Patient engagement in clinical guidelines development: input from > 1000 members of the Canadian Osteoporosis Patient Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patient engagement in clinical guidelines development is essential. The results of a self-administered online survey identified themes important to people living with osteoporosis and will inform the development of Osteoporosis Canada clinical guidelines recommendations. INTRODUCTION: Patient engagement is essential in the development of high-quality and relevant guidelines for osteoporosis management. Osteoporosis Canada (OC) is updating its national clinical practice guidelines in collaboration with people living with osteoporosis in the process. METHODS: Using electronic mail, we contacted 6937 members of the Canadian Osteoporosis Patient Network (COPN) to provide input on the selection of relevant content, outcomes, and research questions via a self-administered online survey. Close-ended questions were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and conventional content analysis was conducted for open-ended questions. RESULTS: A total of 1108 individuals completed the survey (97% women, 86% stated they lived with osteoporosis). Most participants considered it critical to have recommendations on physical activity and exercise (74%), fall prevention (69%), nutrition (68%), and initial bone mineral density testing (67%). In addition to preventing fractures, over 75% of respondents stated that consideration of preserving quality of life and ability to perform daily activities, preventing admission to long-term care and fracture-related death, and avoiding serious harms from medications were essential outcomes to consider in evaluating the evidence. In terms of selection of research questions, seven themes emerged from the content analysis including pharmacotherapy, screening and monitoring, diet and supplements, education, exercise, alternative therapies, and pain management. CONCLUSIONS: Patients emphasized that autonomy, mobility, and quality of life are highly valued outcomes and must be integral to practice guideline development. As expected, guidance on pharmacotherapy, screening and monitoring, and fracture prevention were priorities identified to be included in osteoporosis management guidelines.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.033 | 0.142 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".