Psychological interventions for mood and cognition after stroke and transient ischaemic attack: A protocol for an umbrella review.

Background: People who have had a stroke or a Transient Ischaemic Attack (TIA) can experience psychological and/or cognitive difficulties. The body of research for psychological and neuropsychological interventions after stroke is growing, however, published systematic reviews vary in scope and methodology, with different types and severity of strokes included, and at times, diverse conclusions drawn about the effectiveness of the interventions evaluated. In this umbrella review, we aim to systematically summarise the existing systematic reviews evaluating psychological interventions for mood and cognition post-stroke/TIA. Methods: We will conduct this umbrella review according to the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. The following databases will be searched from inception: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Reviews of Effects (DARE), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Epistemonikos. Systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis published until the search date will be included. Reviews including psychological interventions addressing mood and/or cognition outcomes for any stroke type or severity will be screened for eligibility. A narrative synthesis, including content analysis, will be used. Each stage of the review will be processed by two independent reviewers and a third reviewer will be considered to resolve disagreements. The methodological quality of the included reviews will be assessed using AMSTAR 2. Discussion: Existing systematic reviews provide varied evidence on the effectiveness of psychological interventions post-stroke/TIA. This umbrella review aims to summarise knowledge and evidence on different types of psychological and neuropsychological interventions targeting mood and cognition. Findings will highlight important knowledge gaps and help prioritise future research questions. Systematic Review Registration: This protocol was prospectively registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on November 15, 2022; PROSPERO CRD42022375947.

Design decisions and data completeness for experience sampling methods used in psychosis: systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The experience sampling method (ESM) is an intensive longitudinal research method.  Participants complete questionnaires at multiple times about their current or very recent state. The design of ESM studies is complex. People with psychosis have been shown to be less adherent to ESM study protocols than the general population. It is not known how to design studies that increase adherence to study protocols. A lack of typology makes it is hard for researchers to decide how to collect data in a way that allows for methodological rigour, quality of reporting, and the ability to synthesise findings. The aims of this systematic review were to characterise the design choices made in ESM studies monitoring the daily lives of people with psychosis, and to synthesise evidence relating the data completeness to different design choices. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted of published literature on studies using ESM with people with psychosis. Studies were included if they used digital technology for data collection and reported the completeness of the data set. The constant comparative method was used to identify design decisions, using inductive identification of design decisions with simultaneous comparison of design decisions observed. Weighted regression was used to identify design decisions that predicted data completeness. The review was pre-registered (PROSPERO CRD42019125545). RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies were included. A typology of design choices used in ESM studies was developed, which comprised three superordinate categories of design choice: Study context, ESM approach and ESM implementation. Design decisions that predict data completeness include type of ESM protocol used, length of time participants are enrolled in the study, and if there is contact with the research team during data collection. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified a range of design decisions used in studies using ESM in the context of psychosis. Design decisions that influence data completeness were identified. Findings will help the design and reporting of future ESM studies. Results are presented with the focus on psychosis, but the findings can be applied across different mental health populations.

Uses and Misuses of Recorded Mental Health Lived Experience Narratives in Healthcare and Community Settings: Systematic Review.

Mental health lived experience narratives are first-person accounts of people with experience of mental health problems. They have been published in journals, books and online, and used in healthcare interventions and anti-stigma campaigns. There are concerns about their potential misuse. A four-language systematic review was conducted of published literature characterizing uses and misuses of mental health lived experience narratives within healthcare and community settings. 6531 documents in four languages (English, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian) were screened and 78 documents from 11 countries were included. Twenty-seven uses were identified in five categories: political, societal, community, service level and individual. Eleven misuses were found, categorized as relating to the narrative (narratives may be co-opted, narratives may be used against the author, narratives may be used for different purpose than authorial intent, narratives may be reinterpreted by others, narratives may become patient porn, narratives may lack diversity), relating to the narrator (narrator may be subject to unethical editing practises, narrator may be subject to coercion, narrator may be harmed) and relating to the audience (audience may be triggered, audience may misunderstand). Four open questions were identified: does including a researcher's personal mental health narrative reduce the credibility of their research?: should the confidentiality of narrators be protected?; who should profit from narratives?; how reliable are narratives as evidence?).