scholarly journals POS1444 ADOPTION OF DIGITAL MANIKINS TO SELF-REPORT PAIN: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1006.1-1006
Author(s):  
S. Mustafa Ali ◽  
R. Lee ◽  
A. Chiarotto ◽  
J. Mcbeth ◽  
S. Van der Veer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Digital Library ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Data Collection Tool ◽  
Pain Extent

Background:Chronic pain is common in rheumatic and musculoskeletal conditions, and a major driver of disability worldwide. Knowledge gaps exist with respect to correct estimates of chronic pain [1], what causes it and how best to manage it [2]. To address this, researchers need validated methods to measure pain in large, representative populations. Though many authors have recognised the potential benefits of paper-based and digital pain manikins [3]–[5], it is unknown to what extent studies have adopted digital manikins as a data collection tool.Objectives:The objective of our review was to identify and characterise published studies that have used digital pain manikins as a data collection tool.Methods:We systematically searched six electronic databases, including Medline, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, IEEE Xplore digital library, ACM Digital Library, on 3-4 of November 2020 by using a pre-defined search strategy. We included a study in our review if it used a digital manikin for self-reporting any pain aspect (e.g., intensity, type) by people suffering from pain, and if its full text was published in English. We conducted this review by following the PRISMA reporting guidelines and conducted a descriptive synthesis of findings, including manikin-derived outcome measures.Results:Our search yielded 4,685 unique studies. After full text screening of 705 articles, we included 14 studies in our review. Most articles were excluded because they used either paper-based manikins or didn’t include enough details to determine that the manikin was digital (n=386). The majority of included studies were published in Europe (n=11). Most studies collected data on a manikin once (n=11); from people with pain conditions (n=9); and in clinical settings (n=9). There was only one study that collected digital pain manikin data in a large sized (i.e., ~20,000) population-based survey.In most studies participants shaded any painful area on manikin (n=9) and did not enable participants to record location-specific pain aspects (n=11). None of the manikins enabled participants to record location-specific pain intensity. Pain distribution (i.e. number or percentage of pre-defined body areas or locations experiencing pain) and pain extent (i.e. number or percentage of shaded pixels) were commonly used manikin-derived outcome measures. In six studies, a heat map was used to summarise the extent of pain across the population.Conclusion:Digital pain manikins have been available since the 1990s but their adoption in research has been slow. Few manikins enabled location-specific pain recording suggesting that the digital nature of the manikin is not yet fully utilised. Future development of a validated digital pain manikin supporting self-reporting of the location and intensity of pain, usable across any device and screen size, may increase uptake and value.References:[1]S. E. E. Mills, K. P. Nicolson, and B. H. Smith, “Chronic pain: a review of its epidemiology and associated factors in population-based studies,” Br. J. Anaesth., vol. 123, no. 2, pp. e273–e283, Aug. 2019.[2]D. B. Reuben et al., “National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop: The Role of Opioids in the Treatment of Chronic Pain,” Ann. Intern. Med., vol. 162, no. 4, p. 295, Feb. 2015.[3]R. Waller, P. Manuel, and L. Williamson, “The Swindon Foot and Ankle Questionnaire: Is a Picture Worth a Thousand Words?,” ISRN Rheumatol., vol. 2012, pp. 1–8, 2012.[4]M. Barbero et al., “Clinical Significance and Diagnostic Value of Pain Extent Extracted from Pain Drawings: A Scoping Review,” Diagnostics, vol. 10, no. 8, p. 604, Aug. 2020.[5]S. M. Ali, W. J. Lau, J. McBeth, W. G. Dixon, and S. N. van der Veer, “Digital manikins to self-report pain on a smartphone: A systematic review of mobile apps,” Eur. J. Pain, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 327–338, Feb. 2021.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

scholarly journals Psychometric Properties of Self-Report Concussion Scales and Checklists

2012 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamara C. Valovich McLeod ◽  
Candace Leach
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Head Injury ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Clinical Use ◽  
Symptom Checklist ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Symptom Scale ◽  
Symptom Inventory

Reference/Citation: Alla S, Sullivan SJ, Hale L, McCrory P. Self-report scales/checklists for the measurement of concussion symptoms: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2009;43 (suppl 1):i3–i12. Clinical Question: Which self-report symptom scales or checklists are psychometrically sound for clinical use to assess sport-related concussion? Data Sources: Articles available in full text, published from the establishment of each database through December 2008, were identified from PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO, and AMED. Search terms included brain concussion, signs or symptoms, and athletic injuries, in combination with the AND Boolean operator, and were limited to studies published in English. The authors also hand searched the reference lists of retrieved articles. Additional searches of books, conference proceedings, theses, and Web sites of commercial scales were done to provide additional information about the psychometric properties and development for those scales when needed in articles meeting the inclusion criteria. Study Selection: Articles were included if they identified all the items on the scale and the article was either an original research report describing the use of scales in the evaluation of concussion symptoms or a review article that discussed the use or development of concussion symptom scales. Only articles published in English and available in full text were included. Data Extraction: From each study, the following information was extracted by the primary author using a standardized protocol: study design, publication year, participant characteristics, reliability of the scale, and details of the scale or checklist, including name, number of items, time of measurement, format, mode of report, data analysis, scoring, and psychometric properties. A quality assessment of included studies was done using 16 items from the Downs and Black checklist1 and assessed reporting, internal validity, and external validity. Main Results: The initial database search identified 421 articles. After 131 duplicate articles were removed, 290 articles remained and were added to 17 articles found during the hand search, for a total of 307 articles; of those, 295 were available in full text. Sixty articles met the inclusion criteria and were used in the systematic review. The quality of the included studies ranged from 9 to 15 points out of a maximum quality score of 17. The included articles were published between 1995 and 2008 and included a collective total of 5864 concussed athletes and 5032 nonconcussed controls, most of whom participated in American football. The majority of the studies were descriptive studies monitoring the resolution of concussive self-report symptoms compared with either a preseason baseline or healthy control group, with a smaller number of studies (n = 8) investigating the development of a scale. The authors initially identified 20 scales that were used among the 60 included articles. Further review revealed that 14 scales were variations of the Pittsburgh Steelers postconcussion scale (the Post-Concussion Scale, Post-Concussion Scale: Revised, Post-Concussion Scale: ImPACT, Post-Concussion Symptom Scale: Vienna, Graded Symptom Checklist [GSC], Head Injury Scale, McGill ACE Post-Concussion Symptoms Scale, and CogState Sport Symptom Checklist), narrowing down to 6 core scales, which the authors discussed further. The 6 core scales were the Pittsburgh Steelers Post-Concussion Scale (17 items), Post-Concussion Symptom Assessment Questionnaire (10 items), Concussion Resolution Index postconcussion questionnaire (15 items), Signs and Symptoms Checklist (34 items), Sport Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT) postconcussion symptom scale (25 items), and Concussion Symptom Inventory (12 items). Each of the 6 core scales includes symptoms associated with sport-related concussion; however, the number of items on each scale varied. A 7-point Likert scale was used on most scales, with a smaller number using a dichotomous (yes/no) classification. Only 7 of the 20 scales had published psychometric properties, and only 1 scale, the Concussion Symptom Inventory, was empirically driven (Rasch analysis), with development of the scale occurring before its clinical use. Internal consistency (Cronbach α) was reported for the Post-Concussion Scale (.87), Post-Concussion Scale: ImPACT 22-item (.88–.94), Head Injury Scale 9-item (.78), and Head Injury Scale 16-item (.84). Test-retest reliability has been reported only for the Post-Concussion Scale (Spearman r = .55) and the Post-Concussion Scale: ImPACT 21-item (Pearson r = .65). With respect to validity, the SCAT postconcussion scale has demonstrated face and content validity, the Post-Concussion Scale: ImPACT 22-item and Head Injury Scale 9-item have reported construct validity, and the Head Injury Scale 9-item and 16-item have published factorial validity. Sensitivity and specificity have been reported only with the GSC (0.89 and 1.0, respectively) and the Post-Concussion Scale: ImPACT 21-item when combined with the neurocognitive component of ImPACT (0.819 and 0.849, respectively). Meaningful change scores were reported for the Post-Concussion Scale (14.8 points), Post-Concussion Scale: ImPACT 22-item (6.8 points), and Post-Concussion Scale: ImPACT 21-item (standard error of the difference = 7.17; 80% confidence interval = 9.18). Conclusions: Numerous scales exist for measuring the number and severity of concussion-related symptoms, with most evolving from the neuropsychology literature pertaining to head-injured populations. However, very few of these were created in a systematic manner that follows scale development processes and have published psychometric properties. Clinicians need to understand these limitations when choosing and using a symptom scale for inclusion in a concussion assessment battery. Future authors should assess the underlying constructs and measurement properties of currently available scales and use the ever-increasing prospective data pools of concussed athlete information to develop scales following appropriate, systematic processes.

scholarly journals Gastric Residual Volumes in the Adult Intensive Care Patient: a Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Rebecca Jane Jarden
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Enteral Nutrition ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Patient At Risk

<p>Background: Enteral nutrition is one method of delivering nutrition to intubated patients. There are several issues that prevent optimal delivery of the prescribed enteral nutrition goal rates. The measurement of the patient's gastric residual volume (GRV) may demonstrate tolerability, or intolerability, of enteral nutrition. Identifying a safe GRV, at which to accept and continue enteral nutrition delivery, is essential to ensure the delivery of enteral nutrition adequately achieves the nutritional requirements of patients, and to mitigate the risks associated with the delivery of enteral nutrition. Objectives: This systematic review sought to answer the research question: what is the maximum GRV to accept in order to continue the delivery of enteral nutrition in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) adult patient? This is specifically related to the primary outcome measures indicative of accepting a specified GRV that is too high or too low. Accepting a GRV that is too high would put the patient at risk of vomiting, regurgitation, aspiration of gastric contents and potentially aspiration pneumonia. Conversely, accepting a GRV that is too low would put the patient at risk of not achieving caloric needs, potentially placing the patient at risk of malnutrition and increased morbidity. Search methods: Databases searched included: CCTR, CLCMR, CLTA, CLEED, OVID MEDLINE (R) (Ovid SP), EMBASE, CINAHL Plus with Full Text (EBSCO host via helicon), AMED, Ovid Nursing Full Text plus, CDSR, ACP Journal Club, DARE, Proquest via helicon (advanced search), Pubmed via helicon (limits "all adult", "humans", "abstract", "title"), all EBM reviews, and the reference lists of articles. Selection criteria: The types of studies eligible for inclusion were published randomised controlled trials, case controlled studies, cohort studies and observational studies. Interventions considered were a comparison of two or more GRV measures. The participants eligible were adult ICU or critical care patients receiving enteral nutrition. The primary outcome measures for study inclusion were caloric requirement met, and specified potential adverse events including vomiting, regurgitation, or aspiration. Data collection and analysis: Data was extracted using a data extraction tool created by the researcher. Risk of bias was assessed by the author using two risk of bias assessment tools. Main results: Three studies met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review (McClave et al., 2005; Metheny, Schallom, Oliver, & Clouse, 2008; Pinilla, Samphire, Arnold, Liu, & Thiessen, 2001). Each of these studies contained methodological risks of bias and limitations related to their study designs. McClave et al.'s study was a prospective study (n = 40), Metheny et al.'s study was a prospective descriptive study (n = 206), and Pinilla et al.'s study was a randomised controlled trial (n = 80). No one study, or a combination of studies, provided conclusive evidence to support the use of one particular GRV over another. Author's conclusion: No recommendation for a definitive GRV was made in this systematic review due to the lack of strong evidentiary support for one GRV over another. There remain opportunities for enhancing practice through developing a consistent, multidisciplinary approach to managing GRVs. There are future research opportunities related to improving the management of GRVs in the enterally fed ICU patient, and achieving optimal volumes of nutrition delivered.</p>

scholarly journals A systematic review with meta-analysis of the role of anxiety and depression in irritable bowel syndrome onset

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (15) ◽  
pp. 3065-3080 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Sibelli ◽  
T. Chalder ◽  
H. Everitt ◽  
P. Workman ◽  
S. Windgassen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Irritable Bowel Syndrome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Anxiety And Depression ◽  
Gastrointestinal Infection ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Irritable Bowel

BackgroundIt is well established that people with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) have higher levels of anxiety and depression compared with controls. However, the role of these as risk factors is less clearly established. The aims of this systematic review were to investigate: (1) whether anxiety and/or depression predict IBS onset; (2) the size of the relative risk (RR) of anxiety versus depression in IBS onset. Subgroup analyses explored if methodological factors affected the overall findings.MethodProspective cohort or case–control studies were included if they: (1) focused on the development of IBS in population-based or gastroenteritis cohorts; (2) explored the effects of anxiety and/or depression at baseline as predictors of IBS onset at a future point. In all, 11 studies were included of which eight recruited participants with a gastrointestinal infection. Meta-analyses were conducted.ResultsThe risk of developing IBS was double for anxiety cases at baseline compared with those who were not [RR 2.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.58–3.60]. Similar results were found for depression (RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.44–2.96). Anxiety and depression seemed to play a stronger role in IBS onset in individuals with a gastrointestinal infection although this could be attributed to other differences in methodology, such as use of diagnostic interviews rather than self-report.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that self-reported anxiety and depression provide a twofold risk for IBS onset. There is less support for the role of anxiety or depressive disorder diagnosed using clinical interview. These findings may have implications for the development of interventions focused on IBS prevention and treatment.

Patient Self-report Measures of Chronic Pain Consultation Measures: A Systematic Review

2010 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 235-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norman Jay Stomski ◽  
Shylie Mackintosh ◽  
Mandy Stanley
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Self Report

scholarly journals ADHD symptoms and diagnosis in adult preterms: systematic review, IPD meta-analysis, and register-linkage study

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Robinson ◽  
Polina Girchenko ◽  
Anna Pulakka ◽  
Kati Heinonen ◽  
Anna Lähdepuro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Birth Weight ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Linkage Study ◽  
Self Report ◽  
List Type ◽  
Adhd Symptoms ◽  
Adhd Diagnosis ◽  
Preterm Born

Abstract Background This study examined differences in ADHD symptoms and diagnosis between preterm and term-born adults (≥18 years), and tested if ADHD is related to gestational age, birth weight, multiple births, or neonatal complications in preterm borns. Methods (1) A systematic review compared ADHD symptom self-reports and diagnosis between preterm and term-born adults published in PubMed, Web of Science, and PROQUEST until April 2021; (2) a one-stage Individual Participant Data(IPD) meta-analysis (n = 1385 preterm, n = 1633 term; born 1978–1995) examined differences in self-reported ADHD symptoms[age 18–36 years]; and (3) a population-based register-linkage study of all live births in Finland (01/01/1987–31/12/1998; n = 37538 preterm, n = 691,616 term) examined ADHD diagnosis risk in adulthood (≥18 years) until 31/12/2016. Results Systematic review results were conflicting. In the IPD meta-analysis, ADHD symptoms levels were similar across groups (mean z-score difference 0.00;95% confidence interval [95% CI] −0.07, 0.07). Whereas in the register-linkage study, adults born preterm had a higher relative risk (RR) for ADHD diagnosis compared to term controls (RR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.12, 1.41, p < 0.001). Among preterms, as gestation length (RR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.89, 0.97, p < 0.001) and SD birth weight z-score (RR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.80, 0.97, p < 0.001) increased, ADHD risk decreased. Conclusions While preterm adults may not report higher levels of ADHD symptoms, their risk of ADHD diagnosis in adulthood is higher. Impact Preterm-born adults do not self-report higher levels of ADHD symptoms, yet are more likely to receive an ADHD diagnosis in adulthood compared to term-borns. Previous evidence has consisted of limited sample sizes of adults and used different methods with inconsistent findings. This study assessed adult self-reported symptoms across 8 harmonized cohorts and contrasted the findings with diagnosed ADHD in a population-based register-linkage study. Preterm-born adults may not self-report increased ADHD symptoms. However, they have a higher risk of ADHD diagnosis, warranting preventive strategies and interventions to reduce the presentation of more severe ADHD symptomatology in adulthood.

Data Collection Methods for the Voice Range Profile: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 1716-1734
Author(s):  
Grace M. Cutchin ◽  
Laura W. Plexico ◽  
Aurora J. Weaver ◽  
Mary J. Sandage
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sound Level ◽  
Data Collection Methods ◽  
Range Profile ◽  
Voice Range ◽  
The Voice ◽  
Collection Methods

Purpose To assess data collection variability in the voice range profile (VRP) across clinicians and researchers, a systematic review was conducted to evaluate the extent of variability of specific data collection points that affect the determination of frequency range and sound level and determine next steps in standardization of a VRP protocol. Method A systematic review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis checklist. Full-text journal articles were identified through PubMed, Web of Science, Psych Info, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, Google Scholar, and hand searching of journals. Results A total of 1,134 articles were retrieved from the search; of these, 463 were duplicates. Titles and abstracts of 671 articles were screened, with 202 selected for full-text review. Fifty-four articles were considered eligible for inclusion. The information extracted from these articles revealed the methodology used to derive the VRP was extremely variable across the data points selected. Additionally, there were eight common acoustic measures used for statistical analysis described in included studies that were added as a data point. Conclusions The data collection methods for the VRP varied considerably. Standardization of procedures was recommended for clinicians and researchers.

scholarly journals A Systematic Review of Data Collection Techniques Used to Measure Preschool Children’s Knowledge of and Preference for Physical Activity

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 964
Author(s):  
Nicola Wiseman ◽  
Christin Rossmann ◽  
Neil Harris
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Early Childhood ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Accurate Data ◽  
Data Collection Tool ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Activity Choices ◽  
Children’S Physical Activity

Background: Early childhood has been identified as a crucial period in which children develop physical activity preferences and behaviors. Both the knowledge of and preferences for physical activity are key proximal indicators of activity choices in children. Thus, accurate data collection tools are required to measure these variables. This review evaluates the data collection techniques that have been utilised to assess preschool children’s knowledge of and preference for physical activity, and examines the validity and reliability of existing techniques. Methods: A systematic search for relevant studies published from 1980 through to December 2017 was conducted via ProQuest, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, ERIC, PubMed, MEDLINE, and ScienceDirect. Results: Fourteen studies were eligible for inclusion in the review. The identified studies employed a limited but disparate range of techniques to assess children’s physical activity knowledge and preferences. Findings reveal that four techniques were consistently used across the reviewed studies, including: interviews, structured play-based activities, questionnaires, and observations. Only four out of 14 included studies reported the assessment of the validity of the data collection tool used, and six reported testing the measures for at least one type of reliability. Conclusion: There is a need for validated and reliable measures to assess children’s knowledge of and preference for physical activity. Greater consideration is required to align data collection techniques with the characteristics, needs and abilities of this study population.

Association between dysmenorrhea and chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based studies

2020 ◽  
Vol 223 (3) ◽  
pp. 350-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rui Li ◽  
Beixi Li ◽  
Donna A. Kreher ◽  
Amy R. Benjamin ◽  
Ashley Gubbels ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Population Based

scholarly journals The Prevalence and Incidence of Dementia: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (S1) ◽  
pp. S3-S50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsten M. Fiest ◽  
Nathalie Jetté ◽  
Jodie I. Roberts ◽  
Colleen J. Maxwell ◽  
Eric E. Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Diagnostic Criteria ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Older Individuals ◽  
Period Prevalence ◽  
Full Text Review ◽  
Annual Period ◽  
Incidence Of Dementia

AbstractIntroductionDementia is a common neurological condition affecting many older individuals that leads to a loss of independence, diminished quality of life, premature mortality, caregiver burden and high levels of healthcare utilization and cost. This is an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the worldwide prevalence and incidence of dementia.MethodsThe MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for relevant studies published between 2000 (1985 for Canadian papers) and July of 2012. Papers selected for full-text review were included in the systematic review if they provided an original population-based estimate for the incidence and/or prevalence of dementia. The reference lists of included articles were also searched for additional studies. Two individuals independently performed abstract and full-text review, data extraction, and quality assessment of the papers. Random-effects models and/or meta-regression were used to generate pooled estimates by age, sex, setting (i.e., community, institution, both), diagnostic criteria utilized, location (i.e., continent) and year of data collection.ResultsOf 16,066 abstracts screened, 707 articles were selected for full-text review. A total of 160 studies met the inclusion criteria. Among individuals 60 and over residing in the community, the pooled point and annual period prevalence estimates of dementia were 48.62 (CI95%: 41.98-56.32) and 69.07 (CI95%: 52.36-91.11) per 1000 persons, respectively. The respective pooled incidence rate (same age and setting) was 17.18 (CI95%: 13.90-21.23) per 1000 person-years, while the annual incidence proportion was 52.85 (CI95%: 33.08-84.42) per 1,000 persons. Increasing participant age was associated with a higher dementia prevalence and incidence. Annual period prevalence was higher in North America than in South America, Europe and Asia (in order of decreasing period prevalence) and higher in institutional compared to community and combined settings. Sex, diagnostic criteria (except for incidence proportion) and year of data collection were not associated with statistically significant different estimates of prevalence or incidence, though estimates were consistently higher for females than males.ConclusionsDementia is a common neurological condition in older individuals. Significant gaps in knowledge about its epidemiology were identified, particularly with regard to the incidence of dementia in low- and middle-income countries. Accurate estimates of prevalence and incidence of dementia are needed to plan for the health and social services that will be required to deal with an aging population.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document