A mixed methods study exploring requests for unproven COVID therapies such as ivermectin and healthcare distrust in the rural South

Scoy, Lauren Jodi Van; Duda, Sarah H; Scott, Allison M.; Baker, Arian; Costigan, Heather; Loeffler, Morgan; Sherman, Michael S.; Brown, Michael D.

doi:10.1016/j.pmedr.2022.102104

Preventive Medicine Reports

2023

DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2022.102104

|View full text |Cite

A mixed methods study exploring requests for unproven COVID therapies such as ivermectin and healthcare distrust in the rural South

Lauren Jodi Van Scoy

Sarah H Duda

Allison M. Scott

et al.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2024

Publication Types

Select...

Article2

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent2

Authors

Journals

Cited by 2 publications

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

The Individual Participant Data Integrity Tool for assessing the integrity of randomised trials

Hunter,

Aberoumand,

Libesman

et al. 2024

Research Synthesis Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing concerns about the trustworthiness of research have prompted calls to scrutinise studies' Individual Participant Data (IPD), but guidance on how to do this was lacking. To address this, we developed the IPD Integrity Tool to screen randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for integrity issues. Development of the tool involved a literature review, consultation with an expert advisory group, piloting on two IPD meta‐analyses (including 73 trials with IPD), preliminary validation on 13 datasets with and without known integrity issues, and evaluation to inform iterative refinements. The IPD Integrity Tool comprises 31 items (13 study‐level, 18 IPD‐specific). IPD‐specific items are automated where possible, and are grouped into eight domains, including unusual data patterns, baseline characteristics, correlations, date violations, patterns of allocation, internal and external inconsistencies, and plausibility of data. Users rate each item as having either no issues, some/minor issue(s), or many/major issue(s) according to decision rules, and justification for each rating is recorded. Overall, the tool guides decision‐making by determining whether a trial has no concerns, some concerns requiring further information, or major concerns warranting exclusion from evidence synthesis or publication. In our preliminary validation checks, the tool accurately identified all five studies with known integrity issues. The IPD Integrity Tool enables users to assess the integrity of RCTs via examination of IPD. The tool may be applied by evidence synthesists, editors and others to determine whether an RCT should be considered sufficiently trustworthy to contribute to the evidence base that informs policy and practice.

show abstract

The Individual Participant Data Integrity Tool for assessing the integrity of randomised trials

Hunter,

Aberoumand,

Libesman

et al. 2024

Research Synthesis Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Considering collaborative incident management: A study of the COVID-19 response and initial recovery in a rural West Virginia community

Harvey,

Lathan, III,

McDonald, Jr

2024

JEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hierarchical command-style structures are commonplace in the management of disasters, though researchers have begun to recommend the exploration of networked approaches to incident management. Furthermore, few studies are explicitly looking at the rural context of disaster management. This study seeks to contribute to both topics by examining the motivations for emergent collaboration in the direction of the response and initial recovery to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in a rural West Virginia community. Between March 2020 and March 2022, the primary investigator moderated regular briefings of a community task force convened to coordinate the pandemic response and recovery. As regular operations concluded, members completed a survey, and 10 randomly selected members participated in semistructured interviews regarding their experiences in the task force. Survey responses suggest that common motivations for collaboration in nondisaster contexts (as they appear in the scholarly literature) and potential benefits of networked approaches highlighted in the incident management literature could also serve as motivators within the disaster context. Qualitative interview data extend that discussion and identify the need to gain clear information regarding the concerned authorities and specific local information to better inform the expenditure of limited resources as two additional motivators for collaboration.

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

A mixed methods study exploring requests for unproven COVID therapies such as ivermectin and healthcare distrust in the rural South

Cited by 2 publications

References 48 publications

The Individual Participant Data Integrity Tool for assessing the integrity of randomised trials

The Individual Participant Data Integrity Tool for assessing the integrity of randomised trials

Considering collaborative incident management: A study of the COVID-19 response and initial recovery in a rural West Virginia community

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About