Mapping the concept of health care integration: A lexicographic analysis of scientific literature

BACKGROUND

Systems fragmentation is a major challenge for an efficient organization, integration being a potential solution also proposed in health care field, including pharmacy as a player. However, the use of different terms and definitions in the literature hinders the comparison of different integration initiatives.

OBJECTIVE

To identify and map the terms used in scientific literature regarding integration in health care and to characterize each emerging topic.

METHODS

A lexicographic analysis of the integration of healthcare systems literature indexed in PubMed was conducted. Ten different systematic searches, four using only Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and six using text words, were conducted in March 2023. Journal scattering was analyzed following Bradford's distribution using the Leimkuhler model. An overall text corpus was created with titles and abstracts of all the records retrieved. The corpus was lemmatized, and the most used bigrams were tokenized as single strings. To perform a topic modeling, the lemmatized corpus text was analyzed using IRaMuTeQ, producing descending hierarchic classification and a correspondence analysis. The 50 words with higher chi-square statistics in each class were considered as representative of the class.

RESULTS

A total of 42,479 articles published from 1943 to 2023 in 4469 different journals were retrieved. The MeSH "Delivery of Health Care, Integrated", created in the 1996 MeSH update, was the most productive retrieving 33.7 % of the total articles but also retrieving 22.6 % of articles not retrieved in any other search. The text word "Integration" appeared in 15,357 (36.2 %) records. The lexicographic analysis resulted in 7 classes, named as: Evidence and implementation, Quantitative research, Professional education, Qualitative research, Governance and leadership, Clinical research, and Financial resources. Association between the classes and the searches or the text-words used ranged from moderate to weak demonstrating the lack of a standard pattern of use of terms in literature regarding healthcare integration.

CONCLUSIONS

The term "integration" and the MeSH "Delivery of Health Care, Integrated" are the most used to represent the concept of integration in healthcare and should be the preferred terms in the literature.

What's in a name? Justifying terminology for genomic findings beyond the initial test indication: A scoping review

Genome sequencing can generate findings beyond the initial test indication that may be relevant to a patient or research participant's health. In the decade since the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics published its recommendations for reporting these findings, consensus regarding terminology has remained elusive and a variety of terms are in use globally. We conducted a scoping review to explore terminology choice and the justifications underlying those choices. Documents were included if they contained a justification for their choice of term(s) related to findings beyond the initial genomic test indication. From 3571 unique documents, 52 were included, just over half of which pertained to the clinical context (n = 29, 56%). We identified four inter-related concepts used to defend or oppose terms: expectedness of the finding, effective communication, relatedness to the original test indication, and how genomic information was generated. A variety of justifications were used to oppose the term "incidental," whereas "secondary" had broader support as a term to describe findings deliberately sought. Terminology choice would benefit from further work to include the views of patients. We contend that clear definitions will improve ethical debate and support communication about genomic findings beyond the initial test indication.

Consensus on the Definition of Control and Remission in Chronic Urticaria

The terms control and remission and other key terms used in chronic urticaria (CU) such as flare-up, relapse, exacerbation, and recurrence have not been fully defined in the literature. Disease monitoring and treatment goals in clinical practice are not well established. After a qualitative appraisal of available evidence, we aimed to find a consensus definition of control and remission, clarify key terminology, provide guidance on how to monitor the disease, and establish treatment goals in clinical practice. A modified Delphi consensus approach was used. Based on a literature review, a scientific committee provided 137 statements addressing controversial definitions and terms, available patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and recommendations on how to measure therapeutic objectives in CU. The questionnaire was evaluated by 138 expert allergists and dermatologists. A consensus was reached on 105 out of the 137 proposed items (76.6%). The experts agreed that complete control and remission of CU could be defined as the absence of signs or symptoms while on treatment and in the absence of treatment, respectively. Consensus was not reached on the definition of other key terms such as flare-up, exacerbation, and recurrence. The panel agreed that the objective of therapy in CU should be to achieve complete control. PROs that define the degree of control (complete, good, partial, or absence) were established. An algorithm for disease assessment is provided. In conclusion, this work offers consensus definitions and tools that may be useful in the management of patients with CU.

Communication in radiology: evaluation of terminology and TNM descriptor use at a cancer center

Objective

The purpose of our study was to evaluate the transmission of information from radiologists to physicians, focusing on the level of certainty and the use of imaging descriptors from the tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system.

Materials and Methods

Radiologists (n = 56) and referring physicians (n = 50) participated in this questionnaire-based, singlecenter study, conducted between March 20, 2020, and January 21, 2021. Participants were presented with terms commonly used by the radiologists at the institution and were asked to order them hierarchically in terms of the level of certainty they communicate regarding a diagnosis, using a scale ranging from 1 (most contrary to) to 10 (most favoring). They then assessed TNM system descriptors and their interpretation. Student's t-tests and the kappa statistic were used in order to compare the rankings of the terms of certainty. Items related to T and N staging were analyzed by Fisher's exact test. The confidence level was set to 97% (p < 0.03).

Results

Although overall agreement among the radiologists and referring physicians on term ranking was poor (kappa = 0.10- 0.35), the mean and median values for the two groups were similar. Most of the radiologists and referring physicians (67% and 86%, respectively) approved of the proposal to establish a standard lexicon. Such a lexicon, based on the participant responses, was developed and graphically represented. Regarding the TNM system descriptors, there were significant differences between the two groups in the reporting of lymph node numbers, of features indicating capsular rupture, and of vessel wall irregularities, as well as in the preference for clear descriptions of vascular involvement.

Conclusion

Our findings indicate that ineffective communication and differences in report interpretation between radiologists and referring physicians are still prevalent in the fields of radiology and oncology. Efforts to gain a better understanding of those impediments might improve the objectivity of reporting and the quality of care.

Manual Evaluation of the Automatic Mapping of International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11 (in French)

A lexical method was used to map ICD-11 to the terminologies included in the HeTOP server. About half of ICD-11 codes (47.76%) were mapped to at least one concept. The developed tool reached a global precision of 0.98 and a recall of 0.66. Lexical methods are powerful methods to map health terminologies. Supervised and manual mapping is still necessary to complete the mapping.

Attitudes towards "disorders of sex development" nomenclature among affected individuals

INTRODUCTION

Although now commonly used in medicine, the updated "disorders of sex development" (DSD) nomenclature formally introduced in 2006 has never been universally accepted by members of the affected community, particularly advocacy groups. Use of this nomenclature by medical professionals may unintentionally negatively affect access to healthcare and research for individuals with DSD conditions.

OBJECTIVE

Among individuals affected by various DSD diagnoses, this study sought to (1) evaluate attitudes towards potentially controversial DSD terminology, (2) determine potential impact of terminology on how affected individuals access healthcare, and (3) explore alternate terms.

STUDY DESIGN

A web-based survey was developed in collaboration with the AIS-DSDSG (Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome-DSD Support Group) leadership. AIS-DSDSG members (caregivers and affected individuals) were surveyed about attitudes towards DSD, potential impact on healthcare utilization, and alternate terms. A qualitative analysis of reasons for using/avoiding specific terms was performed.

RESULTS

Surveys were completed by 202 out of 580 (35%) AIS-DSDSG members (61% affected, 39% caregivers; 16% non-gender binary; age range of affected individuals 0-86 years). Only 24% use disorder of sex development to describe themselves/their child. A majority (69%) had a negative emotional experience because of clinical use of nomenclature; 81% changed their care because of it. Preferred and non-preferred terms for clinical care and research are illustrated in the figure. Preferred diagnostic terms were intersex, variation in sex development, and difference of sex development (55%, 52%, and 50% liked/strongly liked, respectively). Disorder of sex development was not preferred (17% liked/strongly liked). About one-third reported that they would not attend a clinic named the Disorder of Sex Development Clinic. Overall, 81% provided qualitative comments; flexible terminology use was a key theme.

DISCUSSION

These study findings are consistent with previous studies that demonstrated negative perceptions of DSD nomenclature. This study adds to previous findings by surveying a large group of affected individuals with a range of diagnoses, and by exploring emotional impact and healthcare utilization. Several possible alternative terms were also defined. The study was limited by inclusion of only members of AIS-DSDSG, a convenience sample where complete AIS is over-represented, and whose views may not represent the opinion of all individuals with DSD conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

A group of affected individuals and parents have negative views about the DSD terminology commonly used by medical professionals. Use of certain terms may affect the choice of healthcare provider/institution. Evaluation of DSD terminology in other affected individuals, and re-evaluation of current nomenclature, in collaboration with advocates, is needed.

Development and use of a content search strategy for retrieving studies on patients' views and preferences

BACKGROUND

Identifying scientific literature addressing patients' views and preferences is complex due to the wide range of studies that can be informative and the poor indexing of this evidence. Given the lack of guidance we developed a search strategy to retrieve this type of evidence.

METHODS

We assembled an initial list of terms from several sources, including the revision of the terms and indexing of topic-related studies and, methods research literature, and other relevant projects and systematic reviews. We used the relative recall approach, evaluating the capacity of the designed search strategy for retrieving studies included in relevant systematic reviews for the topic. We implemented in practice the final version of the search strategy for conducting systematic reviews and guidelines, and calculated search's precision and the number of references needed to read (NNR).

RESULTS

We assembled an initial version of the search strategy, which had a relative recall of 87.4% (yield of 132/out of 151 studies). We then added some additional terms from the studies not initially identified, and re-tested this improved version against the studies included in a new set of systematic reviews, reaching a relative recall of 85.8% (151/out of 176 studies, 95% CI 79.9 to 90.2). This final version of the strategy includes two sets of terms related with two domains: "Patient Preferences and Decision Making" and "Health State Utilities Values". When we used the search strategy for the development of systematic reviews and clinical guidelines we obtained low precision values (ranging from 2% to 5%), and the NNR from 20 to 50.

CONCLUSIONS

This search strategy fills an important research gap in this field. It will help systematic reviewers, clinical guideline developers, and policy-makers to retrieve published research on patients' views and preferences. In turn, this will facilitate the inclusion of this critical aspect when formulating heath care decisions, including recommendations.

Mapping the evolving definitions of translational research

OBJECTIVE

Systematic review and analysis of definitions of translational research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The final corpus was comprised of 33 papers, each read by at least 2 reviewers. Definitions were mapped to a common set of research processes for presentation and analysis. Influence of papers and definitions was further evaluated using citation analysis and agglomerative clustering.

RESULTS

All definitions were mapped to common research processes, revealing most common labels for each process. Agglomerative clustering revealed 3 broad families of definitions. Citation analysis showed that the originating paper of each family has been cited ~10 times more than any other member.

DISCUSSION

Although there is little agreement between definitions, we were able to identify an emerging consensus 5-phase (T0-T4) definition for translational research. T1 involves processes that bring ideas from basic research through early testing in humans. T2 involves the establishment of effectiveness in humans and clinical guidelines. T3 primarily focuses on implementation and dissemination research while T4 focuses on outcomes and effectiveness in populations. T0 involves research such as genome-wide association studies which wrap back around to basic research.

CONCLUSION

We used systematic review and analysis to identify emerging consensus between definitions of translational research phases.

Searching for rare diseases in PubMed: a blind comparison of Orphanet expert query and query based on terminological knowledge

BACKGROUND

Despite international initiatives like Orphanet, it remains difficult to find up-to-date information about rare diseases. The aim of this study is to propose an exhaustive set of queries for PubMed based on terminological knowledge and to evaluate it versus the queries based on expertise provided by the most frequently used resource in Europe: Orphanet.

METHODS

Four rare disease terminologies (MeSH, OMIM, HPO and HRDO) were manually mapped to each other permitting the automatic creation of expended terminological queries for rare diseases. For 30 rare diseases, 30 citations retrieved by Orphanet expert query and/or query based on terminological knowledge were assessed for relevance by two independent reviewers unaware of the query's origin. An adjudication procedure was used to resolve any discrepancy. Precision, relative recall and F-measure were all computed.

RESULTS

For each Orphanet rare disease (n = 8982), there was a corresponding terminological query, in contrast with only 2284 queries provided by Orphanet. Only 553 citations were evaluated due to queries with 0 or only a few hits. There were no significant differences between the Orpha query and terminological query in terms of precision, respectively 0.61 vs 0.52 (p = 0.13). Nevertheless, terminological queries retrieved more citations more often than Orpha queries (0.57 vs. 0.33; p = 0.01). Interestingly, Orpha queries seemed to retrieve older citations than terminological queries (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The terminological queries proposed in this study are now currently available for all rare diseases. They may be a useful tool for both precision or recall oriented literature search.

Rehabilitation professionals still do not communicate effectively about cognition

OBJECTIVE

To examine current use of descriptive labels for levels of cognitive impairment and types of memory to explore whether rehabilitation disciplines are now communicating more effectively.

DESIGN

Survey of rehabilitation professionals.

SETTING

Hospital rehabilitation programs.

PARTICIPANTS

Respondents (N=130) representing 8 facilities in 5 states completed surveys.

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Responses to survey questions about severity and types of memory impairment were examined with the Kruskal-Wallis test to determine the impact of profession on ratings. Post hoc Mann-Whitney U test comparisons of the 2 professions with the most cognitive assessment experience, psychologists/neuropsychologists and speech-language pathologists, were conducted.

RESULTS

Ratings of various deficit levels differed significantly by profession (mild: H=39.780, P<.000; moderate: H=43.309, P<.000; severe: H=38.354, P<.000), but not by program location. In comparing psychologists/neuropsychologists and speech-language pathologists specifically, we found a significant discrepancy in ratings for percentile ranges associated with the terms mild (U=103.000, P<.001), moderate (U=78.000, P<.000), and severe (U=109.000, P<.001). Disagreement on the meaning of descriptive memory terms was noted among rehabilitation professionals in general, with large percentages of respondents not agreeing on the meanings of terms.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant lack of consensus persists regarding the understanding of common cognitive terminology. This miscommunication affects cognitive impairment descriptors (eg, mild, moderate, severe) and categorization of types of memory. Only half of rehabilitation professionals appear aware of this discrepancy, suggesting that education is necessary to bring greater awareness of the potential for miscommunication.

Rehabilitation treatment taxonomy: establishing common ground

This article introduces the Archives supplement presenting a conceptual framework for the creation of a rehabilitation treatment taxonomy (RTT). It describes the key theoretical and empirical articles and their role, and the commentaries that were solicited. More importantly, based on feedback received to date, it sketches what the RTT is proposed to address, and what it explicitly excludes; therefore, the readers will have appropriate expectations and criteria for what is offered.

Rehabilitation treatment taxonomy: implications and continuations

In relation to the conceptual framework for a rehabilitation treatment taxonomy (RTT), which has been proposed in other articles in this supplement, this article discusses a number of issues relevant to its further development, including creating distinctions within the major target classes; the nature and quantity of allowable targets of treatment; and bracketing as a way of specifying (1) the skill or knowledge taught; (2) the nature of compensation afforded by changes in the environment, assistive technology, and orthotics/prosthetics; and (3) the ingredients in homework a clinician assigns. Clarification is provided regarding the role of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, focusing a taxonomy on ingredients versus other observable aspects of treatment, and regarding our lack of knowledge and its impact on taxonomy development. Finally, this article discusses the immediate implications of the work to date and presents the need for rehabilitation stakeholders of all disciplines to be involved in further RTT development.

Treatment taxonomy for rehabilitation: past, present, and prospects

The idea of constructing a taxonomy of rehabilitation interventions has been around for quite some time, but other than small and mostly ad hoc efforts, not much progress has been made, in spite of articulate pleas by some well-respected clinician scholars. In this article, treatment taxonomies used in health care, and in rehabilitation specifically, are selectively reviewed, with a focus on the need to base a rehabilitation treatment taxonomy (RTT) on the "active ingredients" of treatments and their link to patient/client deficits/problems that are targeted in therapy. This is followed by a description of what we see as a fruitful approach to the development of an RTT that crosses disciplines, settings, and patient diagnoses, and a discussion of the potential uses in and benefits of a well-developed RTT for clinical service, research, education, and service administration.

Improving information retrieval with multiple health terminologies in a quality-controlled gateway

Background

The Catalog and Index of French-language Health Internet resources (CISMeF) is a quality-controlled health gateway, primarily for Web resources in French (n=89,751). Recently, we achieved a major improvement in the structure of the catalogue by setting-up multiple terminologies, based on twelve health terminologies available in French, to overcome the potential weakness of the MeSH thesaurus, which is the main and pivotal terminology we use for indexing and retrieval since 1995. The main aim of this study was to estimate the added-value of exploiting several terminologies and their semantic relationships to improve Web resource indexing and retrieval in CISMeF, in order to provide additional health resources which meet the users’ expectations.

Methods

Twelve terminologies were integrated into the CISMeF information system to set up multiple-terminologies indexing and retrieval. The same sets of thirty queries were run: (i) by exploiting the hierarchical structure of the MeSH, and (ii) by exploiting the additional twelve terminologies and their semantic links. The two search modes were evaluated and compared.

Results

The overall coverage of the multiple-terminologies search mode was improved by comparison to the coverage of using the MeSH (16,283 vs. 14,159) (+15%). These additional findings were estimated at 56.6% relevant results, 24.7% intermediate results and 18.7% irrelevant.

Conclusion

The multiple-terminologies approach improved information retrieval. These results suggest that integrating additional health terminologies was able to improve recall. Since performing the study, 21 other terminologies have been added which should enable us to make broader studies in multiple-terminologies information retrieval.