Harmonization of criteria and terminology in fetal rat skeletal evaluations

BACKGROUND

A survey of laboratories in North American and Europe that routinely conduct fetal skeletal examinations was performed with the purpose of (1) understanding current terminology used for classifying skeletal findings in developmental toxicity (DT) studies and (2) understanding the criteria used to identify relatively common findings that sufficiently deviate from normal. The goal was to promote terminology harmonization and improve interlaboratory consistency in the criteria used to identify developmental anomalies.

METHODS

The survey, designed based on terminology for developmental anomalies recommended by an international collaboration (Makris et al., Congenital Anomalies, 2009;49(3):123-246), was conducted by a subgroup (authors of this publication) of the Royal Society of Biology's International Register of Fetal Morphologists (IRFM).

RESULTS

Individual and summarized anonymized responses are provided here. The authors, who are expert fetal morphologists with experience performing fetal examinations, reviewed the responses and generated recommendations on preferred terminology and criteria for determining when morphological variations deviate from normal and warrant recording of the findings for skeletal observations in Sprague Dawley (SD) fetal rats. The objective of these recommendations is to complement Makris et al. (Congenital Anomalies, 2009;49(3):123-246).

CONCLUSION

The broad application will improve interlaboratory harmonization of recording fetal skeleton findings in developmental toxicity studies intended for regulatory submissions, including SEND (Standard for Exchange of Nonclinical Data).

User involvement throughout development of technology to support diabetes foot care: a case illustration of the devices for dignity PPIE model

The successful development and implementation of any healthcare technology requires input from multiple stakeholders including clinical leads, trust information technology directorates as well as project management and procurement. In this process however, a key stakeholder that is often overlooked is the patient.This paper illustrates the crucial importance of patient involvement to avoid poor design and poor uptake of technology and subsequently poor health outcomes.To highlight this, we share a case example evidencing involvement of people with lived experience of foot ulcers resulting from Diabetic foot neuropathy throughout identification of unmet technology needs, design requirements for the device and iterative device development and evaluation.