ORCID Profile
0000-0003-1962-8212
Current Organisations
University of Western Australia
,
Fiona Stanley Hospital
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Date: 23-02-2023
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 20-03-2023
DOI: 10.1002/LIO2.1044
Abstract: Despite a recent drive to increase ersity, the global academic workforce is skewed in favor of authors from high‐income countries, and women are under‐represented in the published medical literature. To explore the trends in authorship of three high‐impact otolaryngology journals over a ten‐year period (2011–2020). Journals selected: JAMA Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery , The Laryngoscope and Rhinology. Articles were reviewed from four issues per journal per year, and data was collected on: time of publication subspeciality number of authors sex of first and last authors country of practice of first author and country where each study was conducted. Trends were examined though univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. 2998 articles were included. 93.9% of first authors and 94.2% of studies were from high‐income countries. Women were first authors in 31.5% ( n = 912) and senior authors in 18.4% ( n = 524) of articles. Female first authorship significantly increased between 2011 and 2020 however female senior authorship remained the same. There have been no significant changes in the proportion of published articles from low‐and middle‐income countries (LMIC) over time ( p = .65). Amongst the LMIC articles, 72% came from Brazil, Turkey or China and there were no published papers from countries with a low‐income economy (gross national income per capita of $1085 or less). Although female first authorship has increased in the last decade, there has been minimal other demographic change in authorship over this time. High‐impact otolaryngology journals poorly represent academia in low‐and‐middle income countries. There is a need for increased advocacy promoting gender and geographical research equity in academic medicine. III.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 09-04-2022
DOI: 10.1007/S11060-022-03991-Z
Abstract: This study aimed to: determine the supportive care available for Australian patients with High Grade Glioma (HGG) and their carers identify service gaps and inform changes needed to implement guidelines and Optimal Care Pathways. This cross-sectional online survey recruited multidisciplinary health professionals (HPs) who were members of the Cooperative Trials Group for Neuro-Oncology involved in management of patients diagnosed with HGG in Australian hospitals. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Fisher's exact test was used to explore differences between groups. 42 complete responses were received. A majority of MDT meetings were attended by a: neurosurgeon, radiation oncologist, medical oncologist, radiologist, and care coordinator. Less than 10% reported attendance by a palliative care nurse physiotherapist neuropsychologist or speech therapist. Most could access referral pathways to a cancer care coordinator (76%), neuropsychologist (78%), radiation oncology nurse (77%), or psycho-oncologist (73%), palliative care (93–100%) and mental health professionals (60–85%). However, few routinely referred to an exercise physiologist (10%), rehabilitation physician (22%), dietitian (22%) or speech therapist (28%). Similarly, routine referrals to specialist mental health services were not standard practice. Nearly all HPs (94%) reported HGG patients were advised to present to their GP for pre-existing conditions/comorbidities however, most HPs took responsibility (≤ 36% referred to GP) for social issues, mental health, symptoms, cancer complications, and treatment side-effects. While certain services are accessible to HGG patients nationally, improvements are needed. Psychosocial support, specialist allied health, and primary care providers are not yet routinely integrated into the care of HGG patients and their carers despite these services being considered essential in clinical practice guidelines and optimal care pathways.
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 11-2022
DOI: 10.1136/BMJOPEN-2022-063577
Abstract: Postoperative pain is common and frequently addressed through opioid analgesia. This practice must balance the benefits of achieving adequate pain relief against the harms of adverse effects such as opioid-induced ventilatory impairment and opioid use disorder. This student and trainee-led collaborative study aims to investigate and compare the prescription versus consumption of opioids at 7 days postdischarge after common surgical procedures and their impact on patient-reported outcomes regarding postoperative pain. This is a prospective multicentre observational cohort study of surgical patients in Australia, Aotearoa New Zealand and select international sites, conducted by networks of students, trainees and consultants. Consecutive adult patients undergoing common elective and emergency general, orthopaedic, gynaecological and urological surgical procedures are eligible for inclusion, with follow-up 7 days after hospital discharge. The primary outcome will be the proportion of prescribed opioids consumed by patients at 7 days postdischarge. Secondary outcomes will include patient-reported quality of life and satisfaction scores, rate of non-opioid analgesic use, rate of continuing use of opioids at follow-up, rates of opioid prescription from other sources and hospital readmissions at 7 days postdischarge for opioid related side-effects or surgery-related pain. Descriptive and multivariate analyses will be conducted to investigate factors associated with opioid requirements and prescription-consumption discrepancies. OPERAS has been approved in Australia by the Hunter New England Human Research Ethics Committee (Protocol 2021/ETH11508) and by the Southern Health and Disability Ethics Committee (2021 EXP 11199) in Aotearoa New Zealand. Results will be submitted for conference presentation and peer-reviewed publication. Centre-level data will be distributed to participating sites for internal audit. ANZCTR (ID: ACTRN12621001451897p)
Publisher: American Medical Association (AMA)
Date: 10-2023
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 07-2022
DOI: 10.1111/ANS.17902
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 06-07-2023
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 10-2021
DOI: 10.1136/BMJGH-2021-006672
Abstract: Global surgery has recently gained prominence as an academic discipline within global health. Authorship inequity has been a consistent feature of global health publications, with over-representation of authors from high-income countries (HICs), and disenfranchisement of researchers from low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). In this study, we investigated authorship demographics within recently published global surgery literature. We performed a systematic analysis of author characteristics, including gender, seniority and institutional affiliation, for global surgery studies published between 2016 and 2020 and indexed in the PubMed database. We compared the distribution of author gender and seniority across studies related to different topics between authors affiliated with HICs and LMICs and across studies with different authorship networks. 1240 articles were included for analysis. Most authors were male (60%), affiliated only with HICs (51%) and of high seniority (55% were fully qualified specialist or generalist clinicians, Principal Investigators, or in senior leadership or management roles). The proportion of male authors increased with increasing seniority for last and middle authors. Studies related to Obstetrics and Gynaecology had similar numbers of male and female authors, whereas there were more male authors in studies related to surgery (69% male) and Anaesthesia and Critical care (65% male). Compared with HIC authors, LMIC authors had a lower proportion of female authors at every seniority grade. This gender gap among LMIC middle authors was reduced in studies where all authors were affiliated only with LMICs. Authorship disparities are evident within global surgery academia. Remedial actions to address the lack of authorship opportunities for LMIC authors and female authors are required.
No related grants have been discovered for Davina Daudu.