2024
Recommended Guidelines for Screening for Underlying Malignancy in Extramammary Paget's Disease Based on Anatomic Subtype
Kibbi N, Owen J, Worley B, Alam M, Group E, Wang J, Harikumar V, Downing M, Aasi S, Aung P, Barker C, Bolotin D, Bordeaux J, Cartee T, Chandra S, Cho N, Choi J, Chung K, Cliby W, Dorigo O, Eisen D, Fujisawa Y, Golda N, Halfdanarson T, Iavazzo C, Jiang S, John E, Kanitakis J, Keimig E, Khan A, Linos E, Kim J, Kuzel T, Lawrence N, Leitao M, MacLean A, Maher I, Mittal B, Nehal K, Ozog D, Pettaway C, Rajan N, Ross J, Rossi A, Servaes S, Solomon M, Thomas V, Tolia M, Voelzke B, Waldman A, Wong M, Zhou Y, Brackett A, Poon E, Ahmed A. Recommended Guidelines for Screening for Underlying Malignancy in Extramammary Paget's Disease Based on Anatomic Subtype. Journal Of The American Academy Of Dermatology 2024 PMID: 39401611, DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2024.07.1531.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchExtramammary Paget's diseaseSecondary extramammary Paget's diseaseVulvar extramammary Paget diseasePerianal extramammary Paget's diseaseUrine cytologyAnatomic subtypesComputed tomographyPaget's diseaseProstate-specific antigen testingHigh-risk featuresOrgan-specific testsMultidisciplinary expert panelUnderlying malignancySystematic follow-upFollow-upAdenocarcinomaAntigen testAnatomical locationInclusion criteriaCytologyRetrospective dataScreening testSubtypesScreening algorithmRecommendation statements
2023
Representation of patients with non-English language preferences in motor vehicle collision trauma and emergency medicine research
Smith M, Tibbetts C, Agrawal P, Cordone A, Leff R, Smith R, Moran T, Brackett A, Zeidan A. Representation of patients with non-English language preferences in motor vehicle collision trauma and emergency medicine research. Injury Prevention 2023, 29: 253-258. PMID: 36854627, DOI: 10.1136/ip-2022-044813.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsNon-English language preferenceMotor vehicle collisionsRepresentation of patientsStudy inclusion/exclusion criteriaStandardised reporting toolsInclusion/exclusion criteriaDisparate health outcomesPaucity of literatureEmergency medicine researchPrimary outcomePatient populationInclusion criteriaTraumatic injuryExclusion criteriaEligible articlesHealth outcomesAppropriate interventionsLanguage preferenceCollision traumaPatientsSystematic searchEmergency medicineOutcomesVehicle collisionsFull text
2022
Evidence of Racial Disparities in the Lung Cancer Screening Process: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Kunitomo Y, Bade B, Gunderson CG, Akgün KM, Brackett A, Tanoue L, Bastian LA. Evidence of Racial Disparities in the Lung Cancer Screening Process: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal Of General Internal Medicine 2022, 37: 3731-3738. PMID: 35838866, PMCID: PMC9585128, DOI: 10.1007/s11606-022-07613-2.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsLung cancer screeningLCS participationLung cancer mortalityScreening ratesWhite patientsSystematic reviewCancer mortalityPatient populationRacial disparitiesPatient studiesLung cancer screening processAllied Health Literature databasesLow-dose chestHigh-risk individualsMethodsA systematic reviewCancer screening processFull-text reviewTitles/abstractsWeb of ScienceBlack patientsDatabase inceptionCancer screeningClinical trialsInclusion criteriaProvider awareness
2019
Association Between Chiropractic Use and Opioid Receipt Among Patients with Spinal Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Corcoran KL, Bastian LA, Gunderson CG, Steffens C, Brackett A, Lisi AJ. Association Between Chiropractic Use and Opioid Receipt Among Patients with Spinal Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Pain Medicine 2019, 21: e139-e145. PMID: 31560777, DOI: 10.1093/pm/pnz219.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsOpioid receiptSpinal painChiropractic useOpioid prescriptionsChiropractic careSystematic reviewMeta-AnalysisChiropractic usersProportion of patientsCase-control studyPairs of reviewersCase management strategiesNoncancer painNeck painRandom effects analysisCohort studyOpioid useBack painDatabase inceptionInverse associationOdds ratioBias assessmentInclusion criteriaLower oddsCurrent evidence