scholarly journals PROTOCOL: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials evaluating the impact of parenting programmes for parents of adolescents (10–18 years) on adolescent mental health outcomes, positive development and the parent–adolescent relationship

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kylie Burke ◽  
Cassandra K. Dittman ◽  
Elana J. Forbes ◽  
Elizabeth Eggins
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Positive Development ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Adolescent Relationship ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals The impact of whole-of-diet interventions on depression and anxiety: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (11) ◽  
pp. 2074-2093 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachelle S Opie ◽  
Adrienne O’Neil ◽  
Catherine Itsiopoulos ◽  
Felice N Jacka
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Mental Health Outcomes ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Depression And Anxiety ◽  
Dietary Interventions ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Impact

AbstractObjectiveNon-pharmacological approaches to the treatment of depression and anxiety are of increasing importance, with emerging evidence supporting a role for lifestyle factors in the development of these disorders. Observational evidence supports a relationship between habitual diet quality and depression. Less is known about the causative effects of diet on mental health outcomes. Therefore a systematic review was undertaken of randomised controlled trials of dietary interventions that used depression and/or anxiety outcomes and sought to identify characteristics of programme success.DesignA systematic search of the Cochrane, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed and PyscInfo databases was conducted for articles published between April 1971 and May 2014.ResultsOf the 1274 articles identified, seventeen met eligibility criteria and were included. All reported depression outcomes and ten reported anxiety or total mood disturbance. Compared with a control condition, almost half (47 %) of the studies observed significant effects on depression scores in favour of the treatment group. The remaining studies reported a null effect. Effective dietary interventions were based on a single delivery mode, employed a dietitian and were less likely to recommend reducing red meat intake, select leaner meat products or follow a low-cholesterol diet.ConclusionsAlthough there was a high level of heterogeneity, we found some evidence for dietary interventions improving depression outcomes. However, as only one trial specifically investigated the impact of a dietary intervention in individuals with clinical depression, appropriately powered trials that examine the effects of dietary improvement on mental health outcomes in those with clinical disorders are required.

scholarly journals Animal-Assisted Interventions for the Improvement of Mental Health Outcomes in Higher Education Students: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (20) ◽  
pp. 10768
Author(s):  
Charlotte Parbery-Clark ◽  
Marvellas Lubamba ◽  
Louise Tanner ◽  
Elaine McColl
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Higher Education ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Mental Health Outcomes ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Background: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of Animal-Assisted Interventions (AAIs), particularly Animal-Assisted Therapy (AAT) and Animal-Assisted Activity (AAA), in improving mental health outcomes for students in higher education. The number of students in higher education reporting mental health problems and seeking support from universities’ student support services has risen over recent years. Therefore, providing engaging interventions, such as AAIs, that are accessible to large groups of students are attractive. Methods: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched from relative inception to end of April 2020. Additionally, a grey literature search was undertaken. Independent screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were completed, with varying percentages, by two reviewers. Results: After de-duplication, 6248 articles were identified of which 11 studies were included in the narrative synthesis. The evidence from randomised controlled trials suggests that AAIs could provide short-term beneficial results for anxiety in students attending higher education but with limited evidence for stress, and inconclusive evidence for depression, well-being and mood. For the non-statistically significant results, the studies either did not include a power calculation or were under-powered. Conclusions: Potential emerging evidence for the short-term benefits of AAI for anxiety, and possibly stress, for students in higher education was found.

scholarly journals Impact of social distancing measures for preventing coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]: A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishna Regmi ◽  
Cho Mar Lwin
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
World Health ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
List Type ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Impact

AbstractIntroductionSocial distancing measures (SDMs) protect public health from the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the impact of SDMs has been inconsistent and unclear. This study aims to assess the effects of SDMs (e.g. isolation, quarantine) for reducing the transmission of COVID-19.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a systematic review meta-analysis research of both randomised controlled trials and non-randomised controlled trials. We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied & Complementary Medicine, COVID-19 Research and WHO database on COVID-19 for primary studies assessing the effects of SDMs (e.g. isolation, quarantine) for reducing the transmission of COVID-19, and will be reported in accordance with PRISMA statement. The PRISMA-P checklist will be used while preparing this protocol. We will use Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines (JBI Critical Appraisal Checklists) to assess the methodological qualities and synthesised performing thematic analysis. Two reviewers will independently screen the papers and extracted data. If sufficient data are available, the random-effects model for meta-analysis will be performed to measure the effect size of SDMs or the strengths of relationships. To assess the heterogeneity of effects, I2 together with the observed effects (Q-value, with degrees of freedom) will be used to provide the true effects in the analysis.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval and consent will not be required for this systematic review of the literature as it does not involve human participation. We will be able to disseminate the study findings using the following strategies: we will be publishing at least one paper in peer-reviewed journals, and an abstract will be presented at suitable national/international conferences or workshops. We will also share important information with public health authorities as well as with the World Health Organization. In addition, we may post the submitted manuscript under review to bioRxiv, medRxiv, or other relevant pre-print servers.Strengths and limitations of this studyTo our knowledge, this study will be the first systematic review to examine the impact of social distancing measures to reduce transmission of COVID-19.This study will offer highest level of evidence for informed decisions, drawing a broader framework.This protocol reduces the possibility of duplication, provides transparency to the methods and procedures that will be used, minimise potential biases and allows peer-review.This research is not externally funded, and therefore time and resource will be constrained.If included studies will be variable in sample size, quality and population, which may open to bias, and the heterogeneity of data will preclude a meaningful meta-analysis to measure the impact of specific SDMs

scholarly journals The impact of antibiotics on growth in children in low and middle income countries: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMJ ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 348 (apr15 6) ◽  
pp. g2267-g2267 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. K. Gough ◽  
E. E. M. Moodie ◽  
A. J. Prendergast ◽  
S. M. A. Johnson ◽  
J. H. Humphrey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Low And Middle Income

scholarly journals Nuts and their Effect on Gut Microbiota, Gut Function and Symptoms in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Nutrients ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. 2347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice C. Creedon ◽  
Estella S. Hung ◽  
Sarah E. Berry ◽  
Kevin Whelan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Gut Microbiota ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Faecal Microbiota ◽  
Gut Function ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Impact

Nuts contain fibre, unsaturated fatty acids and polyphenols that may impact the composition of the gut microbiota and overall gut health. This study aimed to assess the impact of nuts on gut microbiota, gut function and gut symptoms via a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in healthy adults. Eligible RCTs were identified by systematic searches of five electronic databases, hand searching of conference abstracts, clinical trials databases, back-searching reference lists and contact with key stakeholders. Eligible studies were RCTs administering tree nuts or peanuts in comparison to control, measuring any outcome related to faecal microbiota, function or symptoms. Two reviewers independently screened papers, performed data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Outcome data were synthesised as weighted mean difference (WMD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) using a random effects model. This review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42019138169). Eight studies reporting nine RCTs were included, investigating almonds (n = 5), walnuts (n = 3) and pistachios (n = 1). Nut consumption significantly increased Clostridium (SMD: 0.40; 95% CI, 0.10, 0.71; p = 0.01), Dialister (SMD: 0.44; 95% CI, 0.13, 0.75; p = 0.005), Lachnospira (SMD: 0.33; 95% CI, 0.02, 0.64; p = 0.03) and Roseburia (SMD: 0.36; 95% CI, 0.10, 0.62; p = 0.006), and significantly decreased Parabacteroides (SMD: −0.31; 95% CI, −0.62, −0.00; p = 0.05). There was no effect of nuts on bacterial phyla, diversity or stool output. Further parallel design RCTs, powered to detect changes in faecal microbiota and incorporating functional and clinical outcomes, are needed.

scholarly journals Kaleidoscope

2017 ◽  
Vol 211 (4) ◽  
pp. 256-257
Author(s):  
Derek K. Tracy ◽  
Dan W. Joyce ◽  
Sukhwinder S. Shergill
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
School Settings ◽  
General Distress ◽  
Externalising Problems ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Gloria Gaynor was an early proponent of resilience, winning many converts with her reflections on ‘how you did me wrong I grew strong, and I learned how to get along’. Tapping into this – resilience, not ‘70s disco – to improve mental health outcomes is a growing concept, but does evidence support this sensible, if sometimes loosely defined, idea? Dray et al provide a timely systematic review of 57 randomised controlled trials of universal resilience-focused interventions targeting children and adolescents in school settings. Meta-analysis showed that, compared with control conditions, interventions were effective in reducing depressive symptoms, internalising and externalising problems, and general distress, but not anxiety, hyperactivity or conduct problems. However, there was variation between age groups and duration of intervention. Not all data were amenable to meta-analysis – the inability to divide results by gender being noteworthy – but these findings support the principle of general resilience-focused preventive programmes in this cohort.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document