Browsing by Author "Buchbinder, Rachelle"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Crowdsourcing trainees in a living systematic review provided valuable experiential learning opportunities: A mixed-methods study
    (2022-03-29) Lee, Chloe; Thomas, Megan; Ejaredar, null; Kassam, Aliya; Whittle, Samuel L; Buchbinder, Rachelle; Tugwell, Peter; Wells, George; Pardo, Jordi Pardo; Hazlewood, Glen S
    Objective: To understand trainee experiences of participating in a living systematic review (LSR) for rheumatoid arthritis, and the potential benefits in terms of experiential evidence-based medicine (EBM) education. Study Design and Setting: We conducted a mixed-methods study with trainees that participated in the LSR who were recruited broadly from training programs in two countries. Trainees received task-specific training and completed one or more tasks in the review: assessing article eligibility, data extraction, quality assessment. Trainees completed a survey followed by a 1-on-1 interview. Data were triangulated to produce broad themes. Results: Twenty-one trainees, most of whom had little prior experience with systematic reviews, reported a positive overall experience. Key benefits included learning opportunities, task segmentation (ability to focus on a single task, as opposed to an entire review), working in a supportive environment, international collaboration, and incentives such as authorship or acknowledgement. Trainees reported improvement in their competency as a Scholar, Collaborator, Leader, and Medical Expert. Challenges included communication and technical difficulties, and appropriate matching of tasks to trainee skillsets. Conclusion: Participating in a LSR provided benefits to a wide range of trainees and may provide an opportunity for experiential EBM training, while helping LSR sustainability.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Patient preferences to value health outcomes in rheumatology clinical trials: Report from the OMERACT special interest group
    (Oxford University Press, British Society for Rheumatology, 2021-05-24) Thomas, Megan; Fraenkel, Liana; Boonen, Annelies; Bansback, Nick; Buchbinder, Rachelle; Marshall, Deborah; Proulx, Laurie; Voshaar, Marieke; Richards, Pamela; Richards, Dawn P; Hiligsmann, Mickael; Guillemin, Francis; Shea, Beverly; Tugwell, Peter; Hazlewood, Glen
    Objective. To inform a research plan for future studies by obtaining stakeholder input on the application of preference-based methods to clinical trial design. Methods. We conducted a virtual OMERACT session to encourage stakeholder engagement. We developed materials for the session to facilitate discussion based on identified case examples and feedback sessions. Results. Participants prioritized incorporating patient preferences in all aspects of trial design with an emphasis on outcome selection. Participants highlighted the need for careful consideration around preference heterogeneity and equity factors. Conclusion. Including patient preferences in trial design was considered a priority requiring further exploration to develop comprehensive guidance.