Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:This case report describes the integration of a capstone Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) assignment into a first-year medical student curriculum and presents an analysis of the correlation between search strategy quality and article selection quality within that assignment. CASE PRESENTATION/UNASSIGNED:A whole-task EBM assignment, requiring students to address a clinical scenario by completing all EBM steps, was implemented after a curriculum-integrated EBM course. Student performance on their search strategy and article selection was assessed using a rubric (1-4 scale). Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was used to assess the relationship between these two variables. Eighty-two students completed the assignment. Fifty-nine percent received a score of 3 for their search strategy, while 77% received a score of 4 for article selection. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was 0.19 (p-value = 0.086). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:While a weak, non-statistically significant correlation was observed between search quality and article selection, the analysis revealed patterns that may inform future instructional design. Educators should consider emphasizing the importance of selecting up-to-date and high-quality evidence and addressing common search errors. Further research, incorporating direct observation and baseline assessments, is needed to draw more definitive conclusions.

BACKGROUND:Cardiovascular disease is the most common cause of morbidity and mortality in kidney transplant recipients. Screening for coronary disease is frequently required prior to kidney transplantation, but coronary intervention has not been shown to be beneficial except in complex coronary artery disease. The likelihood of finding significant coronary artery disease and the benefits of routine pre-transplant screening are uncertain. METHODS:We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medline & Embase were searched to identify manuscripts published between 1998 and 2024 reporting the results of pre-transplant screening. The primary endpoints were the frequency of detecting significant coronary lesions for which there are AHA class 1 indications for revascularization: a) >50% left main stenosis; or b) multi-vessel disease with ejection fraction < 35% during pre-kidney transplant screening. Secondary endpoints included frequency of detecting multivessel disease, proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD) disease, and number of patients who underwent invasive coronary angiography. Meta-regression was used to explore outcome heterogeneity according to the presence of hypertension, diabetes, and age. RESULTS:We identified 1273 studies out of which 44 met eligibility criteria. The mean prevalence of class 1 indications was 2%, although the heterogeneity was high with estimates ranging from 0% to 17%. Estimated prevalence of proximal LAD disease was 2% and left main stenosis was 1%, whereas 10% of patients had multi-vessel coronary artery disease, and 35% were referred for invasive angiography. There was no evidence of significant heterogeneity according to sex of the population or prevalence of diabetes or hypertension. CONCLUSIONS:Identification of class I indications for revascularization during pre-transplant coronary screening was rare.

Due to inconsistencies in literature reporting, there is potential for bias in meta-regression calculations used in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. To address this, we propose a novel modifiable point-based scoring system, highlighting to readers the scientific weight of included studies relative to the conclusion of the review's authors. Such a scoring system will have the added benefit of also highlighting data points that are underrepresented. This system is ideal for synthesizing reviews on pathologies poorly represented in the literature. The scoring system described will decrease bias and enable impactful interpretation to ultimately lead to standard practice adaptation.

OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:We expect medical students to be able to apply evidence-based medicine (EBM) skills in the context of the clinical care of patients. Previous assessments of this domain have primarily utilized decontextualized knowledge tests, which provide limited insights into students' understanding of EBM skills in the context of patient care. New performance-based EBM competence assessments using Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) are being developed and tested. Understanding how students experience and interact with a simulation-based assessment of EBM competence would enable us to improve the modality. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We recruited 13 graduating medical students from one medical school who had recently completed an immersive multi station readiness-for-residency OSCE (Night onCall) which included a case-based EBM assessment. We conducted individual interviews to explore their perceptions of participating in this OSCE as a method of EBM assessment. The interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using Dedoose by three health science librarians. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Students discussed their experience and perceptions in six main areas: connection to clinical practice, curricular timing and content coverage, feedback, station instructions, awareness of their own limitations, and an OSCE as a format for assessing EBM. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Medical students appreciated the EBM OSCE because it enhanced their learning about how to integrate EBM into clinical practice. They proposed implementing multiple such opportunities throughout medical school because it would improve their competence and provide highly impactful opportunities to build toward EBM mastery. They endorsed that this would be well-accepted by medical students.

Acne is a common skin condition, but little data exist on the comparative efficacy of topical acne therapies. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of topical therapies for mild-to-moderate acne. Searches in PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL via Ovid, Embase via Ovid and Web of Science were conducted on 29 November 2021. Randomized controlled trials examining ≥12 weeks of topical treatments for acne vulgaris in subjects aged 12 and older were included. Main outcomes were absolute or percent change in acne lesion count and treatment success on the Investigator's Global Assessment scale. Thirty-five randomized clinical trials with 33,472 participants comparing nine different topical agents were included. Adapalene-benzoyl peroxide (BPO), clindamycin-BPO and clindamycin-tretinoin demonstrated the greatest reduction in non-inflammatory (ratio of means [RoM] 1.76; 95% CI [1.46; 2.12], RoM 1.70; 95% CI [1.44; 2.02] and RoM 1.87; 95% CI [1.53; 2.30], respectively), inflammatory (RoM 1.56; 95% CI [1.44; 1.70], RoM 1.49; 95% CI [1.39; 1.60] and RoM 1.48; 95% CI [1.36; 1.61], respectively) and total lesion count (ROM 1.67; 95% CI [1.47; 1.90], RoM 1.59; 95% CI [1.42; 1.79] and RoM 1.64; 95% CI [1.42; 1.89], respectively) compared to placebo. All single agents outperformed placebo except tazarotene, which did not significantly outperform placebo for inflammatory and non-inflammatory lesion count reduction. Most combination agents significantly outperformed their individual components in lesion count reduction and global assessment scores, except for clindamycin-tretinoin and clindamycin-BPO, which did not significantly outperform tretinoin (RoM 1.13; 95% CI [0.94; 1.36]) and BPO (RoM = 1.15, 95% CI [0.98; 1.36]), respectively, for non-inflammatory lesion reduction. There was no significant difference amongst most single agents when evaluating lesion count reduction. Combination agents are generally most effective for mild-to-moderate acne; however for non-inflammatory acne, the addition of clindamycin in topical regimens is unnecessary and should be avoided.

BACKGROUND:Unannounced standardized patients (USPs) have long been used to measure clinical performance in situ. These incognito actors capture data on clinician skills during an encounter, as well as patient experience more broadly. A robust USP program requires extensive preparation and standardization efforts. Given the widespread expansion of USPs for education, research, and improvement efforts, we conducted a systematic review with the goal of capturing the breadth of uses of USPs across settings, along with the standardization measures employed across studies. METHODS:In collaboration with a medical librarian, we conducted systematic searches across six databases. Two independent researchers screened each report for inclusion. Three coders extracted and reviewed study characteristics and data from the studies deemed eligible for inclusion. We extracted data on: target population, setting, and assessed skills. We also captured the reliability and fidelity measures described in each study, including USP detection, USP training methods, and assessment measures. RESULTS:128 articles were included. Individual clinicians were the most frequently targeted population (n = 114, 89 %). Common clinician roles included physicians (n = 92, 72 %) and pharmacists (n = 12, 9 %). The collective care team was the target in two studies (2 %), and systems and larger healthcare facilities were targeted in only 1 (1 %) and 13 (10 %) studies, respectively. Studies were primarily conducted in ambulatory settings (n = 118, 92 %). History gathering (n = 76, 59 %), communication (n = 55, 43 %), counseling (n = 51, 40 %), and patient education (n = 49, 38 %) were commonly assessed, as were correct diagnosis (n = 34, 27 %), appropriate ordering of labs/tests (n = 30, 23 %), referrals (n = 35, 27 %), and prescriptions (n = 36, 28 %). USP detection reporting was variable across studies; however, no detection information was provided for 48 studies. 62 % of articles reported incorporating a measure of reliability or fidelity into their study, while the remainder either failed to provide adequate information on use of these measures. CONCLUSIONS:We explored USP use across settings and describe the scope and limitations of the literature. USPs capture a range of data domains but a lack uniform report of reliability measures can potentially undermine findings. Future studies should incorporate and uniformly report out on detection, training, and assessment.

INTRODUCTION/UNASSIGNED:Medical students may arrive at medical school with some research background but not necessarily evidence-based medicine (EBM) skills. First-year preclinical medical students require foundational skills for EBM (formulating background and foreground questions, navigating information sources, and conducting database searches) before critically appraising evidence and applying it to clinical scenarios. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We developed a flipped classroom EBM workshop for preclinical students combining prework modules and a 60-minute in-person session. After completing the online modules on foundational EBM skills, students participated in an in-person activity based on patient cases. In small groups, students formulated background and foreground questions based on a case and looked for evidence in resources assigned to each group. Small groups reported back to the whole group how they searched for information for their patient cases. A total of 105 first-year medical students were required to complete this workshop after concluding their basic sciences courses. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:= .002). DISCUSSION/UNASSIGNED:This flipped classroom approach to teaching foundational EBM skills may be adapted for different contexts, but educators should consider time limitations, group size, and tools for interactivity.

INTRODUCTION/UNASSIGNED:We must ensure, through rigorous assessment that physicians have the evidence-based medicine (EBM) skills to identify and apply the best available information to their clinical work. However, there is limited guidance on how to assess EBM competency. With a better understanding of their current role in EBM education, Health Sciences Librarians (HSLs), as experts, should be able to contribute to the assessment of medical student EBM competence. The purpose of this study is to explore the HSLs perspective on EBM assessment practices, both current state and potential future activities. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We conducted focus groups with librarians from across the United States to explore their perceptions of assessing EBM competence in medical students. Participants had been trained to be raters of EBM competence as part of a novel Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). This OSCE was just the starting point and the discussion covered topics of current EBM assessment and possibility for expanded responsibilities at their own institutions. We used a reflexive thematic analysis approach to construct themes from our conversations. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:We constructed eight themes in four broad categories that influence the success of librarians being able to engage in effective assessment of EBM: administrative, curricular, medical student, and librarian. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Our results inform medical school leadership by pointing out the modifiable factors that enable librarians to be more engaged in conducting effective assessment. They highlight the need for novel tools, like EBM OSCEs, that can address multiple barriers and create opportunities for deeper integration of librarians into assessment processes.

KEY POINTS:Women are under-represented in high-impact nephrology trials. Trends remain consistent over the past 20 years and on the basis of target condition. Addressing the imbalanced enrollment of women in trials could improve disparities in care and outcomes of kidney disease. BACKGROUND:Gender disparities in the incidence and complications of kidney diseases are well described. However, analysis to elucidate gender disparities in enrollment in nephrology randomized clinical trials (RCTs) has not been performed. METHODS:) kidney transplantation. We summarized trial characteristics according to reporting and enrollment of participants, enrollment site, publication year, trial category, and intervention type. Outcomes of interest include the proportion of enrolled male and female participants overall and according to trial category. In addition, we compared enrollment trends in the United States and globally to estimates of kidney disease prevalence. RESULTS:=133,082). Male participants formed most of trial cohorts in AKI (65%), CKD (62%), dialysis (55%), and transplant trials (65%), whereas women were majority enrollees in GN trials (61%). CKD trials under-represented women in both US trials and worldwide. CONCLUSIONS:Women are under-represented in high-impact nephrology trials with the exception of GN trials. This imbalance may contribute to disparities in outcomes and gaps in the care of women with kidney disease.