BackgroundThe estimand for a clinical trial is a precise definition of the treatment effect to be estimated. Traditionally, estimates of treatment effects are based on either an ITT analysis or a per-protocol analysis. However, there are important clinical questions which are not addressed by either of these analyses. For example, consider a trial where patients take a rescue medication. The ITT analysis includes data after use of rescue, while the per-protocol analysis excludes these patients altogether. Neither of these analyses addresses the important question of what the treatment effect would have been if patients did not take rescue medication.Main textTrial estimands provide a broader perspective compared to the limitations of ITT and per-protocol analysis. Trial treatment effects depend on how events occurring after treatment initiation such as use of alternative medication or discontinuation of the intervention are included in the definition. These events can be accounted for in different ways, depending on the clinical question of interest.ConclusionThe estimand framework is an important step forward in improving the clarity and transparency of clinical trials. The centrality of estimands to clinical trials is currently not reflected in methods recommended by the Cochrane group or the CONSORT statement, the current standard for reporting clinical trials in medical journals. We encourage revisions to these guidelines.

ABSTRACT At the heart of this paper is an examination of the colloquial concept of a ‘shadow ban’. It reveals ways in which algorithms on the Facebook platform have the effect of suppressing content distribution without specifically targeting it for removal, and examines the consequential stifling of users’ speech. It reveals how the Facebook shadow ban is implemented by blocking dissemination of content in News Feed. The decision-making criteria are based on ‘behaviour’, a term that relates to activity of the page that is identifiable through patterns in the data. It’s a technique that is rooted in computer security, and raises questions about the balance between security and freedom of expression. The paper is situated in the field of responsibility of online platforms for content moderation. It studies the experience of the shadow ban on 20 UK-based Facebook Pages over the period from November 2019 to January 2021. The potential harm was evaluated using human rights standards and a comparative metric produced from Facebook Insights data. The empirical research is connected to recent legislative developments: the EU’s Digital Services Act and the UK’s Online Safety Bill. Its most salient contribution may be around ‘behaviour’ monitoring and its interpretation by legislators.

An ADC with a sampling rate of tens of GS/s and a high input bandwidth can greatly ease the design of wireless network systems. Such ADCs help in simplifying the analog front end design by relaxing the requirements for anti-alias and anti-image filtering. Having a bandwidth of up to 7.2GHz facilitates direct sampling on the 5G full FR1 band including LTE-U and WiFi 6/7 networks. However, the available state-of-the-art high-speed ADCs operating at 20GS/s or higher are designed mostly for wireline communications [5] and are not suitable for wireless base station applications where a high spectral dynamic range with an NSD of -147dBFS/Hz and an SFDR of 70dB are required to support 1024-QAM and higher modulations. The other high-resolution ADCs available in the range from 5-20GS/s [1–4] have higher power consumption, larger area and insufficient SFDR to be reliably used in the previously mentioned applications. The reported ADC achieves 24GS/s sampling rate with an input bandwidth of 7.2GHz as well as 76dB SFDR and -147.5dBFS/Hz NSD with high power efficiency and small area.

BackgroundInvolving patients and members of the public in healthcare planning is beneficial for many reasons including that the outcomes focus on topics relevant to service users. The National Early Inflammatory Arthritis Audit (NEIAA) aims to improve care quality for patients with inflammatory arthritis.Case studyThis paper presents a case study detailing how the NEIAA Patient Panel worked with NEIAA governance groups, the National Rheumatoid Arthritis Society and the National Axial Spondyloarthritis Society to co-create an outpatient clinic visit framework for rheumatology professionals. A framework was co-created, divided into nine sections: pre-appointment preparation, waiting area (face-to-face appointments), face-to-face consultations, physical examination, establishing a forward plan, post consultation, annual holistic reviews, virtual appointments and key considerations. Providing insight into how the multi-disciplinary team can meet the diverse needs of patients with inflammatory arthritis, this framework now informs the teaching content about people who live with physical and mental disability for Year 3 and 4 undergraduate medical students at King’s College London.ConclusionPatients play an important role in helping to address gaps in health service provision in England/Wales. The co-production of a clinic visit framework, informed by their own lived experience and their own expectations can lead to improved and relevant outcomes for the benefit of patients and raises awareness to medical students what matters to patients with physical disabilities when attending outpatient care.

BackgroundWork is an important outcome for people with inflammatory arthritis (IA including PsA, RA, AxSpA) and osteoarthritis (OA). It is known that people with IA and OA are at increased risk of sick leave and have to stop working early due to ill health. In addition to being at increased risk of becoming work disabled and increased absenteeism, high levels of presenteeism (i.e. reduced productivity/limited ability to work due to ill health whilst at work) have also been reported. Several instruments exist to measure presenteeism, including single-item global measures and multi-item instruments. In some studies using single-item global instruments may be more feasible. However, available global instruments differ in concept, recall period and reference. It is important to understand which of the measures have good psychometric properties before using them in clinical studies.ObjectivesTo assess the psychometric properties of four global presenteeism instruments.MethodsPatients with IA or OA were recruited via rheumatology outpatient clinics to a large international, longitudinal observational study including 8 European countries and Canada. Participants completed a survey at baseline, 1, 2, 3, 4 wks, 2 months and 3 months. The four global measures of presenteeism included: Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI), Work Productivity Scale–Rheumatoid Arthritis (WPS-RA), Work Ability Index (WAI) and the Quality*Quantity questionnaire (QQtotal/10) scale. To facilitate score interpretation the WAI and QQtotal were reversed. Pain was measured using an 11-point Likert scale. Spearman correlations were calculated between the presenteeism measures and the Workplace Activity Limitations Scale (WALS), a validated multi-item measure of presenteeism, and HAQ to evaluate construct validity (validity: r <0.50=low; r >0.50-<0.70=moderate; r >0.70=high). Test-retest reliability of the 4 presenteeism scales (baseline-1wk) was measured applying ICC in patients with stable disease (i.e. same pain score at baseline and 1wk) (reliability: ICC<0.40=poor; ICC 0.40-0.75=fair to good; ICC >0.75=excellent). Responsiveness during 3 months was measured comparing patients with improvement in pain score (>1 point improvement in pain score (~MCID pain)) with patients with no change or worsening in pain score. The two groups were compared applying Mann Whitney U test.ResultsThis international study included 550 patients with a mean age of 47.8 (SD 9.9) yrs and 61.4% were female. Mean (SD) disease duration since diagnosis was 10.8 (10.4) yrs and 91.2% had IA. Mean (SD) presenteeism scores at baseline were: WPAI=2.9 (2.7); WPS-RA=3.4 (2.7); WAI=2.7 (2.4); and QQtotal=3.1 (3.2). The correlations between the global measures and with WALS and HAQ were moderate to good, except for QQtotal and HAQ which was low (Table 1). In patients with the same stable pain scores at baseline-1wk (n=141) ICC scores were good to excellent, respectively: WPAI (0.771), WPS-RA (0.752), WAI (0.663), and QQtotal (0.650). An improvement in pain during the 3 month study duration was observed in 145/381 (38%) of the patients. In these patients a significant reduction in mean (SD) change presenteeism was observed for all four presenteeism scales compared to those with no change or worsening of the pain score: WPAI (-1.0 (2.37) vs 0.68 (2.40), p<0.01); WPS-RA (-0.76 (2.57) vs 0.43 (2.10), p<0.001); WAI (-0.09 (2.34) vs 0.41 (2.46), p<0.001); QQtotal (-0.57 (3.16) vs 0.79 (3.1), p<0.01).Table 1.WPAIWPS-RAWAIQQtotalWALSHAQWPAI-0.81640.59920.51840.62690.5592WPS-RA-0.58360.52170.60550.5669WAI-0.58660.52310.5168QQtotal-0.50250.4367ConclusionThe psychometric properties of all 4 global presenteeism scales were moderate to good, with slightly better scores for both the WPS-RA and WPAI instruments both measuring the impact of OA and IA on productivity.Disclosure of InterestsSuzanne Verstappen Consultant of: EUOSHA, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS. EULAR, Annelies Boonen Speakers bureau: Abbvie / Galapagos, Consultant of: Galapagos, Sarah Wilkinson: None declared, Dorcas Beaton: None declared, Ailsa Bosworth: None declared, José Canas da Silva: None declared, Gloria Crepaldi: None declared, Sabrina Dadoun: None declared, Cathie Hofstetter: None declared, Carina Mihai Speakers bureau: Boehringer-Ingelheim, Mepha, MED Talks Switzerland, Consultant of: Boehringer-Ingelheim, Janssen, Grant/research support from: Roche, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Sofia Ramiro Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Sanofi, Grant/research support from: Grant: AbbVie, Galapagos, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Garifallia Sakellariou Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS and Galapagos., Grant/research support from: Abbvie, BMS and Galapagos., Sandra Meisalu: None declared, Johan K Wallman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer., Diane Lacaille: None declared

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify the variables that influence corporate real estate (CRE) decision-making and gauge their relative importance to each other, thereby understanding the consequent challenges/implications for CRE managers (CREM’s). Design/methodology/approach Interviews were undertaken with experienced CREM’s using the causal network elicitation technique to create decision networks for the variables they considered for the specifically defined scenario: dealing with surplus property from a change of business strategy. These networks illustrate the complexity of the mental representations required for the realignment of the CRE portfolio. The key variables are more extensive than alignment theory suggests, namely, financial stakeholders. Additional variables identified include risk, lease accounting, costs, financial analysis, business metrics and motivational drivers. The latter indicates the importance of self-esteem and peer recognition for CREM’s and financial benefits for the C-suite. Accordingly strategy alignment needs to incorporate CRE both in terms of strategy creation and implementation. Findings These networks illustrate the complexity of the mental representations required for the realignment of the CRE portfolio. The key variables are more extensive than alignment theory suggests, namely, financial stakeholders. Additional variables identified include risk, lease accounting, costs, financial analysis, business metrics and motivational drivers. The latter indicates the importance of self-esteem and peer recognition for CREM’s and financial benefits for the C-suite. Accordingly, strategy alignment needs to incorporate CRE both in terms of strategy creation and implementation. Originality/value This research appears to be the first that looks in detail at the mental representations used by decision-makers while making CRE decisions.

COVID-19 is one of several pandemics to have happened within the past century – it is still unclear at this point in time, the direction, scale and magnitude this pandemic may continue on. Vaccines are likely to play a major role in shaping the response over the coming years. This poster will analyse scenarios of how the COVID-19 virus could progress and how the manufacturing of vaccines will shape it.

Background:Many people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have comorbidities. However, there is limited research on the impact of multimorbidity on absenteeism (e.g. sick leave) and presenteeism (i.e. reduced productivity while at work due to ill health) in people with RA.Objectives:i) to explore the impact of comorbidities on absenteeism and presenteeism in patients with RA and ii) to evaluate the association between multimorbidity and employment status.Methods:A cross-sectional survey was conducted by the National Rheumatoid Arthritis Society (NRAS), UK, collecting information on: demographics, education, employment status (i.e. employed (Empl), stopped/retired early because of RA (Stop_RA), stopped/retired early because of other health issues (Stop_Health)), and disease related variables (e.g. symptom duration, rheumatoid arthritis impact of disease (RAID) questionnaire). Participants were asked to report whether they had or were treated for any of 15 predefined comorbidities (categorised into 0, 1, 2, 3, or ≥4 (Table)). Percentage of number of hours missed due RA (i.e. absenteeism) and presenteeism (10-point Likert scale) were assessed using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI-RA). For the purpose of this study both absenteeism and presenteeism outcomes were dichotomized (no presenteeism/absenteeism versus any) and only patients aged <65yrs were included. Logistic regression analysis were applied to assess the association between number of comorbidities and absenteeism/presenteeism, adjusting for the categorical variables age, gender and education. Chi2-square test was applied to assess frequencies of individual comorbidities between the three employment status groups.Results:868 participants were included; 91.7% women with a median symptom duration of 8.3 years [IQR 4.4-13.7]. The average RAID score was 5.2 (SD 2.2). 80.4% were in paid employment, including those currently on sick leave, 16.9% stopped early because of their RA and 2.7% reported stopping early because of other health reasons. In those employed most commonly occurring comorbidities were: back pain (28.8%%), osteoarthritis (21.5%), depression (26.3%) and anxiety (22.6%). Compared to people with RA with no comorbidities, the odds associated with time off work due to RA increased from 1.7 up to 3.4 with increasing number of comorbidities (Table). Although a similar trend was observed for presenteeism, the effect sizes were smaller. Significant differences (p<0.05) in frequencies of the following comorbidities were observed between the three employment status groups (Empl, Stop_RA, Stop_Health, respectively): heart disease (3.9%, 7.9%, 20.0%), blood pressure (18.0%, 29.5%, 36.7%), lung disease (5.7%, 16.3%, 26.7%), diabetes (4.4%, 4.2%, 26.7%), ulcer (6.1%, 11.1%, 13.3%), cancer (3.3%, 2.6%, 13.3%), depression (26.3%, 33.6%, 50.0%), OA (21.5%, 44.7%, 63.33%), and back pain (28.8%, 48.4%, 60.0%).Absenteeism (yes/no)Presenteeism (yes/no)Number of comorbiditiesNOR95%CIOR95%CI0206Ref.Ref.11741.701.06-2.711.661.00-2.7321361.771.08-2.921.991.13-2.863851.751.00-3.081.530.82-2.864-15max863.381.98-5.782.641.28-5.44OR=odds ratio; 95%CI=95% confidence interval; Comorbidities included: heart disease, blood pressure, lung disease, diabetes, ulcer or stomach disease, kidney disease, liver disease, anaemia or other blood disease, cancer, depression, anxiety, OA, back pain, osteoporosis and Sjögren. Bold figuresP<0.05.Conclusion:Although the study is cross-sectional and no temporal association can be determined, this study shows that not only personal and work related contextual factors should be considered when preventing worker productivity loss, but also other comorbidities.Disclosure of Interests:A. Bradshaw: None declared, Ailsa Bosworth Speakers bureau: a number of pharmaceutical companies for reasons of inhouse training, advisory boards etc., K. Walker-Bone: None declared, Laura Lunt: None declared, Suzanne Verstappen Grant/research support from: BMS, Consultant of: Celltrion, Speakers bureau: Pfizer