Extractive text summarization system to aid data extraction from full text in systematic review development

ObjectiveTo perform a systematic review (SR) on the effectiveness of self-management interventions, in order to inform the European League Against Rheumatism Recommendations for its implementation in patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA).MethodsThe SR was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook and included adults (≥18 years) with IA. The search strategy was run in Medline through PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, and PEDro. The assessment of risk of bias, data extraction and synthesis were performed by two reviewers independently. A narrative Summary of Findings was provided according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.ResultsFrom a total 1577 references, 57 were selected for a full-text review, and 32 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria (19 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 13 SRs). The most studied self-management components were specific interactive disease education in ten RCTs, problem solving in nine RCTs, cognitive–behavioural therapy in eight RCTs, goal setting in six RCTs, patient education in five RCTs and response training in two RCTs. The most studied interventions were multicomponent or single exercise/physical activity in six SRs, psychosocial interventions in five SRs and education in two SRs. Overall, all these specific components and interventions of self-management have beneficial effects on IAs-related outcomes.ConclusionsThe findings confirm the beneficial effect of the self-management interventions in IA and the importance of their implementation. Further research should focus on the understanding that self-management is a complex intervention to allow the isolation of the effectiveness of its different components.

Download Full-text

Prevalence and predictors of medication non-adherence among patients with multimorbidity: A systematic review protocol

HRB Open Research ◽

10.12688/hrbopenres.12961.1 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 2 ◽

pp. 29

Author(s):

Louise Foley ◽

James Larkin ◽

Richard Lombard-Vance ◽

Andrew W. Murphy ◽

Gerard J. Molloy

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Full Text ◽

Chronic Conditions ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Intervention Development ◽

Evidence Base ◽

Multiple Chronic Conditions ◽

Review Protocol ◽

Form Quality

Introduction: Patients with multimorbidity are expected to adhere to complex medication regimens in order to manage their multiple chronic conditions. It has been reported the likelihood of adherence decreases as patients are prescribed more medications. Much medication adherence research to date is dominated by a single-disease focus, which is at odds with the rising prevalence of multimorbidity and may artificially underestimate the complexity of managing chronic illness. This review aims to describe the prevalence of medication non-adherence among patients with multimorbidity, and to identify potential predictors of non-adherence in this population. Methods: A systematic review will be conducted and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO will be searched using a predefined search strategy from 2009–2019. Quantitative studies will be considered eligible for review if prevalence of medication non-adherence among adults with two or more chronic conditions is reported. Studies will be included in the review if available in English full text. Titles and abstracts will be screened by single review, with 20% of screening cross-checked by a second reviewer. Full-text articles will be screened by two independent reviewers, noting reasons for exclusions. Data extraction will be performed using a predefined extraction form. Quality and risk of bias assessment will be conducted using criteria for observational studies outlined by Sanderson et al. (2007). A narrative synthesis and, if feasible, meta-analysis will be conducted. Discussion: By exploring medication non-adherence from a multimorbidity perspective, the review aims to inform an evidence base for intervention development which accounts for the rising prevalence of patients with multiple chronic conditions. Study registration: The systematic review is prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019133849); registered on 12 June 2019.

Download Full-text

Forensic facial reconstruction using CBCT – A systematic review

10.21203/rs.3.rs-437016/v1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

JIJIN MEKKADATH JAYAKRISHNAN

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

3D Modeling ◽

Diagnostic Tool ◽

Full Text ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Modeling Method ◽

Facial Reconstruction ◽

Combination Method ◽

Human Face ◽

Exclusion Criteria

Abstract Objectives This systematic review evaluated whether CBCT is a better diagnostic tool in facial forensic reconstruction. Forensic facial reconstruction is a technique to reconstruct human face from unidentified face from skull remains for human identification and facial recognition. Materials and methods Article selection and data extraction was done based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria devised for the study. The articles were screened from PubMed, ProQuest, Google scholar, Science direct and Scopus. Result Three hundred and thirty-nine articles were initially identified from which seven articles were full text reviewed and included in the review. All the articles included in this study suggest that the facial reconstruction done using CBCT are reliable. Conclusion The computerized 3D modeling method produces reliable facial reconstructions which involves the images scanned from CBCT and the combination method. The computerized 3D modeling method produces facial reconstruction which almost mimics the original resemblance.

Download Full-text

Interpersonal psychotherapy for perinatal women: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

Systematic Reviews ◽

10.1186/s13643-019-1158-6 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 8 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Katherine S. Bright ◽

Elyse M. Charrois ◽

Muhammad Kashif Mughal ◽

Abdul Wajid ◽

Deborah McNeil ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Full Text ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Mode Of Delivery ◽

Well Being ◽

Interpersonal Psychotherapy ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Perinatal Women

Abstract Background Interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) is an intervention that has established efficacy in the prevention and treatment of depressive disorders. Previous systematic reviews have not evaluated the effectiveness of IPT on symptoms of stress, anxiety, depression, quality of life, relationship satisfaction/quality, social supports, and an improved psychological sense of well-being. There is limited data regarding factors that moderate and mediate the effectiveness of IPT including the timing of the intervention or the mode of delivery of IPT intervention. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness, feasibility, and acceptability of IPT interventions to treat perinatal psychological distress and to summarize the evidence on predictors, mediators, and moderators of IPT. Methods We will include peer-reviewed studies that recruited perinatal women. The search strategy will involve the following databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Ovid), CINAHL with Full Text (EBSCO), Social Work Abstracts (EBSCO), SocINDEX with Full Text (EBSCO), Academic Search Complete (EBSCO), Family & Society Studies Worldwide (EBSCO), Family Studies Abstracts (EBSCO), and Scopus. Study inclusion criteria include (1) randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, and pre-post studies that evaluated the effectiveness of IPT; (2) qualitative studies that evaluated feasibility and acceptability of IPT; (3) study sample included and analyzed perinatal women; and (4) publication language was English. Using pilot-tested screening and data extraction forms, two reviewers will independently review studies in three steps: (1) abstract/title screening, (2) full-text screening of potentially accepted studies, and (3) data extraction of accepted studies. Disagreements will be resolved by a third reviewer. Studies will be aggregated for meta-synthesis and meta-analysis should the data allow for this. Two independent reviewers will grade methodological quality. Discussion Findings from this review will inform future development and implementation of IPT intervention research for perinatal women. Identifying key factors of successful IPT interventions will inform intervention design and adaptation of IPT interventions to increase the likelihood that perinatal women will engage in and benefit from IPT interventions. This review will also identify key considerations for increasing the effectiveness of IPT interventions during the perinatal period. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42019114292

Download Full-text

Prevalence and predictors of medication non-adherence among patients with multimorbidity: A systematic review protocol

HRB Open Research ◽

10.12688/hrbopenres.12961.2 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 2 ◽

pp. 29

Author(s):

Louise Foley ◽

James Larkin ◽

Richard Lombard-Vance ◽

Andrew W. Murphy ◽

Gerard J. Molloy

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Full Text ◽

Chronic Conditions ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Intervention Development ◽

Evidence Base ◽

Multiple Chronic Conditions ◽

Review Protocol ◽

Form Quality

Introduction: Patients with multimorbidity are expected to adhere to complex medication regimens in order to manage their multiple chronic conditions. It has been reported the likelihood of adherence decreases as patients are prescribed more medications. Much medication adherence research to date is dominated by a single-disease focus, which is at odds with the rising prevalence of multimorbidity and may artificially underestimate the complexity of managing chronic illness. This review aims to describe the prevalence of medication non-adherence among patients with multimorbidity, and to identify potential predictors of non-adherence in this population. Methods: A systematic review will be conducted and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO will be searched using a predefined search strategy from 2009–2019. Quantitative studies will be considered eligible for review if prevalence of medication non-adherence among adults with two or more chronic conditions is reported. Studies will be included in the review if available in English full text. Titles and abstracts will be screened by single review, with 20% of screening cross-checked by a second reviewer. Full-text articles will be screened by two independent reviewers, noting reasons for exclusions. Data extraction will be performed using a predefined extraction form. Quality and risk of bias assessment will be conducted using criteria for observational studies outlined by Sanderson et al. (2007). A narrative synthesis and, if feasible, meta-analysis will be conducted. Discussion: By exploring medication non-adherence from a multimorbidity perspective, the review aims to inform an evidence base for intervention development which accounts for the rising prevalence of patients with multiple chronic conditions. Study registration: The systematic review is prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019133849); registered on 12 June 2019.

Download Full-text

The Prevalence and Incidence of Dementia Due to Alzheimer’s Disease: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques ◽

10.1017/cjn.2016.36 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 43 (S1) ◽

pp. S51-S82 ◽

Cited By ~ 79

Author(s):

Kirsten M. Fiest ◽

Jodie I. Roberts ◽

Colleen J. Maxwell ◽

David B. Hogan ◽

Eric E. Smith ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Alzheimer’S Disease ◽

Alzheimer's Disease ◽

Diagnostic Criteria ◽

Full Text ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Community Settings ◽

Healthcare Needs ◽

The Impact

AbstractBackgroundUpdated information on the epidemiology of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is needed to ensure that adequate resources are available to meet current and future healthcare needs. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence and prevalence of AD.MethodsThe MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from 1985 to 2012, as well as the reference lists of selected articles. Included articles had to provide an original population-based estimate for the incidence and/or prevalence of AD. Two individuals independently performed abstract and full-text reviews, data extraction and quality assessments. Random-effects models were employed to generate pooled estimates stratified by age, sex, diagnostic criteria, location (i.e., continent) and time (i.e., when the study was done).ResultsOf 16,066 abstracts screened, 707 articles were selected for full-text review. A total of 119 studies met the inclusion criteria. In community settings, the overall point prevalence of dementia due to AD among individuals 60+ was 40.2 per 1000 persons (CI95%: 29.1-55.6), and pooled annual period prevalence was 30.4 per 1000 persons (CI95%: 15.6-59.1). In community settings, the overall pooled annual incidence proportion of dementia due to AD among individuals 60+ was 34.1 per 1000 persons (CI95%: 16.4-70.9), and the incidence rate was 15.8 per 1000 person-years (CI95%: 12.9-19.4). Estimates varied significantly with age, diagnostic criteria used and location (i.e., continent).ConclusionsThe burden of AD dementia is substantial. Significant gaps in our understanding of its epidemiology were identified, even in a high-income country such as Canada. Future studies should assess the impact of using such newer clinical diagnostic criteria for AD dementia such as those of the National Institute on Aging–Alzheimer’s Association and/or incorporate validated biomarkers to confirm the presence of Alzheimer pathology to produce more precise estimates of the global burden of AD.

Download Full-text

Institutionalizing research capacity strengthening in LMICs: A systematic review and meta-synthesis

AAS Open Research ◽

10.12688/aasopenres.13116.2 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 3 ◽

pp. 43

Author(s):

Marta Vicente-Crespo ◽

Ojo Agunbiade ◽

John Eyers ◽

Margaret Thorogood ◽

Sharon Fonn

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Full Text ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Research Capacity ◽

Theory Of Change ◽

Inclusion Criteria ◽

Middle Income ◽

Effect Change ◽

Capacity Strengthening ◽

Research Capacity Strengthening

Background: Evidence on effective strategies to ensure sustainability of research capacity strengthening interventions in low- and middle-income country (LMIC) institutions is lacking. This systematic review identified publications describing research capacity building programs and noted their effect, their contexts, and the mechanisms, processes and social actors employed in them. Methods: We searched online databases for the period 2011-2018. Inclusion criteria were that the publications 1) described the intervention; 2) were implemented in LMICs; 3) were based in, or relevant to, university staff or post docs; 4) aimed to improve research capacity; 5) aimed to effect change at the institutional level. Two reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full text in consecutive rounds, a third resolved disagreements. Two people extracted the data of each full text using a data extraction tool covering data relevant to our question. Results: In total 4052 citations were identified and 19 papers were included, which referred to 14 interventions. Only three interventions mentioned using a conceptual framework to develop their approach and none described using a theory of change to assess outcomes. The most frequent inputs described were some method of formal training, promotion of a research-conducive environment and establishment of research support systems. A range of outcomes were reported, most frequently an increased number of publications and proportion of staff with PhDs. When factors of success were discussed, this was attributed to a rigorous approach to implementation, adequate funding, and local buy-in. Those who mentioned sustainability linked it to availability of funds and local buy-in. The lack of a common lexicon and a framework against which to report outcomes made comparison between initiatives difficult. Conclusions: The reduced number of interventions that met the inclusion criteria suggests that programs should be well-described, evaluated systematically, and findings published so that the research capacity strengthening community can extract important lessons.

Download Full-text

Barriers and facilitators to patient uptake and utilisation of digital interventions for the self-management of low back pain: a systematic review of qualitative studies

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038800 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (12) ◽

pp. e038800

Author(s):

Malene Jagd Svendsen ◽

Karen Wood Wood ◽

John Kyle ◽

Kay Cooper ◽

Charlotte Diana Nørregaard Rasmussen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Low Back Pain ◽

Back Pain ◽

Conceptual Model ◽

Full Text ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Barriers And Facilitators ◽

Self Management ◽

Low Back ◽

Engagement Strategies

ObjectivesLow back pain (LBP) is a leading contributor to disability globally. Self-management is a core component of LBP management. We aimed to synthesise published qualitative literature concerning digital health interventions (DHIs) to support LBP self-management to: (1) determine engagement strategies, (2) identify barriers and facilitators affecting patient uptake/utilisation and (3) develop a preliminary conceptual model of barriers and facilitators to uptake/utilisation.DesignSystematic review following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, DoPHER, TRoPHI, Web of Science and OT Seeker, from January 2000 to December 2018, using the concepts: LBP, DHI and self-management.Eligibility criteriaPeer-reviewed qualitative study (or component) examining engagement with, or barriers and/or facilitators to the uptake/utilisation of an interactive DHI for self-management of LBP in adults (community, primary or secondary care settings).Data extraction and synthesisStandardised data extraction form was completed. COREQ (Consolidated criteria for Reporting Qualitative research) checklist was used to assess methodology. Data was synthesised narratively for engagement strategies, thematically for barriers/facilitators to uptake/utilisation and normalisation process theory was applied to produce a conceptual model.ResultsWe identified 14 191 citations, of which 105 full-text articles were screened, and five full-text articles from four studies included. These were from community and primary care contexts in Europe and the USA, and involved 56 adults with LBP and 19 healthcare professionals. There was a lack of consideration on how to sustain engagement with DHIs. Examination of barriers and facilitators for uptake/utilisation identified four major themes: IT (information technology) usability–accessibility; quality–quantity of content; tailoring–personalisation; and motivation–support. These themes informed the development of a preliminary conceptual model for uptake/utilisation of a DHI for LBP self-management.ConclusionsWe highlight key barriers and facilitators that should be considered when designing DHIs for LBP self-management. Our findings are in keeping with reviews of DHIs for other long-term conditions, implying these findings may not be condition specific.Systematic review registrationA protocol for this systematic review was registered with https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ (CRD42016051182) on 10 November 2016. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42016051182

Download Full-text

Institutionalizing research capacity strengthening in LMICs: A systematic review and meta-synthesis

AAS Open Research ◽

10.12688/aasopenres.13116.1 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 3 ◽

pp. 43

Author(s):

Marta Vicente-Crespo ◽

Ojo Agunbiade ◽

John Eyers ◽

Margaret Thorogood ◽

Sharon Fonn

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Full Text ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Research Capacity ◽

Theory Of Change ◽

Inclusion Criteria ◽

Middle Income ◽

Effect Change ◽

Capacity Strengthening ◽

Research Capacity Strengthening

Background: Evidence on effective strategies to ensure sustainability of research capacity strengthening interventions in low- and middle-income country (LMIC) institutions is lacking. This systematic review identified publications describing research capacity building programs and noted their effect, their contexts, and the mechanisms, processes and social actors employed in them. Methods: We searched online databases for the period 2011-2018. Inclusion criteria were that the publications 1) described the intervention; 2) were implemented in LMICs; 3) were based in, or relevant to, university staff or post docs; 4) aimed to improve research capacity; 5) aimed to effect change at the institutional level. Two reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full text in consecutive rounds, a third resolved disagreements. Two people extracted the data of each full text using a data extraction tool covering data relevant to our question. Results: In total 4052 citations were identified and 19 papers were included, which referred to 14 interventions. Only three interventions mentioned using a conceptual framework to develop their approach and none described using a theory of change to assess outcomes. The most frequent inputs described were some method of formal training, promotion of a research-conducive environment and establishment of research support systems. A range of outcomes were reported, most frequently an increased number of publications and proportion of staff with PhDs. When factors of success were discussed, this was attributed to a rigorous approach to implementation, adequate funding, and local buy-in. Those who mentioned sustainability linked it to availability of funds and local buy-in. The lack of a common lexicon and a framework against which to report outcomes made comparison between initiatives difficult. Conclusions: The reduced number of interventions that met the inclusion criteria suggests that programs should be well-described, evaluated systematically, and findings published so that the research capacity strengthening community can extract important lessons.

Download Full-text

Institutionalizing research capacity strengthening in LMICs: A systematic review and meta-synthesis

AAS Open Research ◽

10.12688/aasopenres.13116.3 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 3 ◽

pp. 43

Author(s):

Marta Vicente-Crespo ◽

Ojo Agunbiade ◽

John Eyers ◽

Margaret Thorogood ◽

Sharon Fonn

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Full Text ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Research Capacity ◽

Theory Of Change ◽

Inclusion Criteria ◽

Middle Income ◽

Effect Change ◽

Capacity Strengthening ◽

Research Capacity Strengthening

Background: Evidence on effective strategies to ensure sustainability of research capacity strengthening interventions in low- and middle-income country (LMIC) institutions is lacking. This systematic review identified publications describing research capacity building programs and noted their effect, their contexts, and the mechanisms, processes and social actors employed in them. Methods: We searched online databases for the period 2011-2018. Inclusion criteria were that the publications 1) described the intervention; 2) were implemented in LMICs; 3) were based in, or relevant to, university staff or post docs; 4) aimed to improve research capacity; 5) aimed to effect change at the institutional level. Two reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full text in consecutive rounds, a third resolved disagreements. Two people extracted the data of each full text using a data extraction tool covering data relevant to our question. Results: In total 4052 citations were identified and 19 papers were included, which referred to 14 interventions. Only three interventions mentioned using a conceptual framework to develop their approach and none described using a theory of change to assess outcomes. The most frequent inputs described were some method of formal training, promotion of a research-conducive environment and establishment of research support systems. A range of outcomes were reported, most frequently an increased number of publications and proportion of staff with PhDs. When factors of success were discussed, this was attributed to a rigorous approach to implementation, adequate funding, and local buy-in. Those who mentioned sustainability linked it to availability of funds and local buy-in. The lack of a common lexicon and a framework against which to report outcomes made comparison between initiatives difficult. Conclusions: The reduced number of interventions that met the inclusion criteria suggests that programs should be well-described, evaluated systematically, and findings published so that the research capacity strengthening community can extract important lessons.

Download Full-text