|This project's final research report is expected to be available by July 2019.|
Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot have conflicts of interest with the study.
The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments.
Peer reviewers commented, and the researchers made changes or provided responses. Those comments and responses included the following:
- The reviewers asked for clarification about the researchers’ use of the term, Asian populations, because it lacked specificity. The researchers responded that this was a common criticism of intervention studies, which sometimes included a so-called Asian subgroup without taking into account the cultural, geographical, and linguistic differences within this designation. The researchers stated that their intervention was applicable to the 66 percent of Asian Americans who were fluent in English, as well as the 12 percent who were not English proficient but were fluent in Chinese or Vietnamese. The researchers expanded their description of patient eligibility, results, and limitations to address the intervention’s applicability to Asian American populations.
- The reviewers expressed concern that the lack of an upper age limit meant patients in their 80s and 90s received inappropriate screening for hepatitis and that inclusion of these patients could bias the sample. The researchers explained that they lacked an upper age limit based on stakeholder recommendations. The researchers also noted that the app they developed was more user-friendly because of the wider user base they needed to accommodate.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures
View the COI disclosure form.
Creating Tools Patients Will Use (right)
Project leader Tung Nguyen, MD talks about feedback his team has received from Asian Americans about an iPad tool to encourage screening for hepatitis B and C.
Using Mobile Technology to Increase Screening for Hepatitis B and C among Asian Americans
A narrative on this study, which notes that Americans of Asian ancestry have an increased risk of hepatitis B and, in some cases, hepatitis C, but many have not been screened for these illnesses. Therefore, researchers are testing an interactive app to see whether it encourages more people to be screened.