Motivations for investigating health inequities in observational epidemiology: a content analysis of 320 studies.

Objectives: To enhance equity in clinical and epidemiological research, it is crucial to understand researcher motivations for conducting equity-relevant studies. Therefore, we evaluated author motivations in a randomly selected sample of equity-relevant observational studies published during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Study Design And Setting: We searched MEDLINE for studies from 2020 to 2022, resulting in 16,828 references.

Consensus on the definitions and descriptions of the domains of the OMERACT Core Outcome Set for shared decision making interventions in rheumatology trials.

Objective: To gain consensus on the definitions and descriptions of the domains of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core domain set for rheumatology trials evaluating shared decision making (SDM) interventions.

Methods: Following the OMERACT Handbook methods, our Working Group (WG), comprised of 90 members, including 17 patient research partners (PRPs) and 73 clinicians and researchers, had six virtual meetings in addition to email exchanges to develop draft definitions and descriptions. The WG then conducted an international survey of its members to gain consensus on the definitions and descriptions.

Improving social justice in observational studies: protocol for the development of a global and Indigenous STROBE-equity reporting guideline.

Background: Addressing persistent and pervasive health inequities is a global moral imperative, which has been highlighted and magnified by the societal and health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Observational studies can aid our understanding of the impact of health and structural oppression based on the intersection of gender, race, ethnicity, age and other factors, as they frequently collect this data. However, the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guideline, does not provide guidance related to reporting of health equity.

Validation studies of rheumatoid arthritis patient-reported outcome measures in populations at risk for inequity: A systematic review and analysis using the OMERACT summary of measurement properties equity table.

Background: Existing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may be limited in their applicability to populations that are at risk for inequities. We conducted a systematic review to identify and rate evidence in the validation studies for PROMs in populations at risk for inequity.

Methods: A systematic review of MEDLINE and EMBASE was completed.

Guidance relevant to the reporting of health equity in observational research: a scoping review protocol.

Introduction: Health inequities are defined as unfair and avoidable differences in health between groups within a population. Most health research is conducted through observational studies, which are able to offer real-world insights about etiology, healthcare policy/programme effectiveness and the impacts of socioeconomic factors. However, most published reports of observational studies do not address how their findings relate to health equity.

Factors to Consider During Identification and Invitation of Individuals in a Multi-stakeholder Research Partnership.

Background: Health research teams increasingly partner with stakeholders to produce research that is relevant, accessible, and widely used. Previous work has covered stakeholder group identification.

Objective: We aimed to develop factors for health research teams to consider during identification and invitation of individual representatives in a multi-stakeholder research partnership, with the aim of forming equitable and informed teams.

Development of an extension of the OMERACT Summary of Measurement Properties table to capture equity considerations: SOMP-Equity.

Objective: To develop an equity extension of the OMERACT Summary of Measurement Properties (SOMP) Table, SOMP Equity to describe whether a patient reported outcome measure (PROM) works well among patients of diverse languages and cultures, education levels, and other population characteristics.

Methods: We used the PROGRESS-Plus framework to categorize equity characteristics assessed in trials of PROM. PROGRESS refers to Place of residence, Race/ethnicity/culture/language, Occupation, Gender/sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status, and Social Capital, while the 'plus' captures additional characteristics, such as age.

Improving Social Justice in COVID-19 Health Research: Interim Guidelines for Reporting Health Equity in Observational Studies.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the global imperative to address health inequities. Observational studies are a valuable source of evidence for real-world effects and impacts of implementing COVID-19 policies on the redistribution of inequities. We assembled a diverse global multi-disciplinary team to develop interim guidance for improving transparency in reporting health equity in COVID-19 observational studies.

Endorsement of the OMERACT core domain set for shared decision making interventions in rheumatology trials: Results from a multi-stepped consensus-building approach.

Objective: To gain consensus on the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core domain set for rheumatology trials of shared decision making (SDM) interventions.

Methods: The process followed the OMERACT Filter 2.1 methodology, and used consensus-building methods, with patients involved since the inception.

Community-Initiated Research Engagement: Equitable Partnership Delivering Research-Ready Faith-Based Ambassadors.

Background: Faith-based communities supporting diverse and underserved communities are increasingly being recognized by health researchers as valued partners for research engagement. Although the "why engage" is clearly documented, the how and lessons learned is less well evidenced.

Objectives: This article describes community-academic collaboration initiated by African American faith-based church leaders to foster equitable partnership, engagement and shared decision making in patient-centered health research initiatives.

Protocol for the development of guidance for stakeholder engagement in health and healthcare guideline development and implementation.

Background: Stakeholder engagement has become widely accepted as a necessary component of guideline development and implementation. While frameworks for developing guidelines express the need for those potentially affected by guideline recommendations to be involved in their development, there is a lack of consensus on how this should be done in practice. Further, there is a lack of guidance on how to equitably and meaningfully engage multiple stakeholders.

Proceedings of the 2017 Advancing the Science of Community Engaged Research (CEnR) Conference.

Background: To address an urgent need to advance the field of community engaged research, faculty at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and Meharry Medical College organized the national meeting "Advancing the Science of Community Engaged Research (CEnR): Innovative & Effective Methods of Stakeholder Engagement in Translational Research, Washington, DC September 14-15, 2017 (See Additional file 1). These meetings brought together a diverse group of stakeholders to share community engaged research evidence and practical knowledge for implementing new and enhancing existing research programs. The conference series' goals were: 1) to expand the scientific basis for the community engaged research field by convening researchers, community partners, patient advocacy organizations, and others to share innovative methods and strategies; 2) to engage community representatives and patient advocates in the development of new approaches in community engaged research by meaningfully involving them in the planning, as speakers and presenters, and as conference participants; and 3) to catalyze innovative community engaged research using interactive meeting methods that promote learning, support collective problem solving, and encourage new conceptual frameworks.

Practical Guidance for Involving Stakeholders in Health Research.

Stakeholder engagement is increasingly common in health research, with protocols for engaging multiple stakeholder groups becoming normative in patient-centered outcomes research. Previous work has focused on identifying relevant stakeholder groups with whom to work and on working with stakeholders in evidence implementation. This paper draws on the expertise of a team from four countries-Canada, Australia, the UK, and the USA-to provide researchers with practical guidance for carrying out multi-stakeholder-engaged projects: we present a list of questions to assist in selecting appropriate roles and modes of engagement; we introduce a matrix to help summarize engagement activities; and we provide a list of online resources.

Considerations and guidance in designing equity-relevant clinical trials.

Health research has documented disparities in health and health outcomes within and between populations. When these disparities are unfair and avoidable they may be referred to as health inequities. Few trials attend to factors related to health inequities, and there is limited understanding about how to build consideration of health inequities into trials.

Personal touch: personal health records for consumers of healthcare.

Personal health records (PHRs) consist of medical records that the consumer collects from each of their healthcare providers, plus any health information that the consumer adds. Sharing information from the PHR with providers enables the consumer and provider to work together. Use of data in the PHR can help reduce or eliminate duplicate procedures or processes.