ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2012
Key outcomes from stakeholder workshops at a symposium to inform the development of an Australian national plan for rare diseases.
Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of approaches for engaging patients for research on rare diseases.Journal of general internal medicine · 2014Pooled it
- Main Recommendations for Developing Education and Awareness Strategies for Rare Diseases: Scoping Review.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Impact of data sources and ascertainment methods on reporting paediatric genetic condition prevalence: A scoping review.Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia · 2026Article
- Using Normalisation Process Theory to explore the contribution of stakeholder workshops to the development and refinement of a complex behavioural intervention: the STAMINA lifestyle intervention.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- The case for open science: rare diseases.JAMIA open · 2020Review
- Multi-Method Patient-Engagement Approach: A Case Example from a PCORI-Funded Training Project.The patient · 2019Article
- Design of a framework for the deployment of collaborative independent rare disease-centric registries: Gaucher disease registry model.Blood cells, molecules & diseases · 2018Article
- Exploring patient and family involvement in the lifecycle of an orphan drug: a scoping review.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2017Article
- 3-Dimensional Facial Analysis-Facing Precision Public Health.Frontiers in public health · 2017Article
- The supportive care needs of parents with a child with a rare disease: results of an online survey.BMC family practice · 2016Article
- Directions for new developments on statistical design and analysis of small population group trials.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2016Article
- Survey of healthcare experiences of Australian adults living with rare diseases.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2016Article
- Can the EVIDEM Framework Tackle Issues Raised by Evaluating Treatments for Rare Diseases: Analysis of Issues and Policies, and Context-Specific Adaptation.PharmacoEconomics · 2016Article
- The involvement of patient organisations in rare disease research: a mixed methods study in Australia.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2016Article
- Advancing Pain Education in Canadian Physiotherapy Programmes: Results of a Consensus-Generating Workshop.Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie CanadaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCalls have been made for governments to adopt a cohesive approach to rare diseases through the development of national plans. At present, Australia does not have a national plan for rare diseases. To progress such a plan an inaugural Australian Rare Diseases Symposium was held in Western Australia in April 2011. This paper describes the key issues identified by symposium attendees for the development of a national plan, compares these to the content of EUROPLAN and national plans elsewhere and discusses how the outcomes might be integrated for national planning.
methodsThe symposium was comprised of a series of plenary sessions followed by workshops. The topics covered were; 1) Development of national plans for rare diseases; 2) Patient empowerment; 3) Patient care, support and management; 4) Research and translation; 5) Networks, partnerships and collaboration. All stakeholders within the rare diseases community were invited to participate, including: people affected by rare diseases such as patients, carers, and families; clinicians and allied health practitioners; social and disability services; researchers; patient support groups; industry (e.g. pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical device companies); regulators and policy-makers.
resultsAll of these stakeholder groups were represented at the symposium. Workshop participants indicated the need for a national plan, a national peak body, a standard definition of 'rare diseases', education campaigns, lobbying of government, research infrastructure, streamlined whole-of-lifetime service provision, case co-ordination, early diagnosis, support for health professionals and dedicated funding.
conclusionsThese findings are consistent with frameworks and initiatives being undertaken internationally (such as EUROPLAN), and with national plans in other countries. This implies that the development of an Australian national plan could plausibly draw on frameworks for plan development that have been proposed for use in other jurisdictions. The translation of the symposium outcomes to government policy (i.e. a national plan) requires the consideration of several factors such as the under-representation of some stakeholder groups (e.g. clinicians) and the current lack of evidence required to translate some of the symposium outcomes to policy options. The acquisition of evidence provides a necessary first step in a comprehensive planning approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.