BACKGROUND: Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are a serious public health issue in many countries. Online postal self-sampling (OPSS) is increasingly used to test for STIs, a trend accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. There remains limited understanding of how service users experience OPSS and what leads them to access it over clinic-based services, or vice versa. This research seeks to address these gaps, by undertaking a large qualitative study which sits within the ASSIST study, a mixed-methods, realist evaluation of OPSS.
METHODS: Participants were recruited via clinic-based and online sexual health services in three case study areas in England. Purposive sampling was used to over-represent populations disproportionately affected by poor sexual health: young people; people of colour; men who have sex with men; and trans and non-binary people. Semi-structured interviews were analysed using Levesque\'s conceptual framework of access to healthcare.
RESULTS: We interviewed 100 service users. Participants typically became aware of OPSS from sexual health services, the internet or word of mouth. Acceptability of OPSS was facilitated by the perceived privacy it offered over clinic-based services, which some participants found embarrassing to access. OPSS also enabled participants to overcome barriers to reaching clinic-based services, such as a lack of appointment availability, although difficulty obtaining OPSS kits in some areas undermined this. As all services in our case study areas were free to use, affordability did not significantly shape access, although OPSS enabled some participants to avoid costs associated with travelling to clinic-based services. Participants were usually able to engage with OPSS, finding it easy to use and reliable, although blood self-sampling was challenging for most. Participants valued the support offered by clinic-based services beyond STI testing, including the opportunity to access contraception or ask staff questions, and felt this was more appropriate when they had specific concerns about their sexual health, such as STI symptoms.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings constitute one of the largest qualitative studies to have explored OPSS and offer valuable insights to providers. OPSS shapes access to STI testing in a number of ways, including facilitating access in many circumstances, but users also want to retain access to clinic-based services, particularly for when they believe they need support beyond STI testing.

BACKGROUND: Recruitment for clinical trials and large-scale studies is challenging, especially for patients with complex conditions like chronic pain. Email recruitment has the potential to increase efficiency, to reduce costs, and to improve access for underrepresented patient populations. The objective of this study was to examine the effectiveness, efficiency, and equitability of email versus postal mail recruitment for the Learning to Apply Mindfulness to Pain (LAMP) study, a three-site clinical trial of mindfulness-based interventions for chronic pain.
METHODS: Patients with chronic pain diagnoses were recruited from three United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities using the VA electronic health record (EHR). Recruitment materials were sent using either postal mail (n = 7986) or email (n = 19,333). Patients in the email recruitment group were also mailed introductory postcards before any emails. Mailing addresses and email addresses were obtained from the EHR. Effectiveness was measured by the response rate of patients who logged into the secure LAMP study website. Efficiency was measured by the number of days from when the recruitment materials were sent to when patients logged into the LAMP portal as well as the estimated costs of each recruitment approach. To assess equitability, we examined whether email recruitment was less effective for underrepresented populations, based on demographic information from the EHR.
RESULTS: Effectiveness-unadjusted response rates were greater for email versus postal-mail recruitment (18.9% versus 6.3%), and adjusted response rates were over three times greater for email recruitment (RR = 3.5, 95% CI 3.1-3.8) based on a multivariable analysis controlling for age, gender, race, ethnicity, rurality, and site. Efficiency-email recruitment had a significantly lower mean response time (1 day versus 8 days) and a lower cost. Equity-email recruitment led to higher response rates for all subpopulations, including older, non-White, Hispanic, rural, and female Veterans.
CONCLUSIONS: Email recruitment is an effective, efficient, and equitable way to recruit VA patients to large-scale, chronic pain clinical trials.
BACKGROUND: Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT04526158. Patient enrollment began on December 4, 2020.

BACKGROUND: This qualitative study aims to assess perspectives of clinicians and clinic staff on mail-order pharmacy dispensing for medication abortion.
METHODS: Participants included clinicians and staff involved in implementing a mail-order dispensing model for medication abortion at eleven clinics in seven states as part of a prospective cohort study, which began in January 2020 (before the FDA removed the in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone). From June 2021 to July 2022, we invited participants at the participating clinics, including six primary care and five abortion clinics, to complete a semi-structured video interview about their experiences. We then conducted qualitative thematic analysis of interview data, summarizing themes related to perceived benefits and concerns about the mail-order model, perceived patient interest, and potential barriers to larger-scale implementation.
RESULTS: We conducted 24 interviews in total with clinicians (13 physicians and one nurse practitioner) and clinic staff (n = 10). Participants highlighted perceived benefits of the mail-order model, including its potential to expand abortion services into primary care, increase patient autonomy and privacy, and to normalize abortion services. They also highlighted key logistical, clinical, and feasibility concerns about the mail-order model, and specific challenges related to integrating abortion into primary care.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians and clinic staff working in primary care and abortion clinics were optimistic that mail-order dispensing of medication abortion can improve the ability of some providers to provide abortion and enable more patients to access services. The feasibility of mail-order pharmacy dispensing of medication abortion following the Supreme Court Dobbs decision is to be determined.
BACKGROUND: Registry: Clinicaltrials.gov.
BACKGROUND: NCT03913104. Date of registration: first submitted on April 3, 2019 and first posted on April 12, 2019.

To evaluate whether providing family physicians with feedback on their antibiotic prescribing compared with that of their peers reduces antibiotic prescriptions. To also identify effects on antibiotic prescribing from case-mix adjusted feedback reports and messages emphasising antibiotic associated harms.
Pragmatic, factorial randomised controlled trial.
Primary care physicians in Ontario, Canada PARTICIPANTS: All primary care physicians were randomly assigned a group if they were eligible and actively prescribing antibiotics to patients 65 years or older. Physicians were excluded if had already volunteered to receive antibiotic prescribing feedback from another agency, or had opted out of the trial.
A letter was mailed in January 2022 to physicians with peer comparison antibiotic prescribing feedback compared with the control group who did not receive a letter (4:1 allocation). The intervention group was further randomised in a 2x2 factorial trial to evaluate case-mix adjusted versus unadjusted comparators, and emphasis, or not, on harms of antibiotics.
Antibiotic prescribing rate per 1000 patient visits for patients 65 years or older six months after intervention. Analysis was in the modified intention-to-treat population using Poisson regression.
5046 physicians were included and analysed: 1005 in control group and 4041 in intervention group (1016 case-mix adjusted data and harms messaging, 1006 with case-mix adjusted data and no harms messaging, 1006 unadjusted data and harms messaging, and 1013 unadjusted data and no harms messaging). At six months, mean antibiotic prescribing rate was 59.4 (standard deviation 42.0) in the control group and 56.0 (39.2) in the intervention group (relative rate 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.94 to 0.96). Unnecessary antibiotic prescribing (0.89 (0.86 to 0.92)), prolonged duration prescriptions defined as more than seven days (0.85 (0.83 to 0.87)), and broad spectrum prescribing (0.94 (0.92 to 0.95)) were also significantly lower in the intervention group compared with the control group. Results were consistent at 12 months post intervention. No significant effect was seen for including emphasis on harms messaging. A small increase in antibiotic prescribing with case-mix adjusted reports was noted (1.01 (1.00 to 1.03)).
Peer comparison audit and feedback letters significantly reduced overall antibiotic prescribing with no benefit of case-mix adjustment or harms messaging. Antibiotic prescribing audit and feedback is a scalable and effective intervention and should be a routine quality improvement initiative in primary care.
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04594200.

BACKGROUND: Multiple modalities and frequencies of contact are needed to maximize recruitment in many public health surveys. The purpose of this analysis is to characterize respondents to a statewide SARS-CoV-2 testing study whose participation followed either postcard, phone outreach or electronic means of invitation. In addition, we examine how participant characteristics differ based upon the number of contacts needed to elicit participation.
METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis of survey data collected from participants who were randomly selected to represent Indiana residents and were invited to be tested for Covid-19 in April 2020. Participants received invitations via postcard, text/emails, and/or robocalls/texts based upon available contact information. The modality, and frequency of contacts, that prompted participation was determined by when the notification was sent and when the participant responded and subsequently registered to participate in the study. Chi square analyses were used to determine differences between groups and significant findings were analyzed using multinomial logistic regression.
RESULTS: Respondents included 3,658 individuals and were stratified by postcards (7.9%), text/emails (26.5%), and robocalls/text (65.7%) with 19.7% registering after 1 contact, 47.9% after 2 contacts, and 32.4% after 3 contacts encouraging participation. Females made up 54.6% of the sample and responded at a higher rate for postcards (8.2% vs. 7.5%) and text/emails (28.1 vs. 24.6%) as compared to males (χ2 = 7.43, p = 0.025). Compared to males, females responded at a higher percentage after 1 contact (21.4 vs. 17.9%, χ2 = 7.6, p = 0.023). Those over 60 years responded most often after 2 contacts (χ2 = 27.5, p < 0.001) when compared to others at younger age groups. In regression analysis, participant sex (p = 0.036) age (p = 0.005), educational attainment (p = < 0.0001), and being motivated by \"free testing\" (p = 0.036) were correlated with participation in the prevalence study.
CONCLUSIONS: Researchers should be aware that the modality of contact as well as the number of prompts used could influence differential participation in public health studies. Our findings can inform researchers developing studies that rely on selective participation by study subjects. We explore how to increase participation within targeted demographic groups using specific modalities and examining frequency of contact.

BACKGROUND: Data collection by mailing questionnaires to the study population is one of the main research methods in epidemiologic studies. As participation rates are decreasing, easy-to-implement and cost-effective strategies to increase survey participation are needed. In this study, we tested the effect of a pragmatic combination of evidence-based interventions.
METHODS: We conducted a two-armed randomized controlled trial, nested in a cohort of breast cancer survivors (n = 1000) in the setting of a health outcomes survey. The intervention arm received a postal pre-notification, a non-monetary incentive (ballpoint with the study logo) and an alternative invitation letter in which several lay-out and textual adjustments were implemented according to behavioural science techniques. The alternative invitation letter also contained a QR-code through which an information video about the study could be accessed. The control arm was invited according to standard practice. Participants had the option to fill-out a questionnaire either on paper or online. A questionnaire with more than 50% of the questions answered classified as participation.
RESULTS: Overall participation rate was 62.9%. No significant difference in participation rate was observed between intervention and control arm (64.5% vs 61.3%, Risk Ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% CI [0.96 - 1.16]). Older age at study (>65 vs <51 years), and high socio-economic status (highest vs lowest quartile) were associated with higher participation rates (RR 1.30, 95% CI [1.07 - 1.57] and 1.24, 95% CI [1.09 - 1.42] respectively). In-situ carcinoma compared to invasive cancer and longer interval since treatment were associated with lower participation (RR 0.86, 95% CI [0.74 - 0.99] and RR 0.92, 95% CI [0.87 - 0.99] per 5 year increase, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the combination of four interventions tested in this study did not improve survey participation among breast cancer survivors. The overall participation rate was relatively high, possibly due to the study population of cancer survivors.

Optimal strategies for increasing cervical cancer screening may differ by patient screening history and health care setting. Mailing human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling kits to individuals who are overdue for screening increases adherence; however, offering self-sampling kits to screening-adherent individuals has not been evaluated in the US.
To evaluate the effectiveness of direct-mail and opt-in approaches for offering HPV self-sampling kits to individuals by cervical cancer screening history (screening-adherent and currently due, overdue, or unknown).
Randomized clinical trial conducted in Kaiser Permanente Washington, a US integrated health care delivery system. Individuals aged 30 to 64 years with female sex, a primary care clinician, and no hysterectomy were identified through electronic health records (EHRs) and enrolled between November 20, 2020, and January 28, 2022, with follow-up through July 29, 2022.
Individuals stratified as due (eg, at the time of randomization, these individuals have been previously screened and are due for their next screening in ≤3 months) were randomized to receive usual care (patient reminders and clinician EHR alerts [n = 3671]), education (usual care plus educational materials about screening [n = 3960]), direct mail (usual care plus educational materials and a mailed self-sampling kit [n = 1482]), or to opt in (usual care plus educational materials and the option to request a kit [n = 3956]). Individuals who were overdue for screening were randomized to receive usual care (n = 5488), education (n = 1408), or direct mail (n = 1415). Individuals with unknown history for screening were randomized to receive usual care (n = 2983), education (n = 3486), or to opt in (n = 3506).
The primary outcome was screening completion within 6 months. Primary analyses compared direct-mail or opt-in participants with individuals randomized to the education group.
The intention-to-treat analyses included 31 355 randomized individuals (mean [SD] age, 45.9 [10.4] years). Among those who were due for screening, compared with receiving education alone (1885 [47.6%]), screening completion was 14.1% (95% CI, 11.2%-16.9%) higher in the direct-mail group (914 [61.7%]) and 3.5% (95% CI, 1.2%-5.7%) higher in the opt-in group (2020 [51.1%]). Among individuals who were overdue, screening completion was 16.9% (95% CI, 13.8%-20.0%) higher in the direct-mail group (505 [35.7%]) compared with education alone (264 [18.8%]). Among those with unknown history, screening was 2.2% (95% CI, 0.5%-3.9%) higher in the opt-in group (634 [18.1%]) compared with education alone (555 [15.9%]).
Within a US health care system, direct-mail self-sampling increased cervical cancer screening by more than 14% in individuals who were due or overdue for cervical cancer screening. The opt-in approach minimally increased screening. To increase screening adherence, systems implementing HPV self-sampling should prioritize direct-mail outreach for individuals who are due or overdue for screening. For individuals with unknown screening history, testing alternative outreach approaches and additional efforts to document screening history are warranted.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04679675.

暂无摘要。

Direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion allows people to receive mifepristone and misoprostol for medication abortion in their home without requiring an in-person visit with a healthcare provider. This method has high efficacy and safety, but less is known about the person-centered quality of care provided with telemedicine.
We interviewed 45 participants from the TelAbortion study of direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion in the United States from January to July 2020. Semi-structured qualitative interviews queried their choices, barriers to care, expectations for care, actual abortion experience, and suggestions for improvement. We developed a codebook through an iterative, inductive process and performed content and thematic analyses.
The experience of direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion met the person-centered domains of dignity, autonomy, privacy, communication, social support, supportive care, trust, and environment. Four themes relate to the person-centered framework for reproductive health equity: (1) Participants felt well-supported and safe with TelAbortion; (2) Participants had autonomy in their care which led to feelings of empowerment; (3) TelAbortion exceeded expectations; and (4) Challenges arose when interfacing with the healthcare system outside of TelAbortion. Participants perceived abortion stigma which often led them to avoid traditional care and experienced enacted stigma during encounters with non-study healthcare workers.
TelAbortion is a high quality, person-centered care model that can empower patients seeking care in an increasingly challenging abortion context.

Globalization and environmental changes have intensified the emergence or re-emergence of infectious diseases worldwide, such as outbreaks of dengue fever in Southeast Asia. Collaboration on region-wide infectious disease surveillance systems is therefore critical but difficult to achieve because of the different transparency levels of health information systems in different countries. Although the Program for Monitoring Emerging Diseases (ProMED)-mail is the most comprehensive international expert-curated platform providing rich disease outbreak information on humans, animals, and plants, the unstructured text content of the reports makes analysis for further application difficult.
To make monitoring the epidemic situation in Southeast Asia more efficient, this study aims to develop an automatic summary of the alert articles from ProMED-mail, a huge textual data source. In this paper, we proposed a text summarization method that uses natural language processing technology to automatically extract important sentences from alert articles in ProMED-mail emails to generate summaries. Using our method, we can quickly capture crucial information to help make important decisions regarding epidemic surveillance.
Our data, which span a period from 1994 to 2019, come from the ProMED-mail website. We analyzed the collected data to establish a unique Taiwan dengue corpus that was validated with professionals\' annotations to achieve almost perfect agreement (Cohen κ=90%). To generate a ProMED-mail summary, we developed a dual-channel bidirectional long short-term memory with attention mechanism with infused latent syntactic features to identify key sentences from the alerting article.
Our method is superior to many well-known machine learning and neural network approaches in identifying important sentences, achieving a macroaverage F1 score of 93%. Moreover, it can successfully extract the relevant correct information on dengue fever from a ProMED-mail alerting article, which can help researchers or general users to quickly understand the essence of the alerting article at first glance. In addition to verifying the model, we also recruited 3 professional experts and 2 students from related fields to participate in a satisfaction survey on the generated summaries, and the results show that 84% (63/75) of the summaries received high satisfaction ratings.
The proposed approach successfully fuses latent syntactic features into a deep neural network to analyze the syntactic, semantic, and contextual information in the text. It then exploits the derived information to identify crucial sentences in the ProMED-mail alerting article. The experiment results show that the proposed method is not only effective but also outperforms the compared methods. Our approach also demonstrates the potential for case summary generation from ProMED-mail alerting articles. In terms of practical application, when a new alerting article arrives, our method can quickly identify the relevant case information, which is the most critical part, to use as a reference or for further analysis.