Standardized nomenclature for genes, gene products, and isoforms is crucial to prevent ambiguity and enable clear communication of scientific data, facilitating efficient biocuration and data sharing. Standardized genotype nomenclature, which describes alleles present in a specific strain that differ from those in the wild-type reference strain, is equally essential to maximize research impact and ensure that results linking genotypes to phenotypes are Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR). In this publication, we extend the fission yeast clade gene nomenclature guidelines to support the curation efforts at PomBase (www.pombase.org), the Schizosaccharomyces pombe Model Organism Database. This update introduces nomenclature guidelines for noncoding RNA genes, following those set forth by the Human Genome Organisation Gene Nomenclature Committee. Additionally, we provide a significant update to the allele and genotype nomenclature guidelines originally published in 1987, to standardize the diverse range of genetic modifications enabled by the fission yeast genetic toolbox. These updated guidelines reflect a community consensus between numerous fission yeast researchers. Adoption of these rules will improve consistency in gene and genotype nomenclature, and facilitate machine-readability and automated entity recognition of fission yeast genes and alleles in publications or datasets. In conclusion, our updated guidelines provide a valuable resource for the fission yeast research community, promoting consistency, clarity, and FAIRness in genetic data sharing and interpretation.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: In order for patients to comprehend health related information, it must be written at a level that can be readily understood by the intended population. During 2021 the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) published a sub-section about information for patients into its Guidelines on the Management of Venous Thrombosis.
METHODS: Nine readability measures were used to evaluate the patient educational material regarding venous thrombosis published by seven medical societies: ESVS, Society for Vascular Medicine (SVM), Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS), Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland (VS), Australia and New Zealand Society for Vascular Surgery (ANZSVS), Canadian Society for Vascular Surgery (CSVS) and American Heart Association (AHA).
RESULTS: The mean reading grade level (RGL) for all the 58 recommendations was 10.61 (range 6.4-14.5) and the mean Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) was 56.10 (51.3-62.9), corresponding to a \"fairly difficult\" reading level. The mean RGL of the ESVS recommendations (11.45, 95% CI, 9.90-13.00) was significantly higher than the others. Post-hoc analysis determined a significant difference between the ESVS and the SVS (10.86, 95% CI, 9.84-11.91) recommendations (P=0.005). All the patient\'s education information published by the medical societies presented a RGL higher than recommended. The fifteen sub-sections of the information for patients included into the ESVS clinical guidelines presented a mean RGL above 9.5 points, revealing that no one (0%) was written at or below the recommended GRL. The mean FRE was 47.63 (28.2-61.6), corresponding to a \"difficult\" reading level.
CONCLUSIONS: Venous thrombosis patient educational materials produced by leading medical societies have readability scores that are above the recommended levels. The innovative patient\'s information included into the ESVS venous thrombosis guidelines represents an important advance in the amelioration of the medical information for patients, but their readability should be improved to adapt the understanding to the general population.

In the COVID-19 pandemic, it is imperative that people understand and comply with self-isolation guidelines. We tested whether a simplified version of the guidelines and a simplified version with visual aids would affect comprehension and intention to self-isolate during the containment phase of the pandemic in the UK, in March 2020, compared to the standard guidelines.
We conducted an online, three-armed parallel randomized controlled trial. Participants were English and over 18. The survey software randomized them into conditions; they were blind to condition. The control group read the 7-page standard guidelines (the current version at the time of the trial). The intervention groups were given either a 3-page simplified version, with a summary box on the front page and numbered bullet points, or the same simplified version with pictograms illustrating the points in the box. Primary outcomes were comprehension of the guidelines, as measured by the number of correct answers given to six questions about the content, and the proportion who answered that they would \'definitely\' stay at home for 7 days if symptomatic.
Recruitment was from 13 to 16 March 2020, with 1845 participants randomised and all data analysed. The Control group averaged 4.27 correct answers, the Simplified 4.20, and the Simplified + visual aids 4.13, out of a possible total of 6 correct answers. There were no differences in comprehension in the unadjusted models; however, when the model was adjusted for demographic variables, there was lower comprehension in the simplified + visual aids condition than in the control, (ß = - 0.16, p = 0.04998). There were no statistically significant differences in intention to stay home: Control was 85%, Simplified 83%, and Simplified + visual aids condition 84%.
Simplified guidance did not improve comprehension compared to the standard guidance issued in the containment phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, and simplified guidance with visual aids may even have worsened comprehension. Simplified guidance had no effect on intention to stay home if symptomatic. This trial informed COVID-19 policy and provides insights relevant to guidance production in the acute phase of a major public health emergency.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to ascertain the extent to which school-based speech-language pathologists\' (SLPs) assessment practices with individual English learners (ELs) align with federal legislation and professional practice guidelines. Specifically, we were interested in examining SLPs\' use of multiple tools during individual EL assessments, as well as relationships between practices and number of types of training experiences. Method School-based SLPs in a Midwestern state were recruited in person or via e-mail to complete an online survey pertaining to assessment. Of the 562 respondents who completed the survey, 222 (39.5%) indicated past or present experience with ELs, and thus, their data were included in the analyses. The questionnaire solicited information about respondent\'s demographics, caseload composition, perceived knowledge and skills and training experiences pertaining to working with ELs (e.g., graduate school, self-teaching, professional conferences), and assessment practices used in schools. Results The majority of respondents reported using multiple tools rather than a single tool with each EL they assess. Case history and observation were tools used often or always by the largest number of participants. SLPs who used multiple tools reported using both direct (e.g., standardized tests, dynamic assessment) and indirect tools (e.g., case history, interviews). Analyses revealed low to moderate positive associations between tools, as well as the use of speech-language samples and number of types of training experiences. Conclusions School-based SLPs in the current study reported using EL assessment practices that comply with federal legislation and professional practice guidelines for EL assessment. These results enhance our understanding of school-based SLPs\' assessment practices with ELs and may be indicative of a positive shift toward evidence-based practice.

OBJECTIVE: Representation of benefits and harms associated with specific interventions in an understandable and comparable way is crucial for informed decision making that clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) aim to enhance. Therefore, we investigated how statements concerning the effects of interventions considered and described benefits and harms, magnitude of effect and its uncertainty, numeric and non-numeric information, and outcomes in Finnish CPGs.
METHODS: We selected 10 CPGs on common diseases and risk factors published by The Finnish Medical Society, Duodecim. All the statements which were graded with the level of evidence from high to very low (levels A-D) were included in analyses. From these statements, assessments were made regarding whether the statement considered benefits or harms, whether relative or absolute numeric measures were shown, whether the statement supported or was against the intervention considered, and what outcome was reported.
RESULTS: Of the 10 CPGs, 448 statements were assessed. Most of the statements of effects considered intervention benefits (87%) rather than harms. Half of the statements considering harms were represented in a way that supported the intervention. Most of the statements (94%) did not include numeric estimates of magnitude of the effect. When numeric estimates of magnitude of the effect were present, they were most frequently relative measures and were typically placed in a statement considering (a) intervention benefits with a primary outcome, (b) given the grade of A for level of evidence, and (c) that supported the use of intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: In the Finnish CPGs, the statements were rarely framed with both absolute and relative numeric measures of an intervention\'s effect. Harms were rarely reported with a grade indicating the level of evidence. The users of CPGs would benefit from more consistent and understandable framing of statements considering both benefits and harms of interventions.

The aim of the study was to investigate the effectiveness of user testing for improving healthcare professionals\' retrieval and comprehension of information in medicines guidelines.
The United Kingdom\'s Injectable Medicines Guide was selected as a case study. This gives guidance to nurses on preparing and administering intravenous medicines on hospital wards, in line with standard UK practice. Three rounds of user testing were completed with 10 hospital nurses per round, using the Injectable Medicines Guide for voriconazole and aminophylline. Participants used the guidelines to answer 17 questions related to the administration of these medicines. Answers were scored for \"finding\" and \"understanding\" the required information. Semistructured interviews explored participants\' opinions of guideline content, design, and wording, with responses analyzed thematically. The guidelines were revised between rounds.
In round 1, 8 of 17 questions were answered correctly by all participants. Participants had difficulty with dose, dilution, administration rate, and adverse effects questions. Revisions included new subsections and increased calculation support. In round 2, 14 of 17 questions were answered correctly by all participants. Difficulty persisted with dose and administration rate questions and further revisions made. In round 3, 15 of 17 questions were answered correctly by all participants. Across all rounds, participants considered appropriate subheadings and information order as important for fast location of information. Specific, detailed, and practical instructions were perceived as important to improve understandability and usefulness.
Key information in medicines guidelines may not be found and/or understood by healthcare professionals. User testing increased information retrieval and comprehension and could have an important role in improving the safety of medicines use.

暂无摘要。

Imaging reports are the primary method of communicating diagnostic imaging findings between the radiologist and the referring clinician. Guidelines produced by professional bodies provide guidance on content and format of imaging reports, but the extent to which they consider comprehensibility for referring clinicians and their patients is unclear. The objective of this review was to determine the extent to which radiology reporting guidelines consider comprehensibility of imaging reports for referring clinicians and patients.We performed a scoping review of English-language diagnostic imaging reporting guidelines. We searched electronic databases (OVID MEDLINE, Embase) and websites of radiological professional organisations to identify guidelines. The extent to which the guidelines recommended essential report features such as technical information, content, format and language, as well as features to enhance comprehensibility, such as lay language summaries, was recorded.Six guidelines from professional bodies representing radiologists from the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, Hong Kong, the UK and Europe were identified from the search. Inconsistencies exist between guidelines in their recommendations, and they rarely consider that patients may read the report. No guideline made recommendations about the reporting of results considering the clinical context, and none recommended features preferred by patients such as lay language summaries. This review identifies an opportunity for future radiology reporting guidelines to give greater consideration to referring clinician and patient preferences.

Computational representations of the semantic knowledge embedded within clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) may be a significant aid in creating computer interpretable guidelines (CIGs). Formalizing plain text CPGs into CIGs manually is a laborious and burdensome task, even using CIG tools and languages designed to improve the process. Natural language understanding (NLU) systems perform automated reading comprehension, parsing text and using reasoning to convert syntactic information from unstructured text into semantic information. Influenced by successful systems used in other domains, we present the architecture for a system which uses NLU approaches to create semantic representations of entire CPGs. In the future, these representations may be used to generate CIGs.