Faculty Bibliography

Meta-research is a bourgeoning field studying topics with significant relevance to health sciences librarianship, such as research reproducibility, peer review, and open access. As a discipline that studies research itself and the practices of researchers, meta-research spans disciplines and encompasses a broad spectrum of topics and methods. The breadth of meta-research presents a significant challenge for identifying published meta-research studies. Introducing a subject heading for meta-research in the controlled vocabularies of literature databases has the potential to increase the visibility of meta-research, further advance the field, and expand its impact on research practices. Given the relatively recent designation of meta-research as a field and its expanding use as a term, now is the time to develop appropriate indexing vocabulary. We seek to call attention to the value of meta-research for health sciences librarianship, describe the challenges of identifying meta-research literature with currently available key terms, and highlight the need to establish controlled vocabulary specific to meta-research.

Embedded pragmatic clinical trials (ePCTs) play a vital role in addressing current population health problems, and their use of electronic health record (EHR) systems promises efficiencies that will increase the speed and volume of relevant and generalizable research. However, as the number of ePCTs using EHR-derived data grows, so does the risk that research will become more vulnerable to biases due to differences in data capture and access to care for different subsets of the population, thereby propagating inequities in health and the healthcare system. We identify 3 challenges-incomplete and variable capture of data on social determinants of health, lack of representation of vulnerable populations that do not access or receive treatment, and data loss due to variable use of technology-that exacerbate bias when working with EHR data and offer recommendations and examples of ways to actively mitigate bias.

BACKGROUND:Chatbots are being piloted to draft responses to patient questions, but patients' ability to distinguish between provider and chatbot responses and patients' trust in chatbots' functions are not well established. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to assess the feasibility of using ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer) or a similar artificial intelligence-based chatbot for patient-provider communication. METHODS:A survey study was conducted in January 2023. Ten representative, nonadministrative patient-provider interactions were extracted from the electronic health record. Patients' questions were entered into ChatGPT with a request for the chatbot to respond using approximately the same word count as the human provider's response. In the survey, each patient question was followed by a provider- or ChatGPT-generated response. Participants were informed that 5 responses were provider generated and 5 were chatbot generated. Participants were asked-and incentivized financially-to correctly identify the response source. Participants were also asked about their trust in chatbots' functions in patient-provider communication, using a Likert scale from 1-5. RESULTS:A US-representative sample of 430 study participants aged 18 and older were recruited on Prolific, a crowdsourcing platform for academic studies. In all, 426 participants filled out the full survey. After removing participants who spent less than 3 minutes on the survey, 392 respondents remained. Overall, 53.3% (209/392) of respondents analyzed were women, and the average age was 47.1 (range 18-91) years. The correct classification of responses ranged between 49% (192/392) to 85.7% (336/392) for different questions. On average, chatbot responses were identified correctly in 65.5% (1284/1960) of the cases, and human provider responses were identified correctly in 65.1% (1276/1960) of the cases. On average, responses toward patients' trust in chatbots' functions were weakly positive (mean Likert score 3.4 out of 5), with lower trust as the health-related complexity of the task in the questions increased. CONCLUSIONS:ChatGPT responses to patient questions were weakly distinguishable from provider responses. Laypeople appear to trust the use of chatbots to answer lower-risk health questions. It is important to continue studying patient-chatbot interaction as chatbots move from administrative to more clinical roles in health care.

BACKGROUND:Low medication adherence is a common cause of high blood pressure but is often unrecognized in clinical practice. Electronic data linkages between electronic health records (EHRs) and pharmacies offer the opportunity to identify low medication adherence, which can be used for interventions at the point of care. We developed a multicomponent intervention that uses linked EHR and pharmacy data to automatically identify patients with elevated blood pressure and low medication adherence. The intervention then combines team-based care with EHR-based workflows to address medication nonadherence. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to describe the design of the Leveraging EHR Technology and Team Care to Address Medication Adherence (TEAMLET) trial, which tests the effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention that leverages EHR-based data and team-based care on medication adherence among patients with hypertension. METHODS:TEAMLET is a pragmatic, cluster randomized controlled trial in which 10 primary care practices will be randomized 1:1 to the multicomponent intervention or usual care. We will include all patients with hypertension and low medication adherence who are seen at enrolled practices. The primary outcome is medication adherence, as measured by the proportion of days covered, and the secondary outcome is clinic systolic blood pressure. We will also assess intervention implementation, including adoption, acceptability, fidelity, cost, and sustainability. RESULTS:As of May 2023, we have randomized 10 primary care practices into the study, with 5 practices assigned to each arm of the trial. The enrollment for the study commenced on October 5, 2022, and the trial is currently ongoing. We anticipate patient recruitment to go through the fall of 2023 and the primary outcomes to be assessed in the fall of 2024. CONCLUSIONS:The TEAMLET trial will evaluate the effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention that leverages EHR-based data and team-based care on medication adherence. If successful, the intervention could offer a scalable approach to address inadequate blood pressure control among millions of patients with hypertension. TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05349422; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05349422. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)/UNASSIGNED:DERR1-10.2196/47930.

Embedded pragmatic clinical trials (ePCTs) are conducted during routine clinical care and have the potential to increase knowledge about the effectiveness of interventions under real world conditions. However, many pragmatic trials rely on data from the electronic health record (EHR) data, which are subject to bias from incomplete data, poor data quality, lack of representation from people who are medically underserved, and implicit bias in EHR design. This commentary examines how the use of EHR data might exacerbate bias and potentially increase health inequities. We offer recommendations for how to increase generalizability of ePCT results and begin to mitigate bias to promote health equity.

BACKGROUND:Diabetes mellitus is a common medical complication of pregnancy, and its treatment is complex. Recent years have seen an increase in the application of mobile health tools and advanced technologies, such as remote patient monitoring, with the aim of improving care for diabetes mellitus in pregnancy. Previous studies of these technologies for the treatment of diabetes in pregnancy have been small and have not clearly shown clinical benefit with implementation. OBJECTIVE:Remote patient monitoring allows clinicians to monitor patients' health data (such as glucose values) in near real-time, between office visits, to make timely adjustments to care. Our objective was to determine if using remote patient monitoring for the management of diabetes in pregnancy leads to an improvement in maternal and neonatal outcomes. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:This was a retrospective cohort study of pregnant patients with diabetes mellitus managed by the maternal-fetal medicine practice at one academic institution between October 2019 and April 2021. This practice transitioned from paper-based blood glucose logs to remote patient monitoring in February 2020. Remote patient monitoring options included (1) device integration with Bluetooth glucometers that automatically uploaded measured glucose values to the patient's Epic MyChart application or (2) manual entry in which patients manually logged their glucose readings into their MyChart application. Values in the MyChart application directly transferred to the patient's electronic health record for review and management by clinicians. In total, 533 patients were studied. We compared 173 patients managed with paper logs to 360 patients managed with remote patient monitoring (176 device integration and 184 manual entry). Our primary outcomes were composite maternal morbidity (which included third- and fourth-degree lacerations, chorioamnionitis, postpartum hemorrhage requiring transfusion, postpartum hysterectomy, wound infection or separation, venous thromboembolism, and maternal admission to the intensive care unit) and composite neonatal morbidity (which included umbilical cord pH <7.00, 5 minute Apgar score <7, respiratory morbidity, hyperbilirubinemia, meconium aspiration, intraventricular hemorrhage, necrotizing enterocolitis, sepsis, pneumonia, seizures, hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, shoulder dystocia, trauma, brain or body cooling, and neonatal intensive care unit admission). Secondary outcomes were measures of glycemic control and the individual components of the primary composite outcomes. We also performed a secondary analysis in which the patients who used the two different remote patient monitoring options (device integration vs manual entry) were compared. Chi-square, Fisher's exact, 2-sample t, and Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare the groups. A result was considered statistically significant at P<.05. RESULTS:Maternal baseline characteristics were not significantly different between the remote patient monitoring and paper groups aside from a slightly higher baseline rate of chronic hypertension in the remote patient monitoring group (6.1% vs 1.2%; P=.011). The primary outcomes of composite maternal and composite neonatal morbidity were not significantly different between the groups. However, remote patient monitoring patients submitted more glucose values (177 vs 146; P=.008), were more likely to achieve glycemic control in target range (79.2% vs 52.0%; P<.0001), and achieved the target range sooner (median, 3.3 vs 4.1 weeks; P=.025) than patients managed with paper logs. This was achieved without increasing in-person visits. Remote patient monitoring patients had lower rates of preeclampsia (5.8% vs 15.0%; P=.0006) and their infants had lower rates of neonatal hypoglycemia in the first 24 hours of life (29.8% vs 51.7%; P<.0001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Remote patient monitoring for the management of diabetes mellitus in pregnancy is superior to a traditional paper-based approach in achieving glycemic control and is associated with improved maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Fostering diverse, equitable, and inclusive collaborative research networks is important for advancing the field of aging research. Despite sizeable investment in research consortia and career development programs, there has been only moderate progress toward diversifying the research workforce studying aging. Without critically examining what works and what does not, continuing to place more resources into these same strategies may not result in a substantial improvement in diversity or the creation of collaborative networks. Using meta-research to rigorously evaluate potential strategies to promote diversity and collaboration may yield important insights that can be used to improve upon current efforts. For this reason, we sought to describe meta-research and highlight how its principles can be used to achieve the aging research community's collaboration and diversity goals.

BACKGROUND:Surgery is a potent motivator to help people quit smoking to reduce the risk of complications. Many patients who smoke receive tobacco cessation counseling prior to surgery and are able to quit, but do not receive the same resources after surgery and often resume smoking. METHODS:We present a case study describing the recruitment process, study components, and lessons learned from StayQuit, a comprehensive relapse prevention program designed to prevent relapse after arthroplasty. Lessons learned were examined post hoc to determine challenges related to program implementation, using existing study procedures and information collected. RESULTS:While a comprehensive postoperative relapse prevention program may be beneficial to patients, implementation of StayQuit is unlikely to be feasible under current circumstances. The primary challenges to successful implementation of StayQuit focused on themes of lack of engagement in the preoperative Orthopedic Surgery Quit Smoking Program (OSQSP) and an environment unfavorable to in-person enrollment on the day of surgery. CONCLUSIONS:Postoperative relapse prevention programs may be beneficial for patients who quit smoking prior to elective surgery. To help guide implementation, it is important to consider surgeon behavior, the collaboration of clinical and non-clinical teams, and best practices for study enrollment in surgical settings.