Tactics in Support of the Strategy to Include Artistic Research as Evidence in Systematic Reviews

Artistic research studies produce a felt and often physically embodied type of knowledge initiated in an artistic experience and consolidated as an art form. The actual art work as the outcome of these studies, complements other types of knowledge and therefore requires attention from systematic review authors who synthesize evidence from primary studies. Working with artistic research evidence in a systematic review context requires a different approach to searching, appraising, analysing and integrating research findings than what is usually promoted by international review organisations. In this paper we outline how the different steps in a systematic review process can be adapted to include art work as as a multimodal type of research evidence in systematic reviews. We discuss useful tactics of identifying artistic research evidence, judging its value, analysing and synthesizing such evidence, hereby building on iconographic, thematic and/or art and design related analytical frameworks. In addition, we feature a gallery approach to present artistic research evidence to end-users and feature a multimodal type of evidence synthesis in which individual art works are comprehensively integrated in an audio visual production.

The Impacts of COVID-19 Restrictions on Physical Activity in Children and Youth: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Evidence.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this systematic review were to synthesize qualitative evidence on the impacts of COVID-19 restrictions on physical activity (PA) for children and youth, and explore factors perceived to influence those impacts. METHODS: Five databases (MEDLINE, Embase, SPORTDiscus, ERIC, and CINAHL) were searched initially in June 2021 and updated in December 2021 to locate qualitative articles considering COVID-19 restrictions and PA for children and youth (≤18 y old), in any setting. Eligibility, quality assessments, and data extraction were completed by 2 independent reviewers. Data were synthesized using meta-aggregation with confidence of findings rated using ConQual. RESULTS: After screening 3505 records, 15 studies were included. Curriculum-based PA, organized sport, and active transportation were negatively impacted by COVID-19 restrictions. Negative changes were affected by COVID-19 exposure risks, inadequate instruction, poor access, screen time, and poor weather. Unstructured PA was inconsistently impacted; outdoor unstructured PA increased for some. Positive changes were facilitated by family co-participation, availability of outdoor space, and perceived mental health benefits. CONCLUSION: Qualitative data indicated restrictions had a predominantly negative impact on PA for children and youth, but inconsistent impacts on unstructured PA. The improved contextual understanding offered by our review will be foundational knowledge for health strategies moving forward.

The move towards living systematic reviews and living guidelines in healthcare: consideration of the possibilities and challenges for living qualitative evidence syntheses.

Over the past decade qualitative evidence synthesis (QES), a range of methods for synthesising qualitative research evidence, has become a valued form of evidence for guideline producers who wish to understand more about patient preference and acceptability of treatments. The surge in interest in living systematic reviews and the appearance of living guidelines as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic potentially weaken the value and usability of QES.There are currently no published methods for producing living QES, and if QES are to remain of worth to guideline producers then methods for the rapid, frequent updating of them will need to be developed. We discuss some of the similarities and differences between qualitative and quantitative evidence syntheses and highlight areas where development is needed if reviewers are to progress with living approaches to QES.

Maternity care during COVID-19: a qualitative evidence synthesis of women's and maternity care providers' views and experiences.

BACKGROUND: As COVID-19 continued to impact society and health, maternity care, as with many other healthcare sectors across the globe, experienced tumultuous changes. These changes have the potential to considerably impact on the experience of maternity care. To gain insight and understanding of the experience of maternity care during COVID-19, from the perspectives of women and maternity care providers, we undertook a qualitative evidence synthesis (QES). METHODS: The population of interest for the QES were pregnant and postpartum women, and maternity care providers, who provided qualitative data on their experiences of maternity care during COVID-19. The electronic databases of MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO and the Cochrane COVID study register were systematically searched from 01 Jan 2020 to 13 June 2021. The methodological quality of the included studies was appraised using a modified version of the quality assessment tool, based on 12-criteria, designed by the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information coordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre). Data were extracted by two reviewers independently and synthesised using the Thomas and Harden framework. Confidence in the findings was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual). RESULTS: Fifty records relating to 48 studies, involving 9,348 women and 2,538 maternity care providers, were included in the QES. The methodological quality of the studies varied from four studies meeting all 12 quality criteria to two studies meeting one quality criterion only. The synthesis revealed eight prominent themes. Five of these reflected women's experiences: 1) Altered maternity care (women), 2) COVID-related restrictions, 3) Infection prevention and risk, 4) 'the lived reality' - navigating support systems, and 5) Interactions with maternity services. Three themes reflected maternity care providers' experiences: 6) Altered maternity care (providers), 7) Professional and personal impact, and 8) Broader structural impact. Confidence in the findings was high or moderate. CONCLUSION: Although some positive experiences were identified, overall, this QES reveals that maternity care during COVID-19 was negatively experienced by both women and maternity care providers. The pandemic and associated changes evoked an array of emotive states for both populations, many of which have the potential to impact on future health and wellbeing. Resource and care planning to mitigate medium- and longer-term adverse sequelae are required. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42021232684.

Using qualitative research to develop an elaboration of the TIDieR checklist for interventions to enhance vaccination communication: short report.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an increased interest in communication with the public regarding vaccination. Our recent Cochrane qualitative evidence synthesis points to several factors that could influence the implementation and success of healthcare worker communication with older adults about vaccination. However, it is often difficult to assess whether factors identified as potentially important in qualitative studies have been considered in randomized trials because of poor trial reporting. We therefore decided to use our qualitative evidence synthesis findings to encourage better reporting of vaccination communication interventions in trials by developing an elaboration of the TIDieR (Template for Intervention Description and Replication) checklist for intervention reporting. METHODS: We examined the findings from our Cochrane qualitative evidence synthesis on healthcare workers' perceptions of and experiences with communicating about vaccination with adults over the age of 50 years. We identified factors that could influence the implementation and uptake, and thereby the effectiveness, of vaccination communication interventions. We then drafted a list of the information elements we would need from trial reports to assess whether these factors had been considered in the development of the interventions evaluated in these trials. Finally, we compared our list of information elements to the TIDieR checklist items. We were able to align all of our information elements with the TIDieR items. However, for several of the TIDieR items, we developed a more detailed description to ensure that relevant information would be captured sufficiently in trial reports. RESULTS: We developed elaborations for the following TIDieR items: "Why" (item 2), "What-materials" (item 3), "Who provided" (item 5), "How" (item 6), "Where" (item 7) and "Tailoring" (item 9). CONCLUSIONS: Both qualitative research and trials of intervention effectiveness are critical to furthering our understanding of what works, where, for whom and through which mechanisms. However, a key ingredient for developing this understanding is adequate reporting of intervention design, content and implementation in randomized trials. We hope that this elaboration of the TIDier checklist will improve reporting of interventions in trials focused on vaccine communication with older adults, and thereby enhance the usability of this research for developing future communication strategies.

Maternity care during COVID-19: a protocol for a qualitative evidence synthesis of women's and maternity care providers' views and experiences.

Background: Considerable changes in maternity care provision internationally were implemented in response to COVID-19. Such changes, often occurring suddenly with little advance warning, have had the potential to affect women's and maternity care providers experience of maternity care, both positively and negatively. For this reason, to gain insight and understanding of personal and professional experiences, we will perform a synthesis of the available qualitative evidence on women and maternity care providers' views and experiences of maternity care during COVID-19. Methods and analysis: A qualitative evidence synthesis will be conducted. Studies will be eligible if they include pregnant or postpartum women (up to six months) and maternity care providers who received or provided care during COVID-19. To retrieve relevant literature the electronic databases of CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane COVID study register ( https://covid-19.cochrane.org/) will be searched from 01-Jan-2020 to date of search. A combination of search terms based on COVID-19, pregnancy, childbirth and maternity care, and study design, will be used to guide the search.  The methodological quality of the included studies will be assessed by at least two reviewers using the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information (EPPI)-Centre 12-criteria quality assessment tool. The Thomas and Harden approach to thematic synthesis will be used for data synthesis. This will involve line by line coding of extracted data, establishing descriptive themes, and determining analytical themes. Confidence in the findings of the review will be assessed by two reviewers independently using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual).   Conclusion: The proposed synthesis of evidence will help identify maternity care needs during a global pandemic from the perspectives of those receiving and providing care. The evidence will inform and help enhance care provision into the future.

Quarantine acceptance and adherence: qualitative evidence synthesis and conceptual framework.

Aim: Emergent infectious diseases often lack medical treatment or preventive vaccines, thus requiring non-pharmaceutical interventions such as quarantine to reduce disease transmission. Quarantine, defined as the separation and restriction of movement of healthy people who have potentially been exposed to the disease, remains contentious especially when the risks and benefits are not fully discussed and not effectively communicated to the people by the organizations who impose this public health measure. Subject and methods: A qualitative evidence synthesis was conducted to examine the phenomenon of adherence to quarantine focused on the following questions: What strategies affect adherence to quarantine? What are the barriers and facilitators to quarantine acceptance? What benefits and harms of quarantine have been described or measured? Results: The evidence synthesis produced 18 findings assessed with high confidence. The findings were used to construct a conceptual framework for inter- and within-organization coordination and public communication that includes the following topics for consideration: desired orientation for implementation; population demographics; perceptions of messages; prior acceptance of quarantine; likelihood of impacts of quarantine; perceptions of health infrastructure; and perceptions of policy importance. Conclusion: The findings and conceptual framework can guide development of effective non-pharmaceutical interventions and as such have direct relevance to public health policy and decision-making for intervening in emergent infectious diseases outbreak such as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

A QuESt for speed: rapid qualitative evidence syntheses as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has created a sense of urgency in the research community in their bid to contribute to the evidence required for healthcare policy decisions. With such urgency, researchers experience methodological challenges to maintain the rigour and transparency of their work. With this in mind, we offer reflections on our recent experience of undertaking a rapid Cochrane qualitative evidence synthesis (QES). METHODS: This process paper, using a reflexive approach, describes a rapid QES prepared during, and in response to, the COVID-19 pandemic. FINDINGS: This paper reports the methodological decisions we made and the process we undertook. We place our decisions in the context of guidance offered in relation to rapid reviews and previously conducted QESs. We highlight some of the challenges we encountered in finding the balance between the time needed for thoughtfulness and comprehensiveness whilst providing a rapid response to an urgent request for evidence. CONCLUSION: The need for more guidance on rapid QES remains, but such guidance needs to be based on actual worked examples and case studies. This paper and the reflections offered may provide a useful framework for others to use and further develop.