family medicine clinical practice relative to relevant psychological theories. The role-play interviews drew out conversational strategies and advice from family physicians. The principles of motivational interviewing-an evidence-based approach to vaccine hesitancy conversations that supplements information deficit approaches-were used to codesign the content and layout of the guide. User counts, stakeholder engagement, and web-based analytics indicate the guide is being used extensively. Formal evaluation of the guide is presently underway.Originally published as Annals "Online First" article.
| S-EPMC9328713 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The increased international sharing of data in research consortia and the introduction of new technologies for sequencing challenge the informed consent (IC) process, adding complexities that require coordination between research centres worldwide. Rare disease consortia present special challenges since available data and samples may be very limited. Thus, it is especially relevant to ensure the best use of available resources but at the same time protect patients' right to integrity. To achieve this aim, there is an ethical duty to plan in advance the best possible consent procedure in order to address possible ethical and legal hurdles that could hamper research in the future. Therefore, it is especially important to identify key core elements (CEs) to be addressed in the IC documents for international collaborative research in two different situations: (1) new research collections (biobanks and registries) for which information documents can be created according to current guidelines and (2) established collections obtained without IC or with a previous consent that does not cover all CEs. We propose here a strategy to deal with consent in these situations. The principles have been applied and are in current practice within the RD-Connect consortia - a global research infrastructure funded by the European Commission Seventh Framework program but forward looking in terms of issues addressed. However, the principles established, the lessons learned and the implications for future research are of direct relevance to all internationally collaborative rare-disease projects.
| S-EPMC4989211 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInactivated vaccine is one of the primary technology types of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines, which has wide application in many countries, including mainland China. However, systematic evaluation of the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 inactivated vaccines remains limited. And trust in the vaccine is the key to solving vaccine hesitancy.MethodsVarious academic databases were searched comprehensively for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to COVID-19 inactivated vaccines. The deadline for retrieval was December 2021. Study screening and data extraction were according to inclusive and exclusive criteria. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan software 5.3 version and STATA software 16.0 version.ResultsEight studies with 79,334 subjects were included of which 48,123 had received two doses of COVID-19 inactivated vaccines, and 31,211 had received two doses of placebo. The results of the meta-analysis showed that: in terms of effectiveness evaluation, two doses of COVID-19 inactivated vaccines decreased the symptomatic infection [relative risk (RR) = 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.18,0.30), P < 0.00001], asymptomatic infection [RR = 0.48, 95%CI (0.32, 0.74), P = 0.0008], total infection [RR = 0.32, 95%CI (0.24, 0.41), P < 0.00001] and hospitalization [RR = 0.06, 95%CI (0.01, 0.27), P = 0.0002] for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) significantly. In terms of safety assessment, two doses of COVID-19 inactivated vaccines also caused more adverse events. After two inoculations, total adverse events and systemic adverse events increased significantly [total adverse events RR = 1.14, 95%CI (1.08, 1.21), P < 0.00001; systemic adverse events RR = 1.22, 95%CI (1.09, 1.35), P = 0.0002]. The most common adverse event was pain at the injection site. Almost all local adverse reactions consisted of these events. The incidence of pain at the injection site was related to adjuvants. Using aluminum hydroxide as an adjuvant increased local pain significantly [RR = 1.97, 95%CI (1.52, 2.55), P < 0.00001]. Two doses COVID-19 inactivated vaccines did not increase serious adverse events [RR = 0.71, 95%CI (0.57, 0.90), P = 0.004].ConclusionTwo doses of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines in people over 18 years of age effectively prevented SARS-CoV-2 infection and its associated hospitalizations. Short-term, mild to moderate adverse reactions had occurred, but serious adverse events were rare. No placebo or vaccine-related deaths had been reported.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: 42021291250.
| S-EPMC9676443 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEfforts to improve patients' understanding of their own medical treatments or research in which they are involved are progressing, especially with regard to informed consent procedures. We aimed to design a multisource informed consent procedure that is easily adaptable to both clinical and research applications, and to evaluate its effectiveness in terms of understanding and awareness, even in less educated patients.MethodsWe designed a multisource informed consent procedure for patients' enrolment in a Cancer Institute Biobank (CRO-Biobank). From October 2009 to July 2011, a total of 550 cancer patients admitted to the Centro di Riferimento Oncologico IRCCS Aviano, who agreed to contribute to its biobank, were consecutively enrolled. Participants were asked to answer a self-administered questionnaire aim at exploring their understanding of biobanks and their needs for information on this topic, before and after study participation. Chi-square tests were performed on the questionnaire answers, according to gender or education.ResultsOf the 430 patients who returned the questionnaire, only 36.5% knew what a biobank was before participating in the study. Patients with less formal education were less informed by some sources (the Internet, newspapers, magazines, and our Institute). The final assessment test, taken after the multisource informed consent procedure, showed more than 95% correct answers. The information received was judged to be very or fairly understandable in almost all cases. More than 95% of patients were aware of participating in a biobank project, and gave helping cancer research (67.5%), moral obligation, and supporting cancer care as main reasons for their involvement.ConclusionsOur multisource informed consent information system allowed a high rate of understanding and awareness of study participation, even among less-educated participants, and could be an effective and easy-to-apply model for others to consider to contribute to a well-informed decision making process in several fields, from clinical practice to research.Further studies are needed to explore the effects on the study comprehension by each source of information, and by other sources suggested by participants in the questionnaire.
| S-EPMC3734192 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Discharge summaries are a vital tool to communicate information from Hospital to Primary Care teams; updating GPs about what happened during an admission, and handing over care detailing any follow up care required. Historically, Discharge Summaries have been posted to hospitals, increasing costs for hospitals, creating administrative work for GP practices receiving the letters, and resulting in some letters being lost or delayed in reaching the GP, with implications for patient safety if follow up requests are not received and acted upon. In an effort to improve patient care, the Clinical Commissioning Group in Surrey drew up a contract with Ashford and St Peter's Foundation Trust, aiming to increase the percentage of discharge summaries sent electronically from the rate of 9% sent within 24 hours, to over 75%. This contract set targets of 50% in May, 65% in June, and 80% in July. Financial penalties would be imposed if targets were not achieved, starting in June 2013. The Trust set up a working group comprising of doctors, IT personnel and ward PAs to devise a multi-pronged solution to achieve this target. The electronic discharge summary system was reviewed and improvements were designed and developed to make the process of signing off letters easier, and transmission of signed off letters became automated rather than requiring manual transmission by ward PAs. Presentations and leaflets to explain the importance of prompt completion and transmission of discharge summaries were given to Doctors to improve compliance using the revised IT system. Figures on transmission rates were automatically emailed to key stakeholders every day (Ward PAs, Divisional Leads) showing performance on each ward. This helped identify areas requiring more intervention. Areas (e.g. Day Surgery) that had not used electronic discharge summaries were engaged with, and persuaded to take part. As a result, transmission rates of Discharge Summaries within 24 hours of patient discharge increased from 9% on May 11th 2013, to 76% by June 29th 2013. This has improved communication with GPs, led to more reliable handover of care, and reduced costs for the Trust (both in processing and postage costs, and by avoiding fines).
| S-EPMC4652718 | biostudies-literature
Project description:During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, conclusively evaluating possible associations between COVID-19 vaccines and potential adverse events was of critical importance. The National Academy of Medicine of Korea established the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center (CoVaSC) with support from the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency to investigate the scientific relationship between COVID-19 vaccines and suspected adverse events. Although determining whether the COVID-19 vaccine was responsible for any suspected adverse event necessitated a systematic approach, traditional causal inference theories, such as Hill's criteria, encountered certain limitations and criticisms. To facilitate a systematic and evidence-based evaluation, the United States Institute of Medicine, at the request of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, offered a detailed causality assessment framework in 2012, which was updated in the recent report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) in 2024. This framework, based on a weight-of-evidence approach, allows the independent evaluation of both epidemiological and mechanistic evidence, culminating in a comprehensive conclusion about causality. Epidemiological evidence derived from population studies is categorized into four levels-high, moderate, limited, or insufficient-while mechanistic evidence, primarily from biological and clinical studies in animals and individuals, is classified as strong, intermediate, weak, or lacking. The committee then synthesizes these two types of evidence to draw a conclusion about the causal relationship, which can be described as "convincingly supports" ("evidence established" in the 2024 NASEM report), "favors acceptance," "favors rejection," or "inadequate to accept or reject." The CoVaSC has established an independent committee to conduct causality assessments using the weight-of-evidence framework, specifically for evaluating the causality of adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccines. The aim of this study is to provide an overview of the weight-of-evidence framework and to detail the considerations involved in its practical application in the CoVaSC.
| S-EPMC11231440 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Procedural coding in surgical discharge summaries is extremely important; as well as communicating to healthcare staff which procedures have been performed, it also provides information that is used by the hospital's coding department. The OPCS code (Office of Population, Censuses and Surveys Classification of Surgical Operations and Procedures) is used to generate the tariff that allows the hospital to be reimbursed for the procedure. We felt that the OPCS coding on discharge summaries was often incorrect within our breast and endocrine surgery department. A baseline measurement over two months demonstrated that 32% of operations had been incorrectly coded, resulting in an incorrect tariff being applied and an estimated loss to the Trust of £17,000. We developed a simple but specific OPCS coding table in collaboration with the clinical coding team and breast surgeons that summarised all operations performed within our department. This table was disseminated across the team, specifically to the junior doctors who most frequently complete the discharge summaries. Re-audit showed 100% of operations were accurately coded, demonstrating the effectiveness of the coding table. We suggest that specifically designed coding tables be introduced across each surgical department to ensure accurate OPCS codes are used to produce better quality surgical discharge summaries and to ensure correct reimbursement to the Trust.
| S-EPMC4645875 | biostudies-literature