Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Claudia Zeballos-Palacios is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Claudia Zeballos-Palacios.


PLOS ONE | 2014

The efficacy of resiliency training programs: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Aaron L. Leppin; Pavithra R. Bora; Jon C. Tilburt; Michael R. Gionfriddo; Claudia Zeballos-Palacios; Megan M. Dulohery; Amit Sood; Patricia J. Erwin; Juan P. Brito; Kasey R. Boehmer; Victor M. Montori

Importance Poor mental health places a burden on individuals and populations. Resilient persons are able to adapt to life’s challenges and maintain high quality of life and function. Finding effective strategies to bolster resilience in individuals and populations is of interest to many stakeholders. Objectives To synthesize the evidence for resiliency training programs in improving mental health and capacity in 1) diverse adult populations and 2) persons with chronic diseases. Data Sources Electronic databases, clinical trial registries, and bibliographies. We also contacted study authors and field experts. Study Selection Randomized trials assessing the efficacy of any program intended to enhance resilience in adults and published after 1990. No restrictions were made based on outcome measured or comparator used. Data Extraction and Synthesis Reviewers worked independently and in duplicate to extract study characteristics and data. These were confirmed with authors. We conducted a random effects meta-analysis on available data and tested for interaction in planned subgroups. Main Outcomes The standardized mean difference (SMD) effect of resiliency training programs on 1) resilience/hardiness, 2) quality of life/well-being, 3) self-efficacy/activation, 4) depression, 5) stress, and 6) anxiety. Results We found 25 small trials at moderate to high risk of bias. Interventions varied in format and theoretical approach. Random effects meta-analysis showed a moderate effect of generalized stress-directed programs on enhancing resilience [pooled SMD 0.37 (95% CI 0.18, 0.57) p = .0002; I2 = 41%] within 3 months of follow up. Improvement in other outcomes was favorable to the interventions and reached statistical significance after removing two studies at high risk of bias. Trauma-induced stress-directed programs significantly improved stress [−0.53 (−1.04, −0.03) p = .03; I2 = 73%] and depression [−0.51 (−0.92, −0.10) p = .04; I2 = 61%]. Conclusions We found evidence warranting low confidence that resiliency training programs have a small to moderate effect at improving resilience and other mental health outcomes. Further study is needed to better define the resilience construct and to design interventions specific to it. Registration Number PROSPERO #CRD42014007185


European Journal of Endocrinology | 2012

Body composition and quality of life in adults treated with GH therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ahmad Hazem; Mohamed B. Elamin; Irina Bancos; Germán Málaga; Gabriela Prutsky; Juan Pablo Domecq; Tarig Elraiyah; No Abu Elnour; Yolanda Prevost; Jaime P. Almandoz; Claudia Zeballos-Palacios; Er Velasquez; Patricia J. Erwin; Neena Natt; Victor M. Montori; Mohammad Hassan Murad

OBJECTIVE To summarise the evidence about the efficacy and safety of using GH in adults with GH deficiency focusing on quality of life and body composition. DATA SOURCES We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science and Scopus through April 2011. We also reviewed reference lists and contacted experts to identify candidate studies. STUDY SELECTION Reviewers, working independently and in duplicate, selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared GH to placebo. DATA SYNTHESIS We pooled the relative risk (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) by the random effects model and assessed heterogeneity using the I(2) statistic. RESULTS Fifty-four RCTs were included enrolling over 3400 patients. The quality of the included trials was fair. GH use was associated with statistically significant reduction in weight (WMD, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): -2.31 kg, -2.66 and -1.96) and body fat content (WMD, 95% CI: -2.56 kg, -2.97 and -2.16); increase in lean body mass (WMD, 95% CI: 1.38, 1.10 and 1.65), the risk of oedema (RR, 95% CI: 6.07, 4.34 and 8.48) and joint stiffness (RR, 95% CI: 4.17, 1.4 and 12.38); without significant changes in body mass index, bone mineral density or other adverse effects. Quality of life measures improved in 11 of the 16 trials although meta-analysis was not feasible. RESULTS GH therapy in adults with confirmed GH deficiency reduces weight and body fat, increases lean body mass and increases oedema and joint stiffness. Most trials demonstrated improvement in quality of life measures.


Clinical Endocrinology | 2015

Testing for germline mutations in sporadic pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma: a systematic review

Juan P. Brito; Noor Asi; Irina Bancos; Michael R. Gionfriddo; Claudia Zeballos-Palacios; Aaron L. Leppin; Chaitanya Undavalli; Zhen Wang; Juan Pablo Domecq; Gabriela Prustsky; Tarig Elraiyah; Larry J. Prokop; Victor M. Montori; Mohammad Hassan Murad

The presence of germline mutations in sporadic pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas (SPPs) may change the clinical management of both index patients and their family members. However, the frequency of germline mutations in SPPs is unknown.


Systematic Reviews | 2014

The efficacy of resilience training programs: a systematic review protocol

Aaron L. Leppin; Michael R. Gionfriddo; Amit Sood; Victor M. Montori; Patricia J. Erwin; Claudia Zeballos-Palacios; Pavithra R Bora; Megan M. Dulohery; Juan P. Brito; Kasey R. Boehmer; Jon C. Tilburt

BackgroundResilience has been defined as the ability of individuals to manage and adapt to stress and life challenges. Training programs that develop and/or enhance resilience may have efficacy in improving health, well-being, and quality of life. Because patients with chronic conditions must reliably self-manage their health, strategies to bolster resilience in this population may be of particular value. The objectives of this systematic review are to synthesize the evidence of resilience training program efficacy in improving outcomes related to quality of life, self-efficacy and activation, and resilience and coping ability in: 1) diverse adult populations; and 2) patients with chronic conditions.Methods/DesignWe will conduct a systematic review of randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of any program designed to enhance resilience in adults that measure any outcome against any comparator. We will search multiple electronic databases, trial registries, bibliographies, and will contact authors and experts to identify studies. We will use systematic review software to independently and in duplicate screen reports and extract data. We will extract characteristics of the study populations, interventions, comparators, outcomes, and quality/risk of bias. Primary, patient reported outcomes will be categorized into domains of quality of life, self-efficacy, and resilience. Secondary outcomes will be considered based on findings of the review. We will attempt meta-analysis by pooling standardized mean differences and minimally important differences (MIDs), when possible. Planned trial subgroup analyses are: 1) studies of patients with chronic conditions; 2) studies with placebo controls; 3) studies with similar intervention characteristics; and 4) studies with common lengths of follow-up.DiscussionThis study is intended to accumulate the evidence for resilience training programs in improving quality of life, resilience, and self-efficacy for care management, particularly among adult patients with chronic conditions. Its findings will be valuable to policy-makers, funding agencies, clinicians, and patients seeking innovative and effective ways to achieve patient-centered care.Trial registrationPROSPERO registration number: CRD42014007185.


Systematic Reviews | 2014

A systematic review of shared decision making interventions in chronic conditions: a review protocol

Michael R. Gionfriddo; Aaron L. Leppin; Juan P. Brito; Annie LeBlanc; Kasey R. Boehmer; Megan A. Morris; Patricia J. Erwin; Larry J. Prokop; Claudia Zeballos-Palacios; Germán Málaga; J. Jaime Miranda; Heidi M McLeod; René Rodríguez-Gutiérrez; Rongchong Huang; Oscar L. Morey-Vargas; Mohammad Hassan Murad; Victor M. Montori

BackgroundChronic conditions are a major source of morbidity, mortality and cost worldwide. Shared decision making is one way to improve care for patients with chronic conditions. Although it has been widely studied, the effect of shared decision making in the context of chronic conditions is unknown.Methods/DesignWe will perform a systematic review with the objective of determining the effectiveness of shared decision making interventions for persons diagnosed with chronic conditions. We will search the following databases for relevant articles: PubMed, Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid EBM Reviews CENTRAL, CINAHL, and Ovid PsycInfo. We will also search clinical trial registries and contact experts in the field to identify additional studies. We will include randomized controlled trials studying shared decision making interventions in patients with chronic conditions who are facing an actual decision. Shared decision making interventions will be defined as any intervention aiming to facilitate or improve patient and/or clinician engagement in a decision making process. We will describe all studies and assess their quality. After adjusting for missing data, we will analyze the effect of shared decision making interventions on outcomes in chronic conditions overall and stratified by condition. We will evaluate outcomes according to an importance ranking informed by a variety of stakeholders. We will perform several exploratory analyses including the effect of author contact on the estimates of effect.DiscussionWe anticipate that this systematic review may have some limitations such as heterogeneity and imprecision; however, the results will contribute to improving the quality of care for individuals with chronic conditions and facilitate a process that allows decision making that is most consistent with their own values and preferences.Trial registrationPROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42013005784


European Journal of Endocrinology | 2011

The accuracy of diagnostic tests for GH deficiency in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ahmad Hazem; Mohamed B. Elamin; Germán Málaga; Irina Bancos; Yolanda Prevost; Claudia Zeballos-Palacios; Edgar R Velasquez; Patricia J. Erwin; Neena Natt; Victor M. Montori; Mohammad Hassan Murad

CONTEXT The diagnostic accuracy of tests used to diagnose GH deficiency (GHD) in adults is unclear. OBJECTIVE We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that provided data on the available diagnostic tests. DATA SOURCES We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Sciences, and Scopus) through April 2011. STUDY SELECTION Review of reference lists and contact with experts identified additional candidate studies. Reviewers, working independently and in duplicate, determined study eligibility. DATA EXTRACTION reviewers, working independently and in duplicate, determined the methodological quality of studies and collected descriptive, quality, and outcome data. DATA SYNTHESIS Twenty-three studies provided diagnostic accuracy data; none provided patient outcome data. Studies had fair methodological quality, used several reference standards, and included over 1100 patients. Several tests based on direct or indirect stimulation of GH release were associated with good diagnostic accuracy, although most were assessed in one or two studies decreasing the strength of inference due to small sample size. Serum levels of GH or IGF1 had low diagnostic accuracy. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of the two most commonly used stimulation tests were found to be 95 and 89% for the insulin tolerance test and 73 and 81% for the GHRH+arginine test respectively. Meta-analytic estimates for accuracy were associated with substantial heterogeneity. CONCLUSION Several tests with reasonable diagnostic accuracy are available for the diagnosis of GHD in adults. The supporting evidence, however, is at high risk of bias (due to heterogeneity, methodological limitations, and imprecision).


Future Oncology | 2014

Papillary lesions of indolent course: reducing the overdiagnosis of indolent papillary thyroid cancer and unnecessary treatment

Juan P. Brito; Louise Davies; Claudia Zeballos-Palacios; John C. Morris; Victor M. Montori

1 ISSN 1479-6694 10.2217/FON.13.240


Circulation-cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes | 2016

PCI Choice Decision Aid for Stable Coronary Artery Disease: A Randomized Trial

Megan Coylewright; Sara Dick; Becky Zmolek; Jason Askelin; Edward Hawkins; Megan E. Branda; Jonathan Inselman; Claudia Zeballos-Palacios; Nilay D. Shah; Erik P. Hess; Annie LeBlanc; Victor M. Montori; Henry H Ting

Background— Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for stable coronary artery disease does not reduce the risk of death and myocardial infarction compared with optimal medical therapy (OMT), but many patients think otherwise. PCI Choice, a decision aid (DA), was designed for use during the clinical visit and includes information on quality of life and mortality outcomes for PCI with OMT versus OMT alone for stable coronary artery disease. Methods and Result— We conducted a randomized trial to assess the impact of the PCI Choice DA compared with usual care when there is a choice between PCI and optimal medical therapy. Primary outcomes were patient knowledge and decisional conflict, and the secondary outcome was an objective measure of shared decision making. A total of 124 patients were eligible for final analysis. Knowledge was higher among patients receiving the DA compared with usual care (60% DA; 40% usual care; P =0.034), and patients felt more informed ( P =0.043). Other measures of decisional quality were not improved, and engagement of the patient by the clinician in shared decision making did not change with use of the DA. There was evidence that clinicians used the DA as an educational tool. Conclusion— The PCI choice DA improved patient knowledge but did not significantly impact decisional quality. Further work is needed to effectively address clinician knowledge gaps in shared decision-making skills, even in the context of carefully designed DAs. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: . Unique identifier: [NCT01771536][1]. [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT01771536&atom=%2Fcirccvoq%2Fearly%2F2016%2F11%2F01%2FCIRCOUTCOMES.116.002641.atomBackground—Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for stable coronary artery disease does not reduce the risk of death and myocardial infarction compared with optimal medical therapy (OMT), but many patients think otherwise. PCI Choice, a decision aid (DA), was designed for use during the clinical visit and includes information on quality of life and mortality outcomes for PCI with OMT versus OMT alone for stable coronary artery disease. Methods and Results—We conducted a randomized trial to assess the impact of the PCI Choice DA compared with usual care when there is a choice between PCI and optimal medical therapy. Primary outcomes were patient knowledge and decisional conflict, and the secondary outcome was an objective measure of shared decision making. A total of 124 patients were eligible for final analysis. Knowledge was higher among patients receiving the DA compared with usual care (60% DA; 40% usual care; P=0.034), and patients felt more informed (P=0.043). Other measures of decisional quality were not improved, and engagement of the patient by the clinician in shared decision making did not change with use of the DA. There was evidence that clinicians used the DA as an educational tool. Conclusions—The PCI Choice DA improved patient knowledge but did not significantly impact decisional quality. Further work is needed to effectively address clinician knowledge gaps in shared decision-making skills, even in the context of carefully designed DAs. Clinical Trial Registration—URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT01771536.


Medical Decision Making | 2015

Shared Decision Making in Senior Medical Students Results from a National Survey

Claudia Zeballos-Palacios; Renato Quispe; Nicole Mongilardi; Carlos Diaz-Arocutipa; Carlos Mendez-Davalos; Natalia Lizarraga; Aldo Paz; Victor M. Montori; Germán Málaga

Purpose. To explore perceptions and experiences of Peruvian medical students about observed, preferred, and feasible decision-making approaches. Methods. We surveyed senior medical students from 19 teaching hospitals in 4 major cities in Peru. The self-administered questionnaire collected demographic information, current approach, exposure to role models for and training in shared decision making, and perceptions of the pertinence and feasibility of the different decision-making approaches in general as well as in challenging scenarios. Results. A total of 327 senior medical students (51% female) were included. The mean age was 25 years. Among all respondents, 2% reported receiving both theoretical and practical training in shared decision making. While 46% of students identified their current decision-making approach as clinician-as-perfect-agent, 50% of students identified their teachers with the paternalistic approach. Remarkably, 53% of students thought shared decision making should be the preferred approach and 50% considered it feasible in Peru. Among the 10 challenging scenarios, shared decision making reached a plurality (40%) in only one scenario (terminally ill patients). Conclusion. Despite limited exposure and training, Peruvian medical students aspire to practice shared decision making but their current attitude reflects the less participatory approaches they see role modeled by their teachers.


Trials | 2017

Shared decision making for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Marleen Kunneman; Megan E. Branda; Peter A. Noseworthy; Mark Linzer; Bruce Burnett; Sara Dick; Gabriela Spencer-Bonilla; Cara Fernandez; Haeshik Gorr; Mike Wambua; Shelly Keune; Claudia Zeballos-Palacios; Ian Hargraves; Nilay D. Shah; Victor M. Montori

BackgroundNonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common ongoing health problem that places patients at risk of stroke. Whether and how a patient addresses this risk depends on each patient’s goals, context, and values. Consequently, leading cardiovascular societies recommend using shared decision making (SDM) to individualize antithrombotic treatment in patients with AF. The aim of this study is to assess the extent to which the Anticoagulation Choice conversation tool promotes high-quality SDM and influences anticoagulation uptake and adherence in patients with AF at risk of strokes.MethodsThis study protocol describes a multicenter, encounter-level, randomized trial to assess the effect of using the Anticoagulation Choice conversation tool in the clinical encounter, compared to usual care. The participating centers include an academic hospital system, a suburban community group practice, and an urban safety net hospital, all in Minnesota, USA. Patients with ongoing nonvalvular AF at risk of strokes (CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 1 in men, or ≥ 2 in women) will be eligible for participation. We aim to include 999 patients and their clinicians. The primary outcome is the quality of SDM as perceived by participants, and as assessed by a post-encounter survey that ascertains (a) knowledge transfer, (b) concordance of the decision made, (c) quality of communication, and (d) satisfaction with the decision-making process. Recordings of encounters will be reviewed to assess the extent of patient involvement and how participants use the tool (fidelity). Anticoagulant use, choice of agent, and adherence will be drawn from patients’ medical and pharmacy records. Strokes and bleeding events will be drawn from patient records.DiscussionThis study will provide a valid and precise measure of the effect of the Anticoagulation Choice conversation tool on SDM quality and processes, and on the treatment choices and adherence to therapy among AF patients at risk of stroke.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02905032. Registered on 9 September 2016.

Collaboration


Dive into the Claudia Zeballos-Palacios's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Germán Málaga

Cayetano Heredia University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge