Citations

Mayo Clinic

Clear

5 citation(s) found for "Dunn, Patrick".

International development of Investigator Global Assessment scores for pemphigus
Murrell, Dédée F., Boucher, Darby , Daneshpazhooh, Maryam, Mahmoudi, H., Kianfar, Nika , Wilson, Anna , BILGIC, ASLI, Chandran, N. S., Patsatsi, Aikaterini , Caux, Frédéric, Lim, Yen L., Marzano, Angelo V., Payne, Aimee S., Sprecher, Eli, Beek, Nina Van, Yamagami, Jun , Antiga, Emiliano, Bagci, I., Borradori, Luca, Caproni, Marzia, De, Dipankar, Dunn, Patrick F. , Feliciani, Claudio, Fivenson, David , Handa, Sanjeev, Horvath, B., Ioannides, D. , Kasperkiewicz, Michael, Lipman, Rachel E. , Mascaró, José M., Meijer, Joost M. , MIMOUNI, D, Schultz, Brittney , Skiljevic, Dusan, Strong, Becky, Tomayko, Mary M. , Vestergaard, Christian , Wozniak, Katarzyna, Yayli, S., Joly, Pascal, Werth, Victoria P., Caproni, Marzia , Joly, P. , Horváth, Barbara , Murrell, D F , Daneshpazhooh, M , Mahmoudi, Hamidreza , Wilson, Anna , Patsatsi, Aikaterini , Drenovska, Kossara , Caux, Frédéric , Marzano, Angelo Valerio , Schmidt, Enno , Sprecher, Eli , Van Beek, Nina , Antiga, Emiliano , Borradori, Luca , Caproni, Marzia , Feliciani, Claudio , Ioannides, Dimitrios , Kasperkiewicz, Michael , Mascaró, José M , Meijer, Joost M , Schultz, Brittney , Vestergaard, Christian , Joly, Pascal , Dasdar, Shayan , Yale, Marc , Uzun, Soner , Vassileva, Snejina , Culton, Donna Aline , Hertl, Michael , Marinović, Branka , Marzano, Angelo Valerio , Payne, Aimee S. , Schmidt, Enno , Sprecher, Eli , Bağci, Işın Sinem , Corrà, Alberto , De, Dipankar , Dunn, Patrick, Günther, Claudia , Handa, Sanjeev , Kowaléwski, Cezary , Lehman, Julia S. , Mimouni, Daniel , Skiljevic, Dusan S. , Woźniak, Katarzyna , Yaylı, Savaş , Werth, Victoria P.

Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology | April 7, 2026 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: No page available

10.1111/jdv.70430 | PMID 41944632 Get It

PDX-MI: Minimal Information for Patient-Derived Tumor Xenograft Models
Meehan, Terrence F. , Goldstein, Theodore C. , Murakami, Mark A. , Brabetz, Sebastian , Gu, Zhiping , Wiser, Jeffrey A., Dunn, Patrick , Begley, Dale A. , Krupke, Debra M. , Bertotti, Andrea , Bruna, Alejandra , Brush, Matthew , Byrne, Annette T. , Caldas, Carlos , Christie, Amanda L., Clark, Dominic A. , Dowst, Heidi , Dry, Jonathan R. , Doroshow, James H. , Duchamp, Olivier, Ferretti, Stéphane , Frese, Kristopher K. , Goodwin, Neal , Greenawalt, Danielle M., Haendel, Melissa , Hermans, Els , Houghton, Peter J. , Jonkers, Jos , Kemper, Kristel , Khor, Tin Oo, Lloyd, K. C. Kent , Mason, Jeremy , Médico, Enzo , Olson, James M. , Peeper, Daniel S. , Seong, Je Kyung , Trusolino, Livio , Vinolo, Emilie, Wechsler‐Reya, Robert J. , Weinstock, David M. , Welm, Alana L. , Weroha, S. John , Pfister, Stefan M. , Kool, Marcel , Parkinson, Helen , Butte, Atul J. , Bult, Carol J. , Haendel, Melissa , Caldas, Carlos , Pfister, Stefan M , Conte, Nathalie , Inghirami, Giorgio , Evrard, Yvonne A. , Lewis, Michael T. , Neuhauser, Steven B. , Rueda, Oscar M. , Amant, Frédéric

Cancer Research | November 1, 2017 | Volume: 77 | Issue: 21 | Pages: e62-e66

10.1158/0008-5472.can-17-0582 | PMID 29092942 Get It

Abstract Patient-derived tumor xenograft (PDX) mouse models have emerged as an important oncology research platform to study tumor evolution, mechanisms of drug response and resistance, and tailoring chemotherapeutic approaches for individual patients. The lack of robust standards for reporting on PDX models has hampered the ability of researchers to find relevant PDX models and associated data. Here we present the PDX models minimal information standard (PDX-MI) for reporting on the generation, quality assurance, and use of PDX models. PDX-MI defines the minimal information for describing the clinical attributes of a patient's tumor, the processes of implantation and passaging of tumors in a host mouse strain, quality assurance methods, and the use of PDX models in cancer research. Adherence to PDX-MI standards will facilitate accurate search results for oncology models and their associated data across distributed repository databases and promote reproducibility in research studies using these models. Cancer Res; 77(21); e62–66. ©2017 AACR.
Funding Research in Emergency Department Shared Decision Making: A Summary of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference Panel Discussion
Dodd, Kenneth W. , Berman, Amy , Carr, Brendan G. , Dunn, Patrick , Escobedo, Marcus, Gayer, Christopher, Grieser, Mira, Carpenter, Christopher R. , Grudzen, Corita R. , Brown, Jeremy , Hess, Erik P. , Carpenter, Christopher R

Academic Emergency Medicine | November 28, 2016 | Volume: 23 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 1340-1345

10.1111/acem.13063 | PMID 27474887 Get It

AbstractAs part of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference, “Shared Decision Making in the Emergency Department: Development of a Policy‐relevant Patient‐centered Research Agenda,” a panel of representatives from the Office of Emergency Care Research, the Patient‐Centered Outcomes Research Institute, the American Heart Association, the John A. Hartford Foundation, and the Emergency Care Coordination Center were assembled to discuss funding opportunities for future research in this field. This article summarizes their discussion of funding priorities and examples of successfully funded projects related to shared decision making in emergency medicine.
Adapting Conceptual Frameworks for Patient Engagement in Emergency Department Research
Carden, Donna L., Booker‐Vaughns, Juanita , Dunn, Patrick , Kizzie-Gillett, Constance L., Vaughan, William P., Weingarten, Gail, Williams, Pluscedia, Young‐Brinn, Angela, Grudzen, Corita R. , Wright, Rebecca , Hess, Erik P.

Academic Emergency Medicine | August 16, 2016 | Volume: 23 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 1332-1336

10.1111/acem.13066 | PMID 27526646 Get It

AbstractFor many people the emergency department (ED) is the first point of access to healthcare for acute needs and a recurring location for many with chronic healthcare needs. While the ED is well placed to identify unmet needs it can also be a net that people slip through when faced with uncoordinated and expensive healthcare challenges. Thus the ED has a responsibility to set patients on a safe and meaningful care trajectory, which can only be done in consultation and partnership with the patients themselves. The purpose of this article is to present crucial aspects of patient engagement that are essential for future research to foster an environment of colearning and respect that encourages ongoing involvement by patients, families, and staff.
Development and Testing of Shared Decision Making Interventions for Use in Emergency Care: A Research Agenda
Melnick, Edward R. , Schoenfeld, Elizabeth , Collins, Sean P. , Breslin, Maggie , Walsh, Cheryl , Kuppermann, Nathan , Boatright, Dowin , Probst, Marc A. , Dunn, Patrick , Abella, Benjamin S. , Hess, Erik P. , Melnick, Edward R , Schoenfeld, Elizabeth M

Academic Emergency Medicine | July 26, 2016 | Volume: 23 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 1346-1353

10.1111/acem.13045 | PMID 27457137 Get It

AbstractDecision aids are evidenced‐based tools designed to increase patient understanding of medical options and possible outcomes, facilitate conversation between patients and clinicians, and improve patient engagement. Decision aids have been used for shared decision making (SDM) interventions outside of the ED setting for more than a decade. Their use in the ED has only recently begun to be studied. This article provides background on this topic and the conclusions of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference SDM in practice work group regarding “Shared Decision Making in the Emergency Department: Development of a Policy‐Relevant, Patient‐Centered Research Agenda.” The goal was to determine a prioritized research agenda for the development and testing of SDM interventions for use in emergency care that was most important to patients, clinicians, caregivers, and other key stakeholders. Using the nominal group technique, the consensus working group proposed prioritized research questions in six key domains: 1) content (i.e., clinical scenario or decision area), 2) level of evidence available, 3) tool design strategies, 4) risk communication, 5) stakeholders, and 6) outcomes.