cometadata/datacite-titles-descriptions-related-identifiers huggingface dataset:
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.27950139.v1
title: A systems perspective on gaps in the person-centered sick leave and rehabilitation process: a Swedish interview study

description: Consensus on priorities to optimize the sick leave and rehabilitation process (SRP) is lacking. To explore perspectives of stakeholders in the SRP on bridging the gap between desired process scope, and actual practice, from a multi-professional, multi-organizational, and interdisciplinary approach. Focus group interviews were conducted with various SRP frontline professionals in Region Västra Götaland, Sweden, using purposive sampling to capture a range of experiences. Participants discussed their perceptions of critical changes and priorities needed to meet patients’ SRP needs in a primary care context. All interviews were analyzed using systematic text condensation, as described by Malterud. General practitioners (<i>n</i> = 6), rehabilitation coordinators and licensed healthcare professionals from primary healthcare (<i>n</i> = 13), administrators from the Social Insurance Agency, the Employment Agency and Social Services (<i>n</i> = 12). Through data analysis, the following themes emerged: 1) The need for rules and regulations to enable coherent process governance 2) Challenges and opportunities in person-centered SRP: Professional collaboration, organizational priorities, and the need for enhanced leadership, and 3) Balancing resources and patient needs in the SRP: How to improve care quality and accessibility. In summary, participants mainly discussed how to improve process efficiency and quality of care while balancing available resources and a heavy workload. A main goal was to prevent negative spirals of suboptimal decision-making in individual cases, which could lead to increased work, unfortunate outcomes, and patient suffering. This qualitative study indicated that gaps between a desired process scope and actual practice might be bridged by enabling coherent cross-organizational process governance, prioritizing person-centered ways of working, and balancing available resources and workload. The above changes were believed to improve process quality and overall efficiency. The study project plan was pre-registered on September 21st, 2020, in the database FOU i VGR (researchweb.org), project number 274941.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.28252122
title: General practitioners’ clinical decision-making in patients that could have cancer: a vignette study comparing the Baltic states with four Nordic countries

description: Relative one-year cancer survival rates in the Baltic states are lower than the European mean; in the Nordic countries they are higher than the mean. This study investigated the likelihood of General Practitioners (GPs) investigating or referring patients with a low but significant risk of cancer in these two regions, and how this was affected by GP demographics. A survey of GPs using clinical vignettes. General Practice in Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, and Sweden. General Practitioners. A regional comparison of GPs’ stated immediate diagnostic actions (whether or not they would perform a key diagnostic test and/or refer to a specialist) for patients with a low but significant risk of cancer (between 1.2 and 3.6%). Of the 427 GPs that completed the questionnaire, those in the Baltic states, and GPs that were more experienced, were more likely to arrange a key diagnostic test and/or refer their patient to a specialist than those in Nordic Countries or who were less experienced (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001 for both measures). Neither GP sex nor practice location within a country showed a significant association with these measures. While relative one-year cancer survival rates are lower in the Baltic states than in four Nordic countries, we found no evidence that this is due to their GPs’ reluctance to take immediate diagnostic action, as GPs in the Baltic states were more likely to investigate and/or refer at the first consultation. Research on patient and secondary care factors is needed to explain the survival differences.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.28252122.v1
title: General practitioners’ clinical decision-making in patients that could have cancer: a vignette study comparing the Baltic states with four Nordic countries

description: Relative one-year cancer survival rates in the Baltic states are lower than the European mean; in the Nordic countries they are higher than the mean. This study investigated the likelihood of General Practitioners (GPs) investigating or referring patients with a low but significant risk of cancer in these two regions, and how this was affected by GP demographics. A survey of GPs using clinical vignettes. General Practice in Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, and Sweden. General Practitioners. A regional comparison of GPs’ stated immediate diagnostic actions (whether or not they would perform a key diagnostic test and/or refer to a specialist) for patients with a low but significant risk of cancer (between 1.2 and 3.6%). Of the 427 GPs that completed the questionnaire, those in the Baltic states, and GPs that were more experienced, were more likely to arrange a key diagnostic test and/or refer their patient to a specialist than those in Nordic Countries or who were less experienced (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001 for both measures). Neither GP sex nor practice location within a country showed a significant association with these measures. While relative one-year cancer survival rates are lower in the Baltic states than in four Nordic countries, we found no evidence that this is due to their GPs’ reluctance to take immediate diagnostic action, as GPs in the Baltic states were more likely to investigate and/or refer at the first consultation. Research on patient and secondary care factors is needed to explain the survival differences.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.27990412
title: General practitioners’ barriers to cross-sectoral collaboration on pregnant women with vulnerabilities: a cross-sectional survey in Danish general practice

description: Pregnancy vulnerability contributes to poor perinatal mental health. Proper cross-sectoral collaboration may mitigate perinatal mental health problems. General practitioners (GPs) often face barriers when assessing pregnancy vulnerability, but little is known about GPs’ perceived barriers to the cross-sectoral collaboration on vulnerable pregnant women. To explore GPs’ barriers to cross-sectoral collaboration on pregnant women with vulnerabilities, and how barriers are associated with the organization of antenatal care (ANC) and general practice characteristics. A cross-sectional questionnaire study among Danish GPs (<i>n</i> = 3465). Descriptive statistics according to the Theoretical Domains Framework describes the barriers to collaboration. Analytical statistics with ordered logistic regression models demonstrate associations between selected barriers (the main outcome measures) and organization of ANC, GP and practice, characteristics. A total of 760 GPs (22%) participated. Perceived GP barriers to collaboration were lacking knowledge of ANC levels relevant to vulnerable pregnant women, insufficient information on vulnerability indicators from collaborating parties, heavy workload and insufficient remuneration for collaborative meetings. Being young were associated with insufficient GP knowledge of ANC levels. Old age was associated with less likelihood of experiencing heavy workload as a barrier. Barriers to collaboration on vulnerable pregnant women were associated with some GP-organizational characteristics including low experience in collaborating with partners in ANC, and GP characteristics, such as age. Reducing general practice workload, e.g. by reorganizing priority areas, releasing more time to vulnerable patients, and improving cross-sectoral information sharing on vulnerability might improve collaboration on vulnerable pregnant women.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.27990412.v1
title: General practitioners’ barriers to cross-sectoral collaboration on pregnant women with vulnerabilities: a cross-sectional survey in Danish general practice

description: Pregnancy vulnerability contributes to poor perinatal mental health. Proper cross-sectoral collaboration may mitigate perinatal mental health problems. General practitioners (GPs) often face barriers when assessing pregnancy vulnerability, but little is known about GPs’ perceived barriers to the cross-sectoral collaboration on vulnerable pregnant women. To explore GPs’ barriers to cross-sectoral collaboration on pregnant women with vulnerabilities, and how barriers are associated with the organization of antenatal care (ANC) and general practice characteristics. A cross-sectional questionnaire study among Danish GPs (<i>n</i> = 3465). Descriptive statistics according to the Theoretical Domains Framework describes the barriers to collaboration. Analytical statistics with ordered logistic regression models demonstrate associations between selected barriers (the main outcome measures) and organization of ANC, GP and practice, characteristics. A total of 760 GPs (22%) participated. Perceived GP barriers to collaboration were lacking knowledge of ANC levels relevant to vulnerable pregnant women, insufficient information on vulnerability indicators from collaborating parties, heavy workload and insufficient remuneration for collaborative meetings. Being young were associated with insufficient GP knowledge of ANC levels. Old age was associated with less likelihood of experiencing heavy workload as a barrier. Barriers to collaboration on vulnerable pregnant women were associated with some GP-organizational characteristics including low experience in collaborating with partners in ANC, and GP characteristics, such as age. Reducing general practice workload, e.g. by reorganizing priority areas, releasing more time to vulnerable patients, and improving cross-sectoral information sharing on vulnerability might improve collaboration on vulnerable pregnant women.
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10791044
title: Data and code to accompany Jonah crab EDM manuscript

description: Data files and R script (manuscript.R) needed to reproduce the models and figures in the paper with the working title "A holistic approach to modeling the growing fishery for Jonah crab (Cancer borealis) in the Gulf of Maine" (Krasnow et al., 2024) in prep for ICES JMS.

Data included are:

Catch data (from Maine DMR ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey portal)— jonahCatch2024.csv

Sex ratio data (from Maine DMR ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey portal)— jonahLength2024.csv

Coastwide Jonah crab landings (from NOAA Fisheries FOSS portal)— noaa_landings.csv

Shapefiles for regions/strata used in the ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey— MaineDMR_-_Inshore_Trawl_Survey_Grid

Location and date of tows in the ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey— MEtows.csv
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10794652
title: Data and code to accompany Jonah crab EDM manuscript

description: Data files and R script (manuscript.R) needed to reproduce the models and figures in the paper with the working title "A holistic approach to modeling the growing fishery for Jonah crab (Cancer borealis) in the Gulf of Maine" (Krasnow et al., 2024) in prep for ICES JMS.

Data included are:

Catch data (from Maine DMR ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey portal)— jonahCatch2024.csv

Sex ratio data (from Maine DMR ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey portal)— jonahLength2024.csv

Coastwide Jonah crab landings (from NOAA Fisheries FOSS portal)— noaa_landings.csv

Shapefiles for regions/strata used in the ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey— MaineDMR_-_Inshore_Trawl_Survey_Grid

Location and date of tows in the ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey— MEtows.csv
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.15444698
title: Data and code for a holistic approach to modeling Jonah crab in the Gulf of Maine

description: Data files and R code needed to reproduce the models and figures in the manuscript "A holistic approach to modeling the growing fishery for Jonah crab (Cancer borealis) in the Gulf of Maine" (Krasnow et al., 2025) in revision for Fish and Fisheries.

Files included are:



01_requirements.txt - the R packages needed to reproduce the results provided in the paper

02_manuscript_2025.R - an R script that includes all analyses from the paper 

03_noaa_landings.csv - Coastwide Jonah crab landings (from NOAA Fisheries FOSS portal)

04_MEtows.csv - Location and date of tows in the ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey

05_jonah_catch2024.csv - Catch data (from Maine DMR ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey portal)

06_jonah_length2024.csv - Sex ratio data (from Maine DMR ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey portal)

07_MaineDMR_Inshore_Trawl_Survey_Grid.zip - Shapefiles for regions/strata used in the ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey, unzip before running the code

EDM_metadata - additional metadata following the Dublin Core schema
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.15446553
title: Data and code for a holistic approach to modeling Jonah crab in the Gulf of Maine

description: Data files and R code needed to reproduce the models and figures in the manuscript "A holistic approach to modeling the growing fishery for Jonah crab (Cancer borealis) in the Gulf of Maine" (Krasnow et al., 2025) in revision for Fish and Fisheries.

Files included are:



01_requirements.txt - the R packages needed to reproduce the results provided in the paper

02_manuscript_2025.R - an R script that includes all analyses from the paper 

03_noaa_landings.csv - Coastwide Jonah crab landings (from NOAA Fisheries FOSS portal)

04_MEtows.csv - Location and date of tows in the ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey

05_jonah_catch2024.csv - Catch data (from Maine DMR ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey portal)

06_jonah_length2024.csv - Sex ratio data (from Maine DMR ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey portal)

07_MaineDMR_Inshore_Trawl_Survey_Grid.zip - Shapefiles for regions/strata used in the ME-NH Inshore Trawl Survey, unzip before running the code

EDM_metadata - additional metadata following the Dublin Core schema
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.27684724
title: Exploring participants’ characteristics and self-assessed readiness to conduct clinical trials in general practice – baseline analysis of the RaPHaeL practice-based research network

description: Primary care is integral to healthcare systems extending beyond traditional illness management to include preventive care, chronic disease management, and health promotion. Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) have emerged as essential infrastructures for conducting clinical research in primary care. This study explores the establishment of the ‘Research-Practices Halle-Leipzig’ (RaPHaeL) PBRN in Germany, evaluating the characteristics and research readiness of participating practices. A cross-sectional survey (MORNING II) was conducted among all general practitioners (GPs) joining the RaPHaeL PBRN, assessing socio-demographic characteristics, practice infrastructure, and research readiness. After a descriptive analysis, we compared data with a previous study (MORNING) to examine potential differences between PBRN participants and non-participants. We developed a research readiness score (RRS) to quantify practices’ ability to perform clinical research subtasks. The response rate was 97.1% and our participants were often male, involved in undergraduate education, generally interested in research or had previous research experiences. However, they differed widely in age and size, staff structure, and patient demographics of their practices. Initially, around two-thirds of the practices were not sufficiently prepared to conduct clinical trials (self-assessed feasibility of relevant subtasks). If further research and documentation tasks are required, patient recruitment estimations are lower than for patient identification and information. This study highlights the variability in research readiness among GP practices and shows the need for targeted training. By systematically assessing and enhancing research capabilities of participating GPs, PBRNs can facilitate high-quality clinical research in primary care to improve patient outcomes and healthcare delivery.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.27684724.v1
title: Exploring participants’ characteristics and self-assessed readiness to conduct clinical trials in general practice – baseline analysis of the RaPHaeL practice-based research network

description: Primary care is integral to healthcare systems extending beyond traditional illness management to include preventive care, chronic disease management, and health promotion. Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) have emerged as essential infrastructures for conducting clinical research in primary care. This study explores the establishment of the ‘Research-Practices Halle-Leipzig’ (RaPHaeL) PBRN in Germany, evaluating the characteristics and research readiness of participating practices. A cross-sectional survey (MORNING II) was conducted among all general practitioners (GPs) joining the RaPHaeL PBRN, assessing socio-demographic characteristics, practice infrastructure, and research readiness. After a descriptive analysis, we compared data with a previous study (MORNING) to examine potential differences between PBRN participants and non-participants. We developed a research readiness score (RRS) to quantify practices’ ability to perform clinical research subtasks. The response rate was 97.1% and our participants were often male, involved in undergraduate education, generally interested in research or had previous research experiences. However, they differed widely in age and size, staff structure, and patient demographics of their practices. Initially, around two-thirds of the practices were not sufficiently prepared to conduct clinical trials (self-assessed feasibility of relevant subtasks). If further research and documentation tasks are required, patient recruitment estimations are lower than for patient identification and information. This study highlights the variability in research readiness among GP practices and shows the need for targeted training. By systematically assessing and enhancing research capabilities of participating GPs, PBRNs can facilitate high-quality clinical research in primary care to improve patient outcomes and healthcare delivery.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.28108243
title: Evaluating general practitioners’ focused lung ultrasound competence and findings in patients with suspected community-acquired pneumonia in general practice

description: To evaluate general practitioners’ (GPs’) ability to perform focused lung ultrasound (FLUS) following a training program and assess FLUS feasibility in general practice. Also, to describe FLUS findings and evaluate GPs’ ability to interpret these in adults with acute lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) when pneumonia is suspected and assess GPs’ perception of FLUS impact. Nine GPs, using point-of-care ultrasound, completed a FLUS training program. Adults (≥ 18 years) with acute cough (&lt; 28 days) and at least one other symptom of acute LRTI, where the GP suspected pneumonia, were subsequently included. All patients received FLUS. The GPs reported FLUS findings, feasibility, and perception of FLUS impact. Recorded FLUS videos from all patients were reviewed by two specialists (Specialist Reference). The specialists assessed FLUS image quality. Agreements between the GPs and the Specialist Reference on FLUS findings were used to evaluate GPs’ ability to interpret FLUS. Of 91 patients included, FLUS image quality was acceptable or higher in 84 patients (92.4%). FLUS proved feasible with only two scans not completed. The GPs reported FLUS pathological findings in 51.7% of patients in 78% agreement with the Specialist Reference and Cohen’s kappa 0.56. Focal B-lines represented the most frequent pathological findings. The GPs perceived that FLUS impacted change in tentative diagnosis and/or plans for treatment and/or visitation in 29 (32.0%) of patients. After the training, the GPs performed FLUS well. Interpretation of FLUS pathology presence was of moderate agreement. The GPs perceived that FLUS had impact on patient management. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04711031 This study found that GPs who were already point-of-care ultrasound users, performed FLUS well following a training program.The GPs interpreted presence of pathological findings in about half of patients (51.7%) presenting with symptoms of an acute LRTI, where the GP suspected pneumonia, this in in moderate agreement with FLUS specialists (Cohen’s kappa 0.56).The GPs perceived that FLUS impacted change in the tentative diagnosis and/or plans for treatment and/or visitation in 32% of patients. This study found that GPs who were already point-of-care ultrasound users, performed FLUS well following a training program. The GPs interpreted presence of pathological findings in about half of patients (51.7%) presenting with symptoms of an acute LRTI, where the GP suspected pneumonia, this in in moderate agreement with FLUS specialists (Cohen’s kappa 0.56). The GPs perceived that FLUS impacted change in the tentative diagnosis and/or plans for treatment and/or visitation in 32% of patients.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.28108243.v1
title: Evaluating general practitioners’ focused lung ultrasound competence and findings in patients with suspected community-acquired pneumonia in general practice

description: To evaluate general practitioners’ (GPs’) ability to perform focused lung ultrasound (FLUS) following a training program and assess FLUS feasibility in general practice. Also, to describe FLUS findings and evaluate GPs’ ability to interpret these in adults with acute lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) when pneumonia is suspected and assess GPs’ perception of FLUS impact. Nine GPs, using point-of-care ultrasound, completed a FLUS training program. Adults (≥ 18 years) with acute cough (&lt; 28 days) and at least one other symptom of acute LRTI, where the GP suspected pneumonia, were subsequently included. All patients received FLUS. The GPs reported FLUS findings, feasibility, and perception of FLUS impact. Recorded FLUS videos from all patients were reviewed by two specialists (Specialist Reference). The specialists assessed FLUS image quality. Agreements between the GPs and the Specialist Reference on FLUS findings were used to evaluate GPs’ ability to interpret FLUS. Of 91 patients included, FLUS image quality was acceptable or higher in 84 patients (92.4%). FLUS proved feasible with only two scans not completed. The GPs reported FLUS pathological findings in 51.7% of patients in 78% agreement with the Specialist Reference and Cohen’s kappa 0.56. Focal B-lines represented the most frequent pathological findings. The GPs perceived that FLUS impacted change in tentative diagnosis and/or plans for treatment and/or visitation in 29 (32.0%) of patients. After the training, the GPs performed FLUS well. Interpretation of FLUS pathology presence was of moderate agreement. The GPs perceived that FLUS had impact on patient management. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04711031 This study found that GPs who were already point-of-care ultrasound users, performed FLUS well following a training program.The GPs interpreted presence of pathological findings in about half of patients (51.7%) presenting with symptoms of an acute LRTI, where the GP suspected pneumonia, this in in moderate agreement with FLUS specialists (Cohen’s kappa 0.56).The GPs perceived that FLUS impacted change in the tentative diagnosis and/or plans for treatment and/or visitation in 32% of patients. This study found that GPs who were already point-of-care ultrasound users, performed FLUS well following a training program. The GPs interpreted presence of pathological findings in about half of patients (51.7%) presenting with symptoms of an acute LRTI, where the GP suspected pneumonia, this in in moderate agreement with FLUS specialists (Cohen’s kappa 0.56). The GPs perceived that FLUS impacted change in the tentative diagnosis and/or plans for treatment and/or visitation in 32% of patients.