Espinoza Suarez, Nataly R

Introduction Despite the increasingly evidenced positive impacts of green space on human physical and mental health, green spaces remain inequitably distributed across different socioeconomic groups. Urban planning and design should prioritise the development and maintenance of urban green spaces, especially for vulnerable and marginalised populations while thinking about protecting them from the effects of green gentrification. This scoping review will explore how the concepts of equity, diversity and inclusion are integrated into the design, the planning and policy development of urban green spaces. Also, we will explore what are the efforts made to incorporate equity, diversity, and inclusion concepts into the planning, design and policy development of urban green spaces to make them equitable for vulnerable and marginalised populations. Methods and analysis This protocol is based on the methodology developed by Arksey and O’Malley and improved by Levac et al . The search will be done in conjunction with a professional librarian, to include studies in all languages. The review will include multidisciplinary databases: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and GeoBase. The search will be done from each database’s inception to February 2024. We will present our results narratively and will conduct a thematic analysis using the urban green equity framework. This framework will guide our understanding of the interplay between the spatial distribution of urban green spaces and the recognition of diverse voices in urban greening decision-making. Ethics and dissemination This scoping review will not require ethical approval since it will be collected from publicly available documents. The results of this scoping review will be presented as a scientific article, social media and public health or environmental conferences organised by environmental organisations or academic institutions.

Objective Shared decision making (SDM) tools can help implement guideline recommendations for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) considering stroke prevention strategies. We sought to characterize all available SDM tools for this purpose and examine their quality and clinical impact. Methods We searched through multiple bibliographic databases, social media, and an SDM tool repository from inception to May 2020 and contacted authors of identified SDM tools. Eligible tools had to offer information about warfarin and ≥1 direct oral anticoagulant. We extracted tool characteristics, assessed their adherence to the International Patient Decision Aids Standards, and obtained information about their efficacy in promoting SDM. Results We found 14 SDM tools. Most tools provided up-to-date information about the options, but very few included practical considerations (e.g., out-of-pocket cost). Five of these SDM tools, all used by patients prior to the encounter, were tested in trials at high risk of bias and were found to produce small improvements in patient knowledge and reductions in decisional conflict. Conclusion Several SDM tools for stroke prevention in AF are available, but whether they promote high-quality SDM is yet to be known. The implementation of guidelines for SDM in this context requires user-centered development and evaluation of SDM tools that can effectively promote high-quality SDM and improve stroke prevention in patients with AF.

Background and objectives: It is unclear why many patients with hypothyroidism prefer the use of desiccated thyroid extract (DTE) as a thyroid hormone replacement formulation over levothyroxine (LT4) treatment, as recommended by clinical practice guidelines. We analyzed patient-reported information from patient online forums to better understand patient preferences for and attitudes toward the use of DTE to treat hypothyroidism. Materials and Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study by evaluating the content of online posts from three popular hypothyroidism forums from patients currently taking DTE (n = 673). From these posts, we extracted descriptive information on patient demographics and clinical characteristics and qualitatively analyzed posts’ content to explore patient perceptions on DTE and other therapies further. Results: Nearly half (46%) of the patients reported that a clinician initially drove their interest in trying DTE. Patients described many reasons for switching from a previous therapeutic approach to DTE, including lack of improvement in hypothyroidism-related symptoms (58%) and the development of side effects (22%). The majority of patients described DTE as moderately to majorly effective overall (81%) and more effective than the previous therapy (77%). The most frequently described benefits associated with DTE use were an improvement in symptoms (56%) and a change in overall well-being (34%). One-fifth of patients described side effects related to the use of DTE. Qualitative analysis of posts’ content supported these findings and raised additional issues around the need for individualizing therapy approaches for hypothyroidism (e.g., a sense of each patient has different needs), as well as difficulties obtaining DTE (e.g., issues with pharmacy availability). Conclusions: Lack of individualized treatment and a feeling of not been listened to were recurrent themes among DTE users. A subset of patients may prefer DTE to LT4 for many reasons, including perceived better effectiveness and improved overall well-being, despite the risks associated with DTE.