Investigating the Use of Serious Games for Cancer Control Among Children and Adolescents: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Effective health care services that meet the diverse needs of children and adolescents with cancer are required to alleviate their physical, psychological, and social challenges and improve their quality of life. Previous studies showed that serious games help promote people's health. However, the potential for serious games to be used for successful cancer control for children and adolescents has received less attention. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aimed to map the use of serious games in cancer prevention and cancer care for children and adolescents, and provide future directions for serious games' development and implementation within the context of cancer control for children and adolescents. METHODS: This study followed a combination of the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) and the JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute) framework for the conduct of scoping reviews. PubMed, CINAHL Plus Full Text, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, and American Psychological Association (APA) PsycINFO databases were used for the search. RESULTS: From the initial 2750 search results, 63 papers were included in the review, with 28 quantitative, 14 qualitative, and 21 mixed method studies. Most of the studies were cancer care serious game papers (55/63, 87%) and a small number of studies were cancer prevention serious game papers (8/63, 13%). The majority of the included studies were published between 2019 and 2023 (cancer prevention: 5/8, 63%; cancer care: 35/55, 64%). The majority of the studies were conducted in Europe (cancer prevention: 3/8, 38%; cancer care: 24/55, 44%) and North America (cancer prevention: 4/8, 50%; cancer care: 17/55, 31%). Adolescents were the most represented age group in the studies' participants (cancer prevention: 8/8, 100%; cancer care: 46/55, 84%). All (8/8, 100%) cancer prevention serious game papers included healthy people as participants, and 45 out of 55 (82%) cancer care serious game papers included patients with cancer. The majority of cancer prevention serious game papers addressed game preference as a target outcome (4/8, 50%). The majority of cancer care serious game papers addressed symptom management as a target outcome (28/55, 51%). Of the cancer care studies examining serious games for symptom management, the majority of the studies were conducted to treat psychological (13/55, 24%) and physical symptoms (10/55, 18%). CONCLUSIONS: This review shows both the growth of interest in the use of serious games for cancer control among children and adolescents and the potential for bias in the relevant literature. The diverse characteristics of the included papers suggest that serious games can be used in various ways for cancer control among children and adolescents while highlighting the need to develop and implement serious games in underrepresented areas.

Clinical decision support systems in community pharmacies: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) were implemented in community pharmacies over 40 years ago. However, unlike CDSS studies in other health settings, few studies have been undertaken to evaluate and improve their use in community pharmacies, where billions of prescriptions are filled every year. The aim of this scoping review is to summarize what research has been done surrounding CDSS in community pharmacies and call for rigorous research in this area. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six databases were searched using a combination of controlled vocabulary and keywords relating to community pharmacy and CDSS. After deduplicating the initial search results, 2 independent reviewers conducted title/abstract screening and full-text review. Then, the selected studies were synthesized in terms of investigational/clinical focuses. RESULTS: The selected 21 studies investigated the perception of and response to CDSS alerts (n = 7), the impact of CDSS alerts (n = 7), and drug-drug interaction (DDI) alerts (n = 8). Three causes of the failures to prevent DDIs of clinical importance have been noted: the perception of and response to a high volume of DDI alerts, a suboptimal performance of CDSS, and a dearth of sociotechnical considerations for managing workload and workflow. Additionally, 7 studies emphasized the importance of utilizing CDSS for a specific clinical focus, ie, antibiotics, diabetes, opioids, and vaccinations. CONCLUSION: Despite the range of topics dealt in the last 30 years, this scoping review confirms that research on CDSS in community pharmacies is limited and disjointed, lacking a comprehensive approach to highlight areas for improvement and ways to optimize CDSS utilization.

Patient-centered care outcomes for patients in the emergency department with a non-English language preference: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: This review highlights what is known about patient-centered care outcomes (PCCOs) for emergency department (ED) patients with non-English language preferences (NELP). METHODS: Four databases were searched and included article were written in English, presented primary evidence, published in a peer-reviewed journal, and reported PCCOs from the perspective of ED patients with NELP. PCCOs were defined using the Institute of Medicine definition, outcomes that evaluate respect and responsiveness to patient preferences, needs and values. Two reviewers assessed all articles, extracted data, and resolved discrepancies. PCCOs were grouped in categories (needs, preferences, and values) based on the definition's domains. RESULTS: Of the 6524 potentially eligible studies, 20 met inclusion criteria. Of these, 16 focused on needs; 4 on preferences and 8 on values. Within patient need, five studies found a large unmet need for language services. Within patient value, three found that language discordance negatively influenced perceptions of care. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies in this review found that not speaking English negatively influenced perceptions of care and highlighted a large unmet need for language services in the ED. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: More work needs to be done to characterize PCCOs in ED patients with NELP and develop interventions to improve care.

A systematic review of randomised-controlled trials on deprescribing outcomes in older adults with polypharmacy.

BACKGROUND: Mixed findings about deprescribing impact have emerged from varied study designs, interventions, outcome measures and targeting sub-categories of medications or morbidities. This systematic review controls for study design by reviewing randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) of deprescribing interventions using comprehensive medication profiles. The goal is to provide a synthesis of interventions and patient outcomes to inform healthcare providers and policy makers about deprescribing effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aims to (1) review RCT deprescribing studies focusing on complete medication reviews of older adults with polypharmacy across all health settings, (2) map patients' clinical and economic outcomes against intervention and implementation strategies and (3) inform research agendas based on observed benefits and best practices. METHODS: The PRISMA framework for systematic reviews was followed. Databases used were EBSCO Medline, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus and Web of Science. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomised trials. RESULTS: Fourteen articles were included. Interventions varied in setting, preparation, use of interdisciplinary teams, validated guidelines and tools, patient-centredness and implementation strategy. Thirteen studies (92.9%) found deprescribing interventions reduced the number of drugs and/or doses taken. No studies found threats to patient safety in terms of primary outcomes including morbidity, hospitalisations, emergency room use and falls. Four of five studies identifying health quality of life as a primary outcome found significant effects associated with deprescribing. Both studies with cost as their primary outcome found significant effects as did two with cost as a secondary outcome. Studies did not systematically study how intervention components influenced deprescribing impact. To explore this gap, this review mapped studies' primary outcomes to deprescribing intervention components using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Five studies had significant, positive primary outcomes related to health-related quality of life (HRQOL), cost and/or hospitalisation, with four reporting patient-centred elements in their intervention. CONCLUSIONS: RCT primary outcomes found deprescribing is safe and reduces drug number or dose. Five RCTs found a significant deprescribing impact on HRQOL, cost or hospitalisation. Important future research agendas include analysing (1) understudied outcomes like cost, and (2) intervention and implementation components that enhance effectiveness, such as patient-centred elements.

Unsolicited solicitations: identifying characteristics of unsolicited emails from potentially predatory journals and the role of librarians.

Email solicitations for manuscript submissions are a common tactic employed by predatory journals to attract potential victims. Both new and established researchers alike have fallen prey to this tactic, justifying the need for librarians to provide further education and support in this area. This commentary provides a succinct overview of predatory journals; briefly describes the problem of predatory journal email solicitations; explains the role librarians can play in their identification; and lists some red flags and tactics librarians can tell researchers to look out for, as informed by the literature and the author's analysis of 60 unsolicited journal emails she received in her own institutional inbox.

Discoverability of information on clinical trial data-sharing platforms.

OBJECTIVE: This study was intended to (1) provide clinical trial data-sharing platform designers with insight into users' experiences when attempting to evaluate and access datasets, (2) spark conversations about improving the transparency and discoverability of clinical trial data, and (3) provide a partial view of the current information-sharing landscape for clinical trials. METHODS: We evaluated preview information provided for 10 datasets in each of 7 clinical trial data-sharing platforms between February and April 2019. Specifically, we evaluated the platforms in terms of the extent to which we found (1) preview information about the dataset, (2) trial information on ClinicalTrials.gov and other external websites, and (3) evidence of the existence of trial protocols and data dictionaries. RESULTS: All seven platforms provided data previews. Three platforms provided information on data file format (e.g., CSV, SAS file). Three allowed batch downloads of datasets (i.e., downloading multiple datasets with a single request), whereas four required separate requests for each dataset. All but one platform linked to ClinicalTrials.gov records, but only one platform had ClinicalTrails.gov records that linked back to the platform. Three platforms consistently linked to external websites and primary publications. Four platforms provided evidence of the presence of a protocol, and six platforms provided evidence of the presence of data dictionaries. CONCLUSIONS: More work is needed to improve the discoverability, transparency, and utility of information on clinical trial data-sharing platforms. Increasing the amount of dataset preview information available to users could considerably improve the discoverability and utility of clinical trial data.