PubMed · 15326708
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Walter J Hogan. 2004. ASGE leadership: promoting or validating endoscopic technology?. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0016-5107(04)01559-7
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Although medically underserved groups bear a heavy burden of cancer disease and governmental agencies have required inclusion of minorities and women in cancer clinical trials since 1993, many of these groups are underrepresented in cancer prevention or treatment clinical trials. To assess and enhance recruitment of underrepresented populations into cancer-related clinical trials, investigators and governmental agencies need consistent measurement approaches for recruitment that can be applied to diverse settings where trials are conducted. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate what measurement approaches were used to evaluate the success of recruitment of underrepresented groups into cancer prevention or treatment trials, and whether these recruitment goals were stated a priori. Only two articles reported an a priori recruitment goal. The recruitment measurement approaches varied considerably, with no consistent standard, especially for individual trials. By using the empiric evidence from this review in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) guidelines, we constructed a framework for choosing consistent a priori recruitment goals for underrepresented groups based on the research question and study location. Using consistent measurement approaches for underrepresented groups will improve comparability of recruitment strategies across trials, improve equity in distribution of benefits and burdens of cancer-related clinical trials, and may improve applicability of trial results to multiple populations.
OBJECTIVE: Workers' medical examination by the occupational physician (OPs) is a decision-making process whose output consists of a variety of evaluations, including assessment of fitness for work. The medical literature reports that there is no complete agreement among OPs assessing the same workers, evidencing a critical aspect of professional performance. This study aims at evaluating the inter-individual variability of medical decisions by different occupational physicians. METHODS: Four specialists in occupational medicine participated in the study. Each specialist examined 100 records of subjects with different medical conditions selected from about 2,500 health care workers. Each physician completed a form including the following items: assessment of fitness for work, advice to workers, need of further investigations, report of occupational disease, recommendation for the general practitioner. To assess the inter-individual variability the percent agreement and the agreement strength or Cohen's kappa were measured. RESULTS: The study shows a variable agreement in the assessment of fitness for work among different professionals, with percent agreement ranging from 58% for the whole group to an average of 77% for physicians' pairs. By taking into account the variability expected by chance, the agreement ranged from fair to substantial. The agreement of other decisions (workers' advice, referral to other specialists, request of further investigation, report of occupational disease, recommendation for the general practitioner) was more variable. CONCLUSION: The study shows that an inter-individual variability exists for some decisions taken by OPs. According to the need to continuously improve professional practice, in the absence of qualitative standards based on the outcome, reduction of inter-individual variability that should be considered as a quality requirement of the performance of the occupational physician.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.