scholarly journals Biopsychosocial factors associated with non-recovery after a minor transport-related injury: protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. e016314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stella Samoborec ◽  
Rasa Ruseckaite ◽  
Lorena Romero ◽  
Sue M Evans

IntroductionGlobally, road transport accidents contribute substantially to the number of deaths and also to the burden of disability. Up to 50 million people suffer a transport-related non-fatal injury each year, which often leads to long-term disability. It has been shown that substantial number of people with minor injuries struggle to recover and the reasons are still not well explored.Despite the high prevalence, little is known about the factors hindering recovery following minor traffic-related injuries. The aim of this paper is to present a protocol for the systematic review aiming to understand biopsychosocial factors related to non-recovery and identify current gaps in the literature.Methods and analysisThe review will be conducted in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocol guidelines. A search of the electronic databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials, will be undertaken, in addition to Google Scholar and grey literature to identify studies in period from 2006 to 2016. Quantitative and qualitative research articles describing and identifying biopsychosocial factors associated with non-recovery and health outcomes such as pain, disability, functional recovery, health-related quality of life, post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, anxiety and return to work will be included. A conceptual framework developed to identify biopsychosocial factors will be applied to assure defined criterion.At present, there is little anticipation for meta-analyses due to the heterogeneity of factors and outcomes assessed. Therefore, a narrative synthesis based on study findings will be conducted.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required as primary data will not be collected. Review results will be published as a part of thesis, peer-reviewed journal and conferences.Trialregistration numberPROSPEROregistration number: CRD42016052276.

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. e0256826
Author(s):  
Andrea E. Zuelke ◽  
Steffi G. Riedel-Heller ◽  
Felix Wittmann ◽  
Alexander Pabst ◽  
Susanne Roehr ◽  
...  

Introduction Dementia is a public health priority with projected increases in the number of people living with dementia worldwide. Prevention constitutes a promising strategy to counter the dementia epidemic, and an increasing number of lifestyle interventions has been launched aiming at reducing risk of cognitive decline and dementia. Gender differences regarding various modifiable risk factors for dementia have been reported, however, evidence on gender-specific design and effectiveness of lifestyle trials is lacking. Therefore, we aim to systematically review evidence on gender-specific design and effectiveness of trials targeting cognitive decline and dementia. Methods and analysis We will conduct a systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Databases MEDLINE (PubMed interface), PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and ALOIS will be searched for eligible studies using a predefined strategy, complemented by searches in clinical trials registers and Google for grey literature. Studies assessing cognitive function (overall measure or specific subdomains) as outcome in dementia-free adults will be included, with analyses stratified by level of cognitive functioning at baseline: a) cognitively healthy b) subjective cognitive decline 3) mild cognitive impairment. Two reviewers will independently evaluate eligible studies, extract data and determine methodological quality using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN)-criteria. If sufficient data with regards to quality and quantity are available, a meta-analysis will be conducted. Ethics and dissemination No ethical approval will be required as no primary data will be collected. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021235281.


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. e001129
Author(s):  
Bill Stevenson ◽  
Wubshet Tesfaye ◽  
Julia Christenson ◽  
Cynthia Mathew ◽  
Solomon Abrha ◽  
...  

BackgroundHead lice infestation is a major public health problem around the globe. Its treatment is challenging due to product failures resulting from rapidly emerging resistance to existing treatments, incorrect treatment applications and misdiagnosis. Various head lice treatments with different mechanism of action have been developed and explored over the years, with limited report on systematic assessments of their efficacy and safety. This work aims to present a robust evidence summarising the interventions used in head lice.MethodThis is a systematic review and network meta-analysis which will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement for network meta-analyses. Selected databases, including PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be systematically searched for randomised controlled trials exploring head lice treatments. Searches will be limited to trials published in English from database inception till 2021. Grey literature will be identified through Open Grey, AHRQ, Grey Literature Report, Grey Matters, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry and International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number registry. Additional studies will be sought from reference lists of included studies. Study screening, selection, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality will be undertaken by two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved via a third reviewer. The primary outcome measure is the relative risk of cure at 7 and 14 days postinitial treatment. Secondary outcome measures may include adverse drug events, ovicidal activity, treatment compliance and acceptability, and reinfestation. Information from direct and indirect evidence will be used to generate the effect sizes (relative risk) to compare the efficacy and safety of individual head lice treatments against a common comparator (placebo and/or permethrin). Risk of bias assessment will be undertaken by two independent reviewers using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the certainty of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations guideline for network meta-analysis. All quantitative analyses will be conducted using STATA V.16.DiscussionThe evidence generated from this systematic review and meta-analysis is intended for use in evidence-driven treatment of head lice infestations and will be instrumental in informing health professionals, public health practitioners and policy-makers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017073375.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. e0255488
Author(s):  
Ritbano Ahmed ◽  
Hassen Mosa ◽  
Mohammed Sultan ◽  
Shamill Eanga Helill ◽  
Biruk Assefa ◽  
...  

Background A number of primary studies in Ethiopia address the prevalence of birth asphyxia and the factors associated with it. However, variations were seen among those studies. The main aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out to estimate the pooled prevalence and explore the factors that contribute to birth asphyxia in Ethiopia. Methods Different search engines were used to search online databases. The databases include PubMed, HINARI, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar. Relevant grey literature was obtained through online searches. The funnel plot and Egger’s regression test were used to see publication bias, and the I-squared was applied to check the heterogeneity of the studies. Cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies that were conducted in Ethiopia were also be included. The Joanna Briggs Institute checklist was used to assess the quality of the studies and was included in this systematic review. Data entry and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.4 software and Stata 14. Result After reviewing 1,125 studies, 26 studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of birth asphyxia in Ethiopia was 19.3%. In the Ethiopian context, the following risk factors were identified: Antepartum hemorrhage(OR: 4.7; 95% CI: 3.5, 6.1), premature rupture of membrane(OR: 4.0; 95% CI: 12.4, 6.6), primiparas(OR: 2.8; 95% CI: 1.9, 4.1), prolonged labor(OR: 4.2; 95% CI: 2.8, 6.6), maternal anaemia(OR: 5.1; 95% CI: 2.59, 9.94), low birth weight(OR = 5.6; 95%CI: 4.7,6.7), meconium stained amniotic fluid(OR: 5.6; 95% CI: 4.1, 7.5), abnormal presentation(OR = 5.7; 95% CI: 3.8, 8.3), preterm birth(OR = 4.1; 95% CI: 2.9, 5.8), residing in a rural area (OR: 2.7; 95% CI: 2.0, 3.5), caesarean delivery(OR = 4.4; 95% CI:3.1, 6.2), operative vaginal delivery(OR: 4.9; 95% CI: 3.5, 6.7), preeclampsia(OR = 3.9; 95% CI: 2.1, 7.4), tight nuchal cord OR: 3.43; 95% CI: 2.1, 5.6), chronic hypertension(OR = 2.5; 95% CI: 1.7, 3.8), and unable to write and read (OR = 4.2;95%CI: 1.7, 10.6). Conclusion According to the findings of this study, birth asphyxia is an unresolved public health problem in the Ethiopia. Therefore, the concerned body needs to pay attention to the above risk factors in order to decrease the country’s birth asphyxia. Review registration PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42020165283).


BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. e020183
Author(s):  
Adolf Kofi Awua ◽  
Edna Dzifa Doe

IntroductionFor a country that lacks a national cervical cancer screening/prevention programme, there is the need to assess the volume of country-specific information, and the status of research on HPV and cervical cancer, in order to provide evidence that will inform policy and further research. The aim of this protocol is to plan an intended systematic review, which is to identify research gaps, prevent unnecessary duplication of work and enable collaboration.Methods and analysisThis protocol, developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols statement and registered by PROSPERO (CRD42017075583), will apply a 13-point eligibility criteria to screening and selecting peer-reviewed research articles and grey literature. These will be obtained from searches in databases, including, among others, those of the National Centre for Biotechnology Information, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar and the digital collections database of research publications of Universities in Ghana. Collected data will be aggregated and summarised according to emerging themes and simple descriptive statistics.Ethics and disseminationThe study will use publicly available data and will not identify authors of the publication by name. In light of these and as has been indicted, research ethics clearance is not required for evidence syntheses in such reviews. The review will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at local and internal conferences as the opportunity becomes available.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017075583.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Calista Leung ◽  
Julia Pei ◽  
Kristen Hudec ◽  
Farhud Shams ◽  
Richard Munthali ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND Digital mental health interventions are increasingly prevalent in the current context of rapidly evolving technology, and research indicates that they yield effectiveness outcomes comparable to in-person treatment. Integrating professionals (i.e. psychologists, physicians) into digital mental health interventions has been common, and the inclusion of guidance within programs can increase adherence to interventions. However, employing professionals to enhance mental health programs may undermine the scalability of digital interventions. Therefore, delegating guidance tasks to paraprofessionals (peer supporters, technicians, lay counsellors, or other non-clinicians) can help reduce costs and increase accessibility. OBJECTIVE This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the effectiveness, adherence, and other process outcomes of non-clinician guided digital mental health interventions. METHODS Four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PSYCInfo) were searched for randomized controlled trials published between 2010 and 2020 examining digital mental health interventions. Three journals focused on digital intervention were also hand searched and grey literature was searched using ProQuest and the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL). Two researchers independently assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2. Data were collected on effectiveness, adherence, and other process outcomes, and meta-analyses were conducted for effectiveness and adherence outcomes. Non-clinician guided interventions were compared with treatment as usual, clinician-guided interventions, and unguided interventions. RESULTS Thirteen studies qualified for inclusion. Results indicate that non-clinician guided interventions yielded higher post-treatment effectiveness outcomes when compared to conditions involving control programs (e.g. online psychoeducation, monitored attention control) or waitlist controls (k=7, Hedges g=-0.73 (95% CI -1.08 to -0.38)). There are significant differences between non-clinician guided interventions and unguided interventions as well (k=6, Hedges g=-0.17 (95% CI -0.23 to -0.11)). In addition, non-clinician guided interventions did not differ in effectiveness from clinician-guided interventions (k=3, Hedges g=0.08 (95% CI -0.01 to 0.17)). These results suggest that guided digital mental health interventions are helpful to improve mental health outcomes regardless of the qualification, and that the presence of a non-clinician guide improves effectiveness outcomes more than no guidance. Non-clinician guided interventions did not yield significantly different effects on adherence outcomes when compared with unguided interventions (k=3, OR 1.58 (95% CI 0.51 to 4.92)), although a general trend of improved adherence was observed within non-clinician guided interventions. CONCLUSIONS Integrating paraprofessionals and non-clinicians appear to improve outcomes of digital mental health interventions, and may also enhance adherence outcomes (though the trend was nonsignificant). Further research should focus on the specific types of tasks these paraprofessionals can successfully provide (i.e. psychosocial support, therapeutic alliance, technical augmentation) and their associated outcomes. CLINICALTRIAL The protocol is preregistered on PROSPERO (CRD42020191226).


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. e033276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valter Devecchi ◽  
Alessio Gallina ◽  
Nicola R Heneghan ◽  
Alison B Rushton ◽  
Deborah Falla

IntroductionThe course of spinal pain (neck or low back pain) is often described as episodic and intermittent, with more than one-third of people continuing to experience episodic symptoms 1 year after first onset. Although ongoing neuromuscular adaptations could contribute to recurrent episodes of pain, no systematic review has synthesised evidence of ongoing neuromuscular changes in people with recurrent spinal pain during a period of symptom remission.Methods and analysisThis protocol is developed and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-P, the Update of the Cochrane Back and Neck Group guidelines and the Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews. PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ZETOC, Google Scholar, grey literature sources and key journals will be searched up to September 2019. Observational studies investigating neuromuscular changes in people with recurrent spinal pain during a period of remission will be included. Neuromuscular function will be considered under five outcome domains of muscle activity, spine kinematics, muscle properties, sensorimotor control and neuromuscular performance. Two independent reviewers will search, screen studies, extract data and assess risk of bias (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale). Data will be synthesised per outcome domain. Where clinical and methodological homogeneity across studies exists, a random-effects meta-analysis will be conducted. Otherwise, results will be synthesised narratively. The overall quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines.Ethics and disseminationFindings of this review may aid the identification of factors that could contribute to spinal pain recurrence and aid the development of interventions for secondary prevention aimed at the restoration of optimal neuromuscular function. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences. No ethical approval was required.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019141527.


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. e034903
Author(s):  
Fiona Stanaway ◽  
Naomi Noguchi ◽  
Erin Mathieu ◽  
Saman Khalatbari-Soltani ◽  
Raj Bhopal

IntroductionGrowing ethnic diversity in the UK has made it increasingly important to determine the presence of ethnic health inequalities. There has been no systematic review that has drawn together research on ethnic differences in mortality in the UK.MethodsAll types of observational studies that compare all-cause mortality between major ethnic groups and the white majority population in the UK will be included. We will search Medline (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), Scopus and Web of Science and search the grey literature through conference proceedings and online thesis registries. Searches will be carried out from inception to 2 August 2019 with no language or other restrictions. Database searches will be repeated prior to publication to identify new articles published since the initial search. We will conduct forward and backward citation tracking of identified references and consult with experts in the field to identify further publications and ongoing or unpublished studies. Two reviewers will independently screen studies and extract data. Two reviewers will independently assess the quality of included studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. If at least two studies are located for each ethnic group and studies are sufficiently homogeneous, we will conduct a meta-analysis. If insufficient studies are located or if there is high heterogeneity we will produce a narrative summary of results.Ethics and disseminationAs no primary data will be collected, formal ethical approval is not required. The findings of this review will be disseminated through publication in peer reviewed journals and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019146143.


2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chen X. Chen ◽  
Bruce Barrett ◽  
Kristine L. Kwekkeboom

This systematic review examines the efficacy of oral ginger for dysmenorrhea. Key biomedical databases and grey literature were searched. We included randomized controlled trials comparing oral ginger against placebo or active treatment in women with dysmenorrhea. Six trials were identified. Two authors independently reviewed the articles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus with a third reviewer. We completed a narrative synthesis of all six studies and exploratory meta-analyses of three studies comparing ginger with placebo and two studies comparing ginger with a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID). Ginger appeared more effective for reducing pain severity than placebo. The weighted mean difference on a 10 cm visual analogue scale was 1.55 cm (favoring ginger) (95% CI 0.68 to 2.43). No significant difference was found between ginger and mefenamic acid (an NSAID). The standardized mean difference was 0 (95% CI −0.40 to 0.41). Available data suggest that oral ginger could be an effective treatment for menstrual pain in dysmenorrhea. Findings, however, need to be interpreted with caution because of the small number of studies, poor methodological quality of the studies, and high heterogeneity across trials. The review highlights the need for future trials with high methodological quality.


2020 ◽  
pp. 106002802094912
Author(s):  
Anum Saqib Zaidi ◽  
Gregory M. Peterson ◽  
Luke R.E. Bereznicki ◽  
Colin M. Curtain ◽  
Mohammed Salahudeen

Objective: To investigate mortality and hospitalization outcomes associated with medication misadventure (including medication errors [MEs], such as the use of potentially inappropriate medications [PIMs], and adverse drug events [ADEs]) among people with cognitive impairment or dementia. Data Sources: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to December 2019. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Relevant studies using any study design were included. Reviewers independently performed critical appraisal and extracted relevant data. Data Synthesis: The systematic review included 10 studies that reported the outcomes of mortality or hospitalization associated with medication misadventure, including PIMs (n=5), ADEs (n=2), a combination of MEs and ADEs (n=2), and drug interactions (n=1). Five studies examining the association between PIMs and mortality/hospitalization were included in the meta-analyses. Exposure to PIMs was not associated with either mortality (odds ratio [OR]=1.36; 95%CI=0.79-2.35) or hospitalization (OR=1.02; 95%CI=0.83-1.26). In contrast, single studies indicated that ADEs with cholinesterase inhibitors were associated with mortality and hospitalization. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: Individuals with cognitive impairment or dementia are at increased risk of medication misadventure; based on relatively limited published data, this does not necessarily translate to increased mortality and hospitalization. Conclusions: Overall, medication misadventure was not associated with mortality or hospitalization in people with cognitive impairment or dementia, noting the limited number of studies, difficulty in controlling potential confounding variables, and that most studies focus on PIMs.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Norris ◽  
Tommy van Steen ◽  
Artur Direito ◽  
Emmanuel Stamatakis

Objective: This review provides the first meta-analysis of the effects of physically active lessons on lesson-time and overall physical activity (PA), as well as health, cognition and educational outcomes. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Six meta-analyses pooled effects on lesson-time PA, overall PA, in-class educational and overall educational outcomes, cognition and health outcomes. Meta-analyses were conducted using the metafor package in R. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool for risk of bias. Data sources: PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, ERIC and Web of Science, grey literature and reference lists were searched in December 2017 and April 2019. Studies eligibility criteria: Physically active lessons compared to a control group in a randomised or non-randomised design, within single component interventions in general school populations. Results: 42 studies (39 in preschool or elementary school settings, 27 randomised controlled trials) were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review and 37 of them were included across the six meta-analyses (n=12,663). Physically active lessons were found to produce large, significant increases in lesson-time PA (d=2.33; 95%CI 1.42, 3.25: k=16) and small, significant effects on overall PA (d= 0.32, 95%CI 0.18, 0.46: k=8). A large, significant effect was shown on lesson-time educational outcomes (d=0.81; 95%CI 0.47, 1.14: k=7) and a small, significant effect on overall educational outcomes (d=0.36, 95%CI [0.09, 0.63], k=25). No effects were seen on cognitive (k=3) or health outcomes (k=3). 25/42 studies had high risk of bias in at least 2 domains. Conclusion: In elementary and preschool settings, when physically active lessons were added into the curriculum they had a positive impact on both physical activity and educational outcomes. These findings support policy initiatives encouraging the incorporation of physically active lessons into teaching in elementary and preschool settings.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document