scholarly journals Caregiver-mediated interventions to support self-regulation among infants and young children (0-5): A protocol for a realist review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Louise Finlay-Jones ◽  
Elaine Bennett ◽  
Jenny Downs ◽  
Sally Kendall ◽  
Keerthi Kottampally ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Realist Review ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
What Works ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Science Framework ◽  
Infants And Young Children

AbstractBackground and ObjectivesSelf-regulation is a modifiable protective factor for lifespan mental and physical health outcomes. Early caregiver-mediated interventions to promote infant and child regulatory outcomes prevent long-term developmental, emotional, and behavioural difficulties and improve outcomes such as school readiness, educational achievement, and economic success. To harness the population health promise of these programmes, there is a need for more nuanced understanding of the impact of these interventions. The aim of this realist review is to understand how, why, under which circumstances, and for whom, early caregiver-mediated interventions improve infant and child self-regulation. The specific research questions guiding this review were based on consultation with families and community organizations that provide early childhood and family services.Design, Methods and AnalysisRealist reviews take a theory-driven and iterative approach to evidence synthesis, structured around continuous refinement of a programme theory. Programme theories specify context-mechanism-outcome configurations to explain what works, for whom, under which circumstances, and how. Our initial programme theory is based on prior work in this field and will be refined through searching peer-reviewed and grey literature to identify relevant evidence. A working group, comprising service users, community organization representatives, representatives from specific populations, clinicians, and review team members will be formed to guide the evidence synthesis and interpretation, as well as the development and dissemination of recommendations based on the findings of the review. The review will involve searching: (1) electronic databases (e.g. EMBASE, Medline, PsycInfo), (2) connected papers, articles and citations, and (3) grey literature. Decisions to include evidence will be guided by judgements about their contribution to the programme theory and will be made by the research team, with input from the working group as required. Evidence synthesis will be reported using the RAMESES guidelines and disseminated through peer-reviewed publication.Trial registration numberThe protocol is registered with Open Science Framework https://osf.io/5ce2z/registrationsStrengths and LimitationsUses a realist approach to provide insight into what works, for whom, under which circumstances, and how for caregiver-mediated interventions designed to promote self-regulation outcomes among infants and young children.Research questions were developed in consultation with families and service providers.Decision-making will be transparently documented, and all review materials made available on the Open Science Framework repository.The programme theory will be largely derived from peer-reviewed journal articles, and therefore may be subject to publication bias.

scholarly journals Caregiver-mediated interventions to support self-regulation among infants and young children (0–5 years): a protocol for a realist review

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e046078
Author(s):  
Amy Finlay-Jones ◽  
Jetro Emanel Ang ◽  
Elaine Bennett ◽  
Jenny Downs ◽  
Sally Kendall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
School Readiness ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Protective Factor ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Realist Review ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
Review Team ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionSelf-regulation is a modifiable protective factor for lifespan mental and physical health outcomes. Early caregiver-mediated interventions to promote infant and child regulatory outcomes prevent long-term developmental, emotional and behavioural difficulties and improve outcomes such as school readiness, educational achievement and economic success. To harness the population health promise of these programmes, there is a need for more nuanced understanding of the impact of these interventions. The aim of this realist review is to understand how, why, under which circumstances and for whom, early caregiver-mediated interventions improve infant and child self-regulation. The research questions guiding this review were based on consultation with families and community organisations that provide early childhood and family services.Methods and analysisRealist reviews take a theory-driven and iterative approach to evidence synthesis, structured around continuous refinement of a programme theory. Programme theories specify context-mechanism-outcome configurations to explain what works, for whom, under which circumstances and how. Our initial programme theory is based on prior work in this field and will be refined through the review process. A working group, comprising service users, community organisation representatives, representatives from specific populations, clinicians and review team members will guide the evidence synthesis and interpretation, as well as the development and dissemination of recommendations based on the findings of the review. The review will involve searching: (i) electronic databases, (ii) connected papers, articles and citations and (iii) grey literature. Decisions to include evidence will be guided by judgements about their contribution to the programme theory and will be made by the research team, with input from the working group. Evidence synthesis will be reported using the Realist and MEta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards guidelines.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required as this is a review. Findings will be disseminated to our working group and through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.Review registration numberThe protocol is registered with Open Science Framework https://osf.io/5ce2z/registrations.

scholarly journals Remediating doctors’ performance to restore patient safety: a realist review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. e025943 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tristan Price ◽  
Nicola Brennan ◽  
Jennifer Cleland ◽  
Linda Prescott-Clements ◽  
Amanda Wanner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Realist Review ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Stakeholder Group ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
Dissemination Strategy ◽  
Knowledge To Action ◽  
Patient Representatives

IntroductionUnderperformance by doctors poses a risk to patient safety. Remediation is an intervention designed to remedy underperformance and return a doctor to safe practice. Remediation is widely used across healthcare systems globally, and has clear implications for both patient safety and doctor retention. Yet, there is a poor evidence base to inform remediation programmes. In particular, there is a lack of understanding as to why and how a remedial intervention may work to change a doctor’s practice. The aim of this research is to identify why, how, in what contexts, for whom and to what extent remediation programmes for practising doctors work to support patient safety.Methods and analysisRealist review is an approach to evidence synthesis that seeks to develop programme theories about how an intervention works to produce its effects. The initial search strategy will involve: database and grey literature searching, citation searching and contacting authors. The evidence search will be extended as the review progresses and becomes more focused on the development of specific aspects of the programme theory. The development of the programme theory will involve input from a stakeholder group consisting of professional experts in the remediation process and patient representatives. Evidence synthesis will use a realist logic of analysis to interrogate data in order to develop and refine the initial programme theory into a more definitive realist programme theory of how remediation works. The study will follow and be reported according to Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses—Evolving Standards (RAMESES).Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Our dissemination strategy will include input from our stakeholder group. Customised outputs will be developed using the knowledge-to-action cycle framework, and will be targeted to: policy-makers; education providers and regulators, the National Health Service, doctors and academics.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018088779.

scholarly journals Upskilling health and care workers with augmented and virtual reality: protocol for a realist review to develop an evidence-informed programme theory

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e050033
Author(s):  
Norina Gasteiger ◽  
Sabine N van der Veer ◽  
Paul Wilson ◽  
Dawn Dowding
Keyword(s):  
Virtual Reality ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Realist Review ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
Clinical Educators ◽  
Continued Learning ◽  
Search Quality

IntroductionAugmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) are increasingly used to upskill health and care providers, including in surgical, nursing and acute care settings. Many studies have used AR/VR to deliver training, providing mixed evidence on their effectiveness and limited evidence regarding contextual factors that influence effectiveness and implementation. This review will develop, test and refine an evidence-informed programme theory on what facilitates or constrains the implementation of AR or VR programmes in health and care settings and understand how, for whom and to what extent they ‘work’.Methods and analysisThis realist review adheres to the Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) standards and will be conducted in three steps: theory elicitation, theory testing and theory refinement. First, a search will identify practitioner, academic and learning and technology adoption theories from databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, Embase, Education Resources Information Center, PsycINFO and Web of Science), practitioner journals, snowballing and grey literature. Information regarding contexts, mechanisms and outcomes will be extracted. A narrative synthesis will determine overlapping configurations and form an initial theory. Second, the theory will be tested using empirical evidence located from the above databases and identified from the first search. Quality will be assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), and relevant information will be extracted into a coding sheet. Third, the extracted information will be compared with the initial programme theory, with differences helping to make refinements. Findings will be presented as a narrative summary, and the MMAT will determine our confidence in each configuration.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required. This review will develop an evidence-informed programme theory. The results will inform and support AR/VR interventions from clinical educators, healthcare providers and software developers. Upskilling through AR/VR learning interventions may improve quality of care and promote evidence-based practice and continued learning. Findings will be disseminated through conference presentations and peer-reviewed journal articles.

scholarly journals Contexts and mechanisms that promote access to healthcare for populations experiencing homelessness: a realist review

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. e043091
Author(s):  
Rikke Siersbaek ◽  
John Alexander Ford ◽  
Sara Burke ◽  
Clíona Ní Cheallaigh ◽  
Steve Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Health System ◽  
Healthcare Access ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Realist Review ◽  
Access To Healthcare ◽  
Staff Retention ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Ovid Medline ◽  
High Level

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to identify and understand the health system contexts and mechanisms that allow for homeless populations to access appropriate healthcare when needed.DesignA realist review.Data sourcesOvid MEDLINE, embase.com, CINAHL, ASSIA and grey literature until April 2019.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesThe purpose of the review was to identify health system patterns which enable access to healthcare for people who experience homelessness. Peer-reviewed articles were identified through a systematic search, grey literature search, citation tracking and expert recommendations. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were assessed for rigour and relevance and coded to identify data relating to contexts, mechanisms and/or outcomes.AnalysisInductive and deductive coding was used to generate context–mechanism–outcome configurations, which were refined and then used to build several iterations of the overarching programme theory.ResultsSystematic searching identified 330 review articles, of which 24 were included. An additional 11 grey literature and primary sources were identified through citation tracking and expert recommendation. Additional purposive searching of grey literature yielded 50 records, of which 12 were included, for a total of 47 included sources. The analysis found that healthcare access for populations experiencing homelessness is improved when services are coordinated and delivered in a way that is organised around the person with a high degree of flexibility and a culture that rejects stigma, generating trusting relationships between patients and staff/practitioners. Health systems should provide long-term, dependable funding for services to ensure sustainability and staff retention.ConclusionsWith homelessness on the rise internationally, healthcare systems should focus on high-level factors such as funding stability, building inclusive cultures and setting goals which encourage and support staff to provide flexible, timely and connected services to improve access.

scholarly journals Conversations about FGM in primary care: a realist review on how, why and under what circumstances FGM is discussed in general practice consultations

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. e039809
Author(s):  
Sharon Dixon ◽  
Claire Duddy ◽  
Gabrielle Harrison ◽  
Chrysanthi Papoutsi ◽  
Sue Ziebland ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Theory Development ◽  
Realist Review ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Mandatory Reporting ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
Genital Mutilation ◽  
The Impact

ObjectivesLittle is known about the management of female genital mutilation (FGM) in primary care. There have been significant recent statutory changes relevant to general practitioners (GPs) in England, including a mandatory reporting duty. We undertook a realist synthesis to explore what influences how and when GPs discuss FGM with their patients.SettingPrimary care in England.Data sourcesRealist literature synthesis searching 10 databases with terms: GPs, primary care, obstetrics, gynaecology, midwifery and FGM (UK and worldwide). Citation chasing was used, and relevant grey literature was included, including searching FGM advocacy organisation websites for relevant data. Other potentially relevant literature fields were searched for evidence to inform programme theory development. We included all study designs and papers that presented evidence about factors potentially relevant to considering how, why and in what circumstances GPs feel able to discuss FGM with their patients.Primary outcome measureThis realist review developed programme theory, tested against existing evidence, on what influences GPs actions and reactions to FGM in primary care consultations and where, when and why these influences are activated.Results124 documents were included in the synthesis. Our analysis found that GPs need knowledge and training to help them support their patients with FGM, including who may be affected, what needs they may have and how to talk sensitively about FGM. Access to specialist services and guidance may help them with this role. Reporting requirements may complicate these conversations.ConclusionsThere is a pressing need to develop (and evaluate) training to help GPs meet FGM-affected communities’ health needs and to promote the accessibility of primary care. Education and resources should be developed in partnership with community members. The impact of the mandatory reporting requirement and the Enhanced Dataset on healthcare interactions in primary care warrants evaluation.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018091996.

Psychophysiology, cognition, and political differences

2021 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordan Mansell ◽  
Allison Harell ◽  
Elisabeth Gidengil ◽  
Patrick A. Stewart
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Common Theme ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
The Future ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Political Differences ◽  
Science Framework

AbstractWe introduce the Politics and the Life Sciences special issue on Psychophysiology, Cognition, and Political Differences. This issue represents the second special issue funded by the Association for Politics and the Life Sciences that adheres to the Open Science Framework for registered reports (RR). Here pre-analysis plans (PAPs) are peer-reviewed and given in-principle acceptance (IPA) prior to data being collected and/or analyzed, and are published contingent upon the preregistration of the study being followed as proposed. Bound by a common theme of the importance of incorporating psychophysiological perspectives into the study of politics, broadly defined, the articles in this special issue feature a unique set of research questions and methodologies. In the following, we summarize the findings, discuss the innovations produced by this research, and highlight the importance of open science for the future of political science research.

scholarly journals Understanding the impact of delegated home visiting services accessed via general practice by community-dwelling patients: a realist review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. e024876 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Abrams ◽  
Geoffrey Wong ◽  
Kamal Ram Mahtani ◽  
Stephanie Tierney ◽  
Anne-Marie Boylan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Home Visiting ◽  
Hospital Admissions ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Realist Review ◽  
Professional Associations ◽  
Community Dwelling ◽  
Mixed Method Research ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionIn western countries, early visiting services (EVS) have been proposed as a recent intervention to reduce both general practitioner workload and hospital admissions among housebound individuals experiencing a healthcare need within the community. EVS involves the delegation of the patient home visits to other staff groups such as paramedics or nursing staff. However, the principles of organising this care are unknown and it remains unclear how different contexts, such as patient conditions and the processes of organising EVS influence care outcomes. A review has been designed to understand how EVS are enacted and, specifically, who benefits, why, how and when in order to provide further insight into the design and delivery of EVS.Methods and analysisThe purpose of this review is to produce findings that provide explanations of how and why EVS contexts influence their associated outcomes. Evidence on EVS will be consolidated through realist review—a theory-driven approach to evidence synthesis. A realist approach is needed as EVS is a complex intervention. What EVS achieve is likely to vary for different individuals and contexts. We expect to synthesise a range of relevant data such as qualitative, quantitative and mixed-method research in the following stages: devising an initial programme theory, searching evidence, selecting appropriate documents, extracting data, synthesising and refining the programme theory.Ethics and disseminationA formal ethics review is not required as this study is secondary research. Findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal, at national and international conferences and to relevant professional associations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018096518.

scholarly journals Interventions to Mitigate COVID-19 Misinformation: Protocol for a Scoping Review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Navin Kumar ◽  
Nathan Walter ◽  
Kate Nyhan ◽  
Kaveh Khoshnood ◽  
Joseph D Tucker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
English Language ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Study Selection ◽  
Scoping Reviews ◽  
Science Framework

Abstract Background: The duration and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic depends in a large part on individual and societal actions which is influenced by the quality and salience of the information to which they are exposed. Unfortunately, COVID-19 misinformation has proliferated. To date, no systematic efforts have been made to evaluate interventions that mitigate COVID-19-related misinformation. We plan to conduct a scoping review that seeks to fill several of the gaps in the current knowledge of interventions that mitigate COVID-19-related misinformation.Methods: A scoping review focusing on interventions that mitigate COVID-19 misinformation will be conducted. We will search (from January 2020 onwards) MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Africa-Wide Information, Global Health, WHO Global Literature on Coronavirus Disease Database, WHO Global Index Medicus, and Sociological Abstracts. Grey literature will be identified using Disaster Lit, Google Scholar, Open Science Framework, governmental websites and preprint servers (e.g. EuropePMC, PsyArXiv, MedRxiv, JMIR Preprints). Study selection will conform to Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual 2020 Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews. Only English language, original studies will be considered for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. A narrative summary of findings will be conducted. Data analysis will involve quantitative (e.g. frequencies) and qualitative (e.g. content and thematic analysis) methods.Discussion: Original research is urgently needed to design interventions to mitigate COVID-19 misinformation. The planned scoping review will help to address this gap.Systematic Review registrations: Systematic Review Registration: Open Science Framework (osf/io/etw9d).

scholarly journals Contexts and mechanisms that promote access to healthcare for populations experiencing homelessness: a realist review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rikke Siersbaek ◽  
John Ford ◽  
Sara Burke ◽  
Clíona Ní Cheallaigh ◽  
Steve Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Health System ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Healthcare Access ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Realist Review ◽  
Access To Healthcare ◽  
Staff Retention ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
Eligibility Criteria

Abstract Objective: The objective of this study was to identify and understand the health system contexts and mechanisms that allow for homeless populations to access appropriate healthcare when needed.Design: A realist review.Data sources: Ovid MEDLINE, embase.com, CINAHL, ASSIA and grey literature until April 2019. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: The purpose of the review was to identify health system patterns which enable access to healthcare for people who experience homelessness. Peer reviewed articles were first identified through a systematic search, grey literature searching, citation tracking and expert recommendations. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were assessed for rigour and relevance and coded to identify data relating to contexts, mechanisms and/or outcomes.Analysis: Inductive coding was used to generate Context-Mechanism-Outcome configurations which were refined and then used to build several iterations of the overarching programme theory.Results: Searching identified 330 review articles, of which 24 were included. Additional searching of grey literature yielded 50 records of which 12 were included. An additional 11 grey literature and primary sources were identified through citation tracking and expert recommendation for a total of 47 included sources. The analysis found that healthcare access for populations experiencing homelessness is improved when services are coordinated and delivered in a way that is organised around the person with a high degree of flexibility and a culture that rejects stigma generating trusting relationships between patients and staff/providers. Health systems should provide long-term, dependable funding for services to ensure sustainability and staff retention. Conclusions: With homelessness on the rise internationally, this study will inform health systems policy-making and implementation. It contributes to our understanding how healthcare systems can be more accessible for populations experiencing homelessness by providing long-term stable funding, promoting inclusive cultures and limiting stigma. Health systems should be flexible, timely and connected.

scholarly journals Oral ulcers of COVID-19 patients: a scoping review protocol

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abanoub Riad ◽  
Julien Issa ◽  
Veronika Chuchmova ◽  
Simona Slezakova ◽  
Esraa Gomaa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Scoping Review ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Hand Search ◽  
Oral Ulcers ◽  
Cochrane Database ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
Science Framework

AbstractObjectiveThis scoping review aims to systematically identify the types, characteristics, and possible pathophysiologic etiologies of the oral ulcers that emerge in COVID-19 patients.IntroductionThe oral cavity is a vulnerable niche for the most diverse microbial ecosystem in the human body; therefore, it presents a wide array of mucocutaneous complications that could indicate various acute and chronic conditions. The COVID-19-related oral conditions, including oral ulcers, had been widely debated as direct manifestations or indirect complications of the SARS-CoV-2 infection. According to a preliminary search of PROSPERO, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the JBI Evidence Synthesis, there is no published nor registered scoping review concerned with the oral ulcers of COVID-19 patients.Inclusion criteriaThe review will include studies included COVID-19 patients whose infection had been confirmed by RT-PCR testing regardless of infection severity and clinical course. Only the studies that reported COVID-19 patients with oral ulcers.MethodsA three-phase search strategy will be carried out: an initial limited search, a full electronic search, and hand search using the reference lists of all included records. The main bibliographic databases of published literature will include MEDLINE® (Ovid), EMBASE (Elsevier), and Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register. All identified records will be managed using EndNote 9.2, and the titles and abstracts will be screened against the inclusion criteria before the full text of all potentially relevant studies will be examined. The data will be presented in tabular form, rating maps, and narrative summary.RegistrationThis protocol had been pre-registered in Open Science Framework (OSF) Registries.[1]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document