Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 270
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
3.
ANZ J Surg ; 91(11): 2360-2375, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1515195

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Telehealth use has increased worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, hands-on requirements of surgical care may have resulted in slower implementation. This umbrella review (review of systematic reviews) evaluated the perceptions, safety and implementation of telehealth services in surgery, and telehealth usage in Australia between 2020 and 2021. METHODS: PubMed was searched from 2015 to 2021 for systematic reviews evaluating real-time telehealth modalities in surgery. Outcomes of interest were patient and provider satisfaction, safety, and barriers and facilitators associated with its use. Study quality was appraised using the AMSTAR 2 tool. A working group of surgeons provided insights into the clinical relevance to telehealth in surgical practice of the evidence collated. RESULTS: From 2025 identified studies, 17 were included, which were of low to moderate risk of bias. Patient and provider satisfaction with telehealth was high. Time savings, decreased healthcare resource use and lower costs were reported as key advantages of the service. Inability to perform comprehensive examinations was noted as the primary barrier. In Australia, peak telehealth usage coincided with the introduction of temporary telehealth services and increased lockdown measures. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and providers are broadly satisfied with telehealth and its benefits. Barriers may be overcome via multidisciplinary collaboration. Telehealth may benefit surgical care long-term if implemented correctly both during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Telemedicine , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Systematic Reviews as Topic
4.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(21)2021 11 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1512297

ABSTRACT

In recent years, research on sedentary behaviour has increased. In this regard, there is a need for theoretical reviews that allow us to determine the past, analyse the present, and prepare the future of research in this field. The purpose of this review paper was to analyse and organise the emerging qualitative research trends (2010-2021) on the sedentary behaviour of older adults. A systematic literature search strategy was developed in various electronic scientific databases (e.g., PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Scielo, and Scopus). The included studies were required to have different qualitative methodological approaches in terms of data collection and methods of data analysis. Studies conducted in any country and published in a peer-reviewed journal in English, Spanish, and Portuguese were considered. A thematic analysis approach was used for data extraction and synthesis, and confidence in the results was assessed using the GRADE-CERQual approach. This study may enable accurate guidelines to be established for future primary qualitative research related to sedentary behaviour.


Subject(s)
Sedentary Behavior , Qualitative Research , Systematic Reviews as Topic
5.
BMC Med Res Methodol ; 21(1): 240, 2021 11 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1505706

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Previous research on data extraction methods in systematic reviews has focused on single aspects of the process. We aimed to provide a deeper insight into these methods by analysing a current sample of reviews. METHODS: We included systematic reviews of health interventions in humans published in English. We analysed 75 Cochrane reviews from May and June 2020 and a random sample of non-Cochrane reviews published in the same period and retrieved from Medline. We linked reviews with protocols and study registrations. We collected information on preparing, piloting, and performing data extraction and on use of software to assist review conduct (automation tools). Data were extracted by one author, with 20% extracted in duplicate. Data were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Of the 152 included reviews, 77 reported use of a standardized extraction form (51%); 42 provided information on the type of form used (28%); 24 on piloting (16%); 58 on what data was collected (38%); 133 on the extraction method (88%); 107 on resolving disagreements (70%); 103 on methods to obtain additional data or information (68%); 52 on procedures to avoid data errors (34%); and 47 on methods to deal with multiple study reports (31%). Items were more frequently reported in Cochrane than non-Cochrane reviews. The data extraction form used was published in 10 reviews (7%). Use of software was rarely reported except for statistical analysis software and use of RevMan and GRADEpro GDT in Cochrane reviews. Covidence was the most frequent automation tool used: 18 reviews used it for study selection (12%) and 9 for data extraction (6%). CONCLUSIONS: Reporting of data extraction methods in systematic reviews is limited, especially in non-Cochrane reviews. This includes core items of data extraction such as methods used to manage disagreements. Few reviews currently use software to assist data extraction and review conduct. Our results can serve as a baseline to assess the uptake of such tools in future analyses.


Subject(s)
Research Design , Humans , Systematic Reviews as Topic
6.
BMJ Open ; 11(11): e056106, 2021 11 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1504289

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 has spread with high morbidity and mortality worldwide. Many inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are being tested at various clinical trial stages for the control and prevention of COVID-19. We aim to comprehensively and objectively evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in healthy individuals through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search electronic databases of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science and EMBASE for RCTs from inception to 31 December 2021. We will also search conference abstracts, reference lists, and grey literature of all available records. Two reviewers will independently screen and extract information from the literature. Bias and the quality of included studies will be evaluated with the risk-bias assessment tool provided by the Cochrane Collaboration. Statistical analysis will be performed using Cochrane's Review Manager (RevMan), V.5.3. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval and patient informed consent are not required because we will be including published literature only. The findings of this research will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and likely through other scientific events such as conferences, seminars and symposia. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021266285.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Research Design , Systematic Reviews as Topic
7.
BMJ Glob Health ; 6(9)2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1504162

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Understanding barriers to childhood vaccination is crucial to inform effective interventions for maximising uptake. Published systematic reviews include different primary studies, producing varying lists of barriers. To make sense of this diverse body of literature, a comprehensive level of summary and synthesis is necessary. This overview of systematic reviews maps all potential parent-level barriers to childhood vaccination identified in systematic reviews. It synthesises these into a conceptual framework to inform development of a vaccine barriers assessment tool. METHODS: We applied Joanna Briggs methodology, searching the Epistemonikos review database and reference lists of included reviews to June 2020. Systematic reviews of qualitative or quantitative data on parent-level barriers to routine vaccination in preschool-aged children were included. Reviews addressing influenza, reporting non-modifiable determinants or reporting barriers not relevant to parents were excluded. Where possible, we extracted review details, barrier descriptions and the number, setting and design of primary studies. Two authors independently screened search results and inductively coded barrier descriptions. RESULTS: We screened 464 papers, identifying 30 relevant reviews with minimal overlap. Fourteen reviews included qualitative and quantitative primary studies, seven included quantitative and seven included qualitative studies only. Two did not report included study designs. Two-thirds of reviews (n=20; 67%) only included primary studies from high-income countries. We extracted 573 barrier descriptions and inductively coded these into 64 unique barriers in six overarching categories: (1) Access, (2) Clinic or Health System Barriers, (3) Concerns and Beliefs, (4) Health Perceptions and Experiences, (5) Knowledge and Information and (6) Social or Family Influence. CONCLUSIONS: A global overview of systematic reviews of parent-level barriers to childhood vaccine uptake identified 64 barriers to inform development of a new comprehensive survey instrument. This instrument will assess both access and acceptance barriers to more accurately diagnose the reasons for under-vaccination in children in different settings.


Subject(s)
Parents , Vaccination , Child , Child, Preschool , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Qualitative Research , Systematic Reviews as Topic
8.
Syst Rev ; 10(1): 289, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1496222

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 19 (covid-19) pandemic has underscored the need to expedite clinical research, which may lead investigators to shift away from measuring patient-important outcomes (PIO), limiting research applicability. We aim to investigate if randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of covid-19 pharmacological therapies include PIOs. METHODS: We will perform a meta-epidemiological study of RCTs that included people at risk for, or with suspected, probable, or confirmed covid-19, examining any pharmacological treatment or blood product aimed at prophylaxis or treatment. We will obtain data from all RCTs identified in a living network metanalysis (NMA). The main data sources are the living WHO covid-19 database up to 1 March 2021 and six additional Chinese databases up to 20 February 2021. Two reviewers independently will review each citation, full-text article, and abstract data. To categorize the outcomes according to their importance to patients, we will adapt a previously defined hierarchy: a) mortality, b) quality of life/ functional status/symptoms, c) morbidity, and d) surrogate outcomes. Outcomes within the category a) and b) will be considered critically important to patients, and outcomes within the category c) will be regarded as important. We will use descriptive statistics to assess the proportion of studies that report each category of outcomes. We will perform univariable and multivariable analysis to explore associations between trial characteristics and the likelihood of reporting PIOs. DISCUSSION: The findings from this meta-epidemiological study will help health care professionals and researchers understand if the current covid-19 trials are effectively assessing and reporting the outcomes that are important to patients. If a deficiency in capturing PIOs is identified, this information may help inform the development of future RCTs in covid-19. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATIONS: Open Science Framework registration: osf.io/6xgjz .


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Epidemiologic Studies , Humans , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Systematic Reviews as Topic
9.
BMJ Open ; 11(10): e053124, 2021 10 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1495470

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Communicable disease epidemics and pandemics magnify the health inequities experienced by marginalised populations. People who use substances suffer from high rates of morbidity and mortality and should be a priority to receive palliative care, yet they encounter many barriers to palliative care access. Given the pre-existing inequities to palliative care access for people with life-limiting illnesses who use substances, it is important to understand the impact of communicable disease epidemics and pandemics such as COVID-19 on this population. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a scoping review and report according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews reporting guidelines. We conducted a comprehensive literature search in seven bibliographical databases from the inception of each database to August 2020. We also performed a grey literature search to identify the publications not indexed in the bibliographical databases. All the searches will be rerun in April 2021 to retrieve recently published information because the COVID-19 pandemic is ongoing at the time of this writing. We will extract the quantitative data using a standardised data extraction form and summarise it using descriptive statistics. Additionally, we will conduct thematic qualitative analyses and present our findings as narrative summaries. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for a scoping review. We will disseminate our findings to healthcare providers and policymakers through professional networks, digital communications through social media platforms, conference presentations and publication in a scientific journal.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Diseases , Humans , Palliative Care , Pandemics , Research Design , Review Literature as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Systematic Reviews as Topic
10.
Syst Rev ; 10(1): 281, 2021 10 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1486597

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The primary objective of this study is twofold: (1) to examine the effect of COVID-19 safety measures, enacted to prevent transmission of SARS-nCOV-2, on total physical activity in the adult general population (≥ 18 years) and (2) to analyze the impact of the factor "severity of safety measures" on potential changes in physical activity. The secondary objective is to investigate the effects of safety measures on the respective PA intensities, i.e., sedentary behavior, light, moderate, and vigorous physical activity. METHODS: A systematic literature search will be performed in the following online databases: Medline (on Ovid), Web of Science, Scopus, L.OVE Coronavirus disease by Epistemonikos, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I. All obtained citations will undergo title and abstract as well as full-text screening by two independent reviewers. Observational studies investigating the effects of safety measures on physical activity patterns in the adult general population will be included. The standardized mean difference in total physical activity per time unit between pre- and during COVID-19 or between normative data and during COVID-19 will be the primary outcome. The standardized mean difference in sedentary time, light, moderate, and vigorous physical activity will be assessed as secondary outcomes. Eligible studies will be divided between the reviewers for data extraction using a pilot-tested data form. Risk of bias assessment will be performed using a standard assessment tool. If suitable, a random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression with a unit of safety measure severity as the independent variable will be performed. DISCUSSION: This study will synthesize available data reporting the effect of COVID-19 safety measures on physical activity patterns in adults. Furthermore, we will incorporate a unit for the severity of safety measures for better generalizability of the results. These findings will be of great value for public health policymaking and estimating future health consequences. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021231039.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Exercise , Humans , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Observational Studies as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Systematic Reviews as Topic
11.
J Med Libr Assoc ; 109(3): 505-506, 2021 Jul 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1481113

ABSTRACT

Invisible labor is a term used by labor economists to describe work that contributes, and is often even necessary, to the economy but largely goes unrecognized and unpaid. Despite the fact that systematic review searching is a significant task for many librarians and knowledge professionals, the search process can be considered a form of invisible labor because it often goes without recognition. This occurs sometimes through not granting authorship to the librarian who performed the intellectual contribution of search development and sometimes through a devaluing of the search process by the choice of language used to describe the search. By using the term search as a passive verb or noun, authors devalue the real intellectual labor involved in searching, which includes decisions related to search terms and combinations, database selection, and other search parameters. This commentary explores the context of how searching is described through the concept of invisible labor.


Subject(s)
Information Storage and Retrieval , Librarians , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Authorship , Databases, Factual , Humans
12.
BMC Public Health ; 21(1): 1888, 2021 10 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1477400

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Locally delivered, place-based public health interventions are receiving increasing attention as a way of improving health and reducing inequalities. However, there is limited evidence on their effectiveness. This umbrella review synthesises systematic review evidence of the health and health inequalities impacts of locally delivered place-based interventions across three elements of place and health: the physical, social, and economic environments. METHODS: Systematic review methodology was used to identify recent published systematic reviews of the effectiveness of place-based interventions on health and health inequalities (PROGRESS+) in high-income countries. Nine databases were searched from 1st January 2008 to 1st March 2020. The quality of the included articles was determined using the Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews tool (R-AMSTAR). RESULTS: Thirteen systematic reviews were identified - reporting 51 unique primary studies. Fifty of these studies reported on interventions that changed the physical environment and one reported on changes to the economic environment. Only one primary study reported cost-effectiveness data. No reviews were identified that assessed the impact of social interventions. Given heterogeneity and quality issues, we found tentative evidence that the provision of housing/home modifications, improving the public realm, parks and playgrounds, supermarkets, transport, cycle lanes, walking routes, and outdoor gyms - can all have positive impacts on health outcomes - particularly physical activity. However, as no studies reported an assessment of variation in PROGRESS+ factors, the effect of these interventions on health inequalities remains unclear. CONCLUSIONS: Place-based interventions can be effective at improving physical health, health behaviours and social determinants of health outcomes. High agentic interventions indicate greater improvements for those living in greater proximity to the intervention, which may suggest that in order for interventions to reduce inequalities, they should be implemented at a scale commensurate with the level of disadvantage. Future research needs to ensure equity data is collected, as this is severely lacking and impeding progress on identifying interventions that are effective in reducing health inequalities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019158309.


Subject(s)
Health Status Disparities , Public Health , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Exercise , Housing , Humans , Systematic Reviews as Topic
13.
BMC Geriatr ; 21(1): 537, 2021 10 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1463233

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patients with hip fracture and depression are less likely to recover functional ability. This review sought to identify prognostic factors of depression or depressive symptoms up to 1 year after hip fracture surgery in adults. This review also sought to describe proposed underlying mechanisms for their association with depression or depressive symptoms. METHODS: We searched for published (MEDLINE, Embase, PsychInfo, CINAHL and Web of Science Core Collection) and unpublished (OpenGrey, Greynet, BASE, conference proceedings) studies. We did not impose any date, geographical, or language limitations. Screening (Covidence), extraction (Checklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies, adapted for use with prognostic factors studies Checklist), and quality appraisal (Quality in Prognosis Studies tool) were completed in duplicate. Results were summarised narratively. RESULTS: In total, 37 prognostic factors were identified from 12 studies included in this review. The quality of the underlying evidence was poor, with all studies at high risk of bias in at least one domain. Most factors did not have a proposed mechanism for the association. Where factors were investigated by more than one study, the evidence was often conflicting. CONCLUSION: Due to conflicting and low quality of available evidence it is not possible to make clinical recommendations based on factors prognostic of depression or depressive symptoms after hip fracture. Further high-quality research investigating prognostic factors is warranted to inform future intervention and/or stratified approaches to care after hip fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospero registration: CRD42019138690 .


Subject(s)
Depression , Hip Fractures , Depression/diagnosis , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/etiology , Hip Fractures/diagnosis , Hip Fractures/epidemiology , Hip Fractures/surgery , Humans , Prognosis , Systematic Reviews as Topic
14.
BMJ Open ; 11(10): e052993, 2021 10 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462971

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Sharps injuries, including needlestick injuries and splash exposures, constitute serious occupational health problems for healthcare workers, carrying the risk of bloodborne infections. However, data on such occupational incidents and their risk factors in healthcare settings are scarce and not systematically summarised in the Arab countries.The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to review published literature about sharps injuries and splash exposures of healthcare workers in Arab countries, with the objectives to determine the incidence and/or prevalence of these events, their identified risk factors and the applied preventive and postexposure prophylactic measures. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The protocol is developed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol guidelines. A comprehensive presearch developed in January to March 2021 in the database PubMed will be followed by a systematic search of six, core medical and health science databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science and Africa-Wide Information in May 2021. The search will be performed without any filters or restrictions for publication years. Covidence systematic review tool will be used for document management, blinded screening and study selection. Two reviewers will independently screen the records, extract data and conduct risk of bias assessment. Results will be synthesised narratively in summary tables, and, if findings allow, meta-analysis will be conducted on the incidence and/or prevalence of sharps injuries and splash exposures, and on the effect size of risk factors. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The systematic review methodology does not require ethics approval due to the nature of the study design based only on published studies. The results of the systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, disseminated to stakeholders and made publicly available. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021242416.


Subject(s)
Needlestick Injuries , Arabs , Delivery of Health Care , Health Personnel , Humans , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Needlestick Injuries/epidemiology , Research Design , Systematic Reviews as Topic
15.
BMJ Open ; 11(10): e050362, 2021 10 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462962

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs) are common and disabling conditions that can result in social isolation and economic hardship for patients and their families. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) improves functional exercise capacity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) but practical barriers to attending centre-based sessions or the need for infection control limits accessibility. Home-PR offers a potential solution that may improve access. We aim to systematically review the clinical effectiveness, completion rates and components of Home-PR for people with CRDs compared with Centre-PR or Usual care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, PeDRO and PsycInfo from January 1990 to date using a PICOS search strategy (Population: adults with CRDs; Intervention: Home-PR; Comparator: Centre-PR/Usual care; Outcomes: functional exercise capacity and HRQoL; Setting: any setting). The strategy is to search for 'Chronic Respiratory Disease' AND 'Pulmonary Rehabilitation' AND 'Home-PR', and identify relevant randomised controlled trials and controlled clinical trials. Six reviewers working in pairs will independently screen articles for eligibility and extract data from those fulfilling the inclusion criteria. We will use the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to rate the quality of evidence. We will perform meta-analysis or narrative synthesis as appropriate to answer our three research questions: (1) what is the effectiveness of Home-PR compared with Centre-PR or Usual care? (2) what components are used in effective Home-PR studies? and (3) what is the completion rate of Home-PR compared with Centre-PR? ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics approval is not required since the study will review only published data. The findings will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation in conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020220137.


Subject(s)
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Respiration Disorders , Adult , Exercise , Humans , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Quality of Life , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Treatment Outcome
16.
BMJ Open ; 11(10): e047314, 2021 10 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462953

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the single greatest contributor to global mortality. The successful introduction and scale-up of antiretroviral therapy (ART) delivered a reduction in HIV mortality. Consequently, an association was found between the scale-up of ART and an increased prevalence of comorbidities among people living with HIV (PLWH) such as hypertension and dyslipidaemia. A higher quality diet can delay the onset of comorbidities related to HIV infection. Diet quality and its methods of assessment are not fully established among PLWH. This review will identify the diet quality and food insecurity indices that have been used among PLWH and how these constructs are associated with risk of developing CVD. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The frameworks recommended by Arksey and O'Malley and the Joanna Briggs Institute's manual for conducting scoping reviews will be adopted. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines will be used for reporting. A search strategy was developed using keywords related to the topic. A preliminary MEDLINE (via PubMed) search was conducted on 11 November 2020 to develop a comprehensive search strategy. The final search will be conducted on PubMed, EbscoHost, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases. Titles and abstracts of retrieved records will be screened independently by two reviewers. Data will be extracted from records that meet the inclusion criteria using a predesigned charting tool. Discrepancies in decisions made by reviewers will be resolved by consensus or the decision of a third reviewer. Extracted data will be presented in tables or charts. A descriptive summary of the charts or tables will follow. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for a scoping review. Findings will inform other studies currently underway and will be presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. REGISTRATION NUMBER: https://osf.io/7k3ja.


Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases , HIV Infections , Adult , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Diet , Food Insecurity , HIV Infections/drug therapy , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Research Design , Review Literature as Topic , Systematic Reviews as Topic
17.
Nursing ; 51(9): 44-47, 2021 Sep 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462510

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: Substance use treatment inequities among rural populations are well documented and the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated these inequalities, forcing healthcare providers to be creative in the delivery of treatment. Systematic reviews on the use of telehealth to treat patients with substance use disorder indicate that it is a promising alternative to in-person services. This article examines the evidence supporting the use of telehealth in treating patients with opioid use disorder and explores other promising options that can help overcome pandemic-related barriers to treatment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Services Accessibility/organization & administration , Opioid-Related Disorders/nursing , Rural Health Services/organization & administration , Telemedicine/organization & administration , Humans , Opioid-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Systematic Reviews as Topic , United States/epidemiology
18.
Syst Rev ; 10(1): 237, 2021 08 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1456007

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In pediatric palliative care (PPC), there is a need to involve the child's voice in situations regarding their symptoms and care needs. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can be tools to systematically gather data reported from the child or a proxy if the child is not capable to self-report in order to provide the services they need. There has been a rapid development in PROM research the last decade, and there is a need for an overview of current knowledge and experiences in the field. Thus, we aim to explore and summarize what is known from the published research about PROMs in PPC. METHODS: We propose a scoping review following the framework by Arksey and O'Malley and the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. A systematic search will be performed in the following databases: Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (Medline), Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), American Psychological Association (APA) PsycInfo, Health and Psychosocial Instruments (HaPI), and Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED). The search will be followed by snowballing to identify key papers and significant researchers for additional citations. Covidence will facilitate the independent review of eligible citations, and data will be extracted and presented descriptively, and thematically analyzed using NVivo. DISCUSSION: The scoping review suggested in this protocol will identify PROMs which have been proposed in PPC and clarify the experiences with their use. The findings of this review will be relevant for researchers and healthcare personnel caring for children and adolescents in PPC. In addition, by highlighting knowledge gaps about the use of PROMs in PPC, this review will point out future needs within this field of research, which is crucial for improving quality of care in PPC. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/yfch2/ .


Subject(s)
Health Personnel , Palliative Care , Adolescent , Child , Humans , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Review Literature as Topic , Systematic Reviews as Topic
19.
Syst Rev ; 10(1): 234, 2021 08 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1456006

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Several comorbidity indices have been created to estimate and adjust for the burden of comorbidity. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate and compare the ability of different comorbidity indices to predict mortality in an orthopedic setting. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library. The search were constructed around two primary focal points: a comorbidity index and orthopedics. The last search were performed on 13 June 2019. Eligibility criteria were participants with orthopedic conditions or who underwent an orthopedic procedure, a comparison between comorbidity indices that used administrative data, and reported mortality as outcome. Two independent reviewers screened the studies using Covidence. The area under the curve (AUC) was chosen as the primary effect estimate. RESULTS: Of the 5338 studies identified, 16 met the eligibility criteria. The predictive ability of the different comorbidity indices ranged from poor (AUC < 0.70) to excellent (AUC ≥ 0.90). The majority of the included studies compared the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI) and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). In-hospital mortality was reported in eight studies reporting AUC values ranging from 0.70 to 0.92 for ECI and 0.68 to 0.89 for CCI. AUC values were generally lower for all other time points ranging from 0.67 to 0.78. For 1-year mortality the overall effect size ranging from 0.67 to 0.77 for ECI and 0.69 to 0.77 for CCI. CONCLUSION: The results of this review indicate that the ECI and CCI can equally be used to adjust for comorbidities when analyzing mortality in an orthopedic setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this systematic review was registered on PROSPERO, the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews on 13 June 2019 and can be accessed through record ID 133,871.


Subject(s)
Orthopedic Procedures , Orthopedics , Comorbidity , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Systematic Reviews as Topic
20.
Syst Rev ; 10(1): 232, 2021 08 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1456005

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Suicide is a leading cause of death in children and youth, with suicidal thoughts and suicide attempts (referred to as non-fatal suicidal behaviors (NFSB)) being among its strongest predictors. Positive parenting (e.g., warmth, responsiveness), negative parenting (e.g., control, hostility), and parent-child relationship quality (e.g., trust, communication) have been reported to be associated with differences in NFSB in this population. To date, no comprehensive systematic review has considered together the wide range of parenting factors studied in relation to NFSB, and no meta-analysis of existing findings has been conducted. The present study will critically appraise and synthesize the existing evidence from observational studies that examine the relationships between parenting factors and (i) suicidal ideation and (ii) suicide attempt in children and youth. METHODS: Studies will be retrieved from APA PsycInfo, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases. Retrospective, cross-sectional, and longitudinal studies, conducted in clinical and population settings, among youth aged less than 25 years and published as articles and dissertations in English or French will be eligible. Two reviewers will select articles using the Covidence Software after title and abstract screening and full-text assessment, will extract information using double data entry, and will appraise studies' quality using the Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Any disagreements will be discussed with a third reviewer. Publication bias will be evaluated using funnel plots and Egger's test. In addition to a narrative summary of results, meta-analyses will be conducted using results from at least three studies. Three-level random effect models will allow to derive pooled estimates from dependent effect sizes (from the same sample or study). In case of significant heterogeneity, moderation analyses will be performed considering participants' characteristics and methodological aspects of studies. The results will be reported according to the PRISMA guidelines, and the certainty of evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach. DISCUSSION: In highlighting parenting factors associated with NFSB and in estimating the overall strength of these associations in children and youth, our results will inform further intervention and prevention strategies designed for young people experiencing NFSB and their families. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020165345.


Subject(s)
Parenting , Suicidal Ideation , Adolescent , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Observational Studies as Topic , Retrospective Studies , Systematic Reviews as Topic
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...