scholarly journals Understanding how to enhance efficacy and effectiveness of feedback via e-portfolio: a realist synthesis protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. e029173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mojca Babovič ◽  
Ren-Huei Fu ◽  
Lynn V Monrouxe
Keyword(s):  
Course Design ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Educational Practice ◽  
Realist Synthesis ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
Clinical Supervisors ◽  
Context Sensitive ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Synthesis Report

IntroductionThe validity of feedback as one of the defining components for electronic portfolios (e-portfolios) to be effective and efficacious has yet to be demonstrated. While the literature has shown individual beneficial features of e-portfolios and feedback per se, evidence of feedback as mediated through technology directly resulting in improved educational practice is scarce. The explanation of how feedback via e-portfolio improves educational practice is particularly vague.Methods and analysisThe aim of this research is to unpack how and why feedback via e-portfolio is likely to flourish or wither in its path. Given the complexity of intervention, we will apply a theory-driven approach for evidence synthesis called realist synthesis. Informed by realist philosophy of science, it seems the most appropriate method because it explores observed outcomes (O) in terms of causal relationship between relevant contexts (C) and generating mechanisms (M). Initial programme theory will be developed through literature scoping. Later on it will be tested against purposively gathered evidence (through database and journal search), which simultaneously will be evaluated for rigour and relevance (whether method used are trustworthy and whether data contributes to theory building). We strive to (1) uncover ‘context sensitive’ mechanisms that generate feedback via e–portfolio to be (in) effective and (2) define in what circumstances is this mostly likely to occur.Ethics and disseminationThe synthesis report will be written according to the RAMESES guidelines and its findings will be published in peer reviewed articles and presented at relevant conferences. The aim is to inform: (1) policy and decision makers for future-course design; (2) medical educators/clinical supervisors and learners for improved educational use. No formal ethical approval is required.PROSPERO registration number120863.

scholarly journals Understanding how and why audits work: protocol for a realist review of audit programmes to improve hospital care

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. e015121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisanne Hut-Mossel ◽  
Gera Welker ◽  
Kees Ahaus ◽  
Rijk Gans
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Care ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Realist Review ◽  
Local Context ◽  
Quality Improvements ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
Meta Review ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Improve Hospital

IntroductionMany types of audits are commonly used in hospital care to promote quality improvements. However, the evidence on the effectiveness of audits is mixed. The objectives of this proposed realist review are (1) to understand how and why audits might, or might not, work in terms of delivering the intended outcome of improved quality of hospital care and (2) to examine under what circumstances audits could potentially be effective. This protocol will provide the rationale for using a realist review approach and outline the method.Methods and analysisThis review will be conducted using an iterative four-stage approach. The first and second steps have already been executed. The first step was to develop an initial programme theory based on the literature that explains how audits are supposed to work. Second, a systematic literature search was conducted using relevant databases. Third, data will be extracted and coded for concepts relating to context, outcomes and their interrelatedness. Finally, the data will be synthesised in a five-step process: (1) organising the extracted data into evidence tables, (2) theming, (3) formulating chains of inference from the identified themes, (4) linking the chains of inference and formulating CMO configurations and (5) refining the initial programme theory. The reporting of the review will follow the ‘Realist and Meta-Review Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards’ (RAMESES) publication standards.Ethics and disseminationThis review does not require formal ethical approval. A better understanding of how and why these audits work, and how context impacts their effectiveness, will inform stakeholders in deciding how to tailor and implement audits within their local context. We will use a range of dissemination strategies to ensure that findings from this realist review are broadly disseminated to academic and non-academic audiences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42016039882.

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 A realist review of community engagement with health research

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bipin Adhikari ◽  
Robin Vincent ◽  
Geoff Wong ◽  
Claire Duddy ◽  
Emma Richardson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
Community Engagement ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Realist Review ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Registration Number

Introduction: Community engagement is increasingly recognized as a critical aspect of global health. Recent years have seen an expansion of community engagement activities linked to health research, but debates and inconsistencies remain about the aims of different types of engagement, mechanisms underpinning their implementation and impact, and influential contextual factors. Greater commitment to and consistency around community engagement by health research programs, implementers and funders requires a more coherent evidence base. This realist review is designed to improve our understanding of how and why community engagement contributes to intended and unintended outcomes (including research and ethical outcomes) in different contexts. Given the breadth and diversity of the literature on community engagement in health research, the review will initially focus on malaria research in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and draw on wider global health literature where needed. Methods and analysis: Community engagement in practice is often a complex set of interventions. We will conduct a realist review – a theory driven approach to evidence synthesis – to provide explanations for how and why community engagement with health research produces the pattern of outcomes observed across different contexts of application. We will consolidate evidence from a range of documents, including qualitative, quantitative and mixed method studies. The review will follow several stages: devising an initial programme theory, searching evidence, selecting appropriate documents, extracting data, synthesizing and refining the programme theory, and reiteration of these steps as needed. Ethics and dissemination: A formal ethics review is not required for this literature review.  Findings will be disseminated in a peer reviewed journal, through national and international conferences, and through a set of short briefings tailored for audiences with an interest in community engagement. Outputs and presentations will be informed by and feed into our network of community engagement experts. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019125687

scholarly journals Utilisation of tools to facilitate cross-border communication during international food safety events, 1995–2019: a realist synthesis protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. e030593
Author(s):  
Carmen Joseph Savelli ◽  
Ceu Mateus
Keyword(s):  
Food Safety ◽  
Contextual Factors ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Theory Development ◽  
Realist Synthesis ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
Communication Tools ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Communication And Coordination

IntroductionEfficient communication and coordination between countries is needed for prevention, detection and response to international food safety events. While communication tools exist, current evidence suggests that they are only effective within certain contexts and only cover certain geographic areas. There is a need to unpack and explore the mechanisms of how and in what context such communication tools and their components are effective at facilitating international communication and coordination to keep food safe and mitigate the burden of foodborne disease around the globe.Methods and analysisA realist synthesis will be undertaken to understand how and why certain processes and structures of communication tools, used during international food safety events, influence their utility and effectiveness according to different contextual factors. The focus of this review is explanatory and aims to develop and refine theory regarding how contextual factors trigger specific processes and mechanisms to produce outcomes. Using the realist context–mechanism–outcome configuration of theory development, a range of sources have been used to develop the initial programme theory, including the author’s experience, a scoping review of published papers and grey literature and input from an expert reference committee. To support, expand or refute the initial theory, data will be synthesised from published literature and input from the expert reference committee.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this review as it does not involve primary research. However, it will be conducted according to the appropriate ethical standards of accuracy, utility, usefulness, accountability, feasibility and propriety. The RAMESES publication standards will be followed to report the findings of this review. On completion, the final manuscript will be shared with members of the FAO/WHO International Food Safety Authorities Network (INFOSAN) and published in a peer-reviewed journal.

scholarly journals Is sarcopenia associated with anxiety symptoms and disorders? A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. e054125
Author(s):  
Emma C West ◽  
Lana J Williams ◽  
Kayla B Corney ◽  
Julie A Pasco
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Adverse Health Outcomes ◽  
Study Selection ◽  
Best Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
And Performance ◽  
And Function

IntroductionSarcopenia is a skeletal muscle disorder characterised by a progressive decline in muscle mass and function (strength and performance). Sarcopenia is associated with numerous adverse health outcomes and has recently been linked to neurological and psychiatric disorders, including dementia and depression. Whether sarcopenia is related to other common psychiatric illnesses, such as anxiety, is unclear. We aim to systematically identify and review the extant literature regarding the association between sarcopenia and anxiety symptomatology and/or disorders (anxiety) in adults.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a systematic search across four online databases (CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE Complete and PsycINFO) from inception to September 2021. Two reviewers will independently confirm study selection and assess methodological quality of included studies. If possible, a meta-analysis will be performed to determine pooled OR for the relationship between sarcopenia and anxiety. If meta-analysis is not possible due to methodological heterogeneity a ‘best evidence synthesis’ will be performed.Ethics and disseminationThis review will use published data only, thus, ethical approval will not be required. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020209420.

scholarly journals Explaining variations in test ordering in primary care: protocol for a realist review

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. e023117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Duddy ◽  
Geoffrey Wong
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Realist Review ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
Dissemination Strategy ◽  
Care Protocol ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Primary Care Doctors ◽  
Generative Mechanisms ◽  
Test Ordering

IntroductionStudies have demonstrated the existence of significant variation in test-ordering patterns in both primary and secondary care, for a wide variety of tests and across many health systems. Inconsistent practice could be explained by differing degrees of underuse and overuse of tests for diagnosis or monitoring. Underuse of appropriate tests may result in delayed or missed diagnoses; overuse may be an early step that can trigger a cascade of unnecessary intervention, as well as being a source of harm in itself.Methods and analysisThis realist review will seek to improve our understanding of how and why variation in laboratory test ordering comes about. A realist review is a theory-driven systematic review informed by a realist philosophy of science, seeking to produce useful theory that explains observed outcomes, in terms of relationships between important contexts and generative mechanisms.An initial explanatory theory will be developed in consultation with a stakeholder group and this ‘programme theory’ will be tested and refined against available secondary evidence, gathered via an iterative and purposive search process. This data will be analysed and synthesised according to realist principles, to produce a refined ‘programme theory’, explaining the contexts in which primary care doctors fail to order ‘necessary’ tests and/or order ‘unnecessary’ tests, and the mechanisms underlying these decisions.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this review. A complete and transparent report will be produced in line with the RAMESES standards. The theory developed will be used to inform recommendations for the development of interventions designed to minimise ‘inappropriate’ testing. Our dissemination strategy will be informed by our stakeholders. A variety of outputs will be tailored to ensure relevance to policy-makers, primary care and pathology practitioners, and patients.Prospero registration numberCRD42018091986

scholarly journals Identifying conducive contexts and working mechanisms of sedentary behaviour interventions in older adults: a realist review protocol as part of the ‘Stand UP Seniors’ project

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. e053942
Author(s):  
Sofie Compernolle ◽  
Delfien Van Dyck ◽  
Kenneth Vanhove ◽  
Sebastien F M Chastin ◽  
Emelien Lauwerier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Complex Interventions ◽  
Realist Review ◽  
Depth Information ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
Age Related ◽  
Modifiable Factors ◽  
Ethical Approval

IntroductionLifestyle behaviours, including sedentary behaviour, have been listed as key modifiable factors to promote healthy ageing. Sedentary behaviour is ubiquitous in older adults and has a strong link with age-related functional declines and chronic health conditions. Although several interventions have been developed aimed at the reduction of sedentary behaviour in older adults, little in-depth information is available on how these complex interventions work in different contexts. Therefore, the aim of our study was to unpack the mechanisms of how existing interventions aimed at the reduction of older adults’ sedentary behaviour work or fail to work in particular contexts in order to optimise the development and implementation of future sedentary behaviour interventions.Methods and analysisA realist review will be conducted as a first part of the Stand UP Seniors (SUPS) project and will be structured as follows: (1) defining the scope of the review, (2) searching and appraising the evidence, (3) extracting data and synthesising the results, and (4) drawing conclusions and formulating recommendations. The result of this iterative process will be a final programme theory that can be used to identify which context triggers which mechanism, and in turn might elicit which outcome. The final programme theory will be used to inform the second and the third parts of the SUPS project, which are, respectively, the development and evaluation of a sedentary behaviour intervention in older adults.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for the review. Dissemination of the realist review results, including the final programme theory, will occur through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at relevant conferences. The peer-reviewed realist review will be prepared according to the Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards publication standards for realist syntheses.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021248795.

scholarly journals A realist review of community engagement with health research

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bipin Adhikari ◽  
Robin Vincent ◽  
Geoff Wong ◽  
Claire Duddy ◽  
Emma Richardson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
Community Engagement ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Realist Review ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Registration Number

Introduction: Community engagement is increasingly recognized as a critical aspect of global health. Recent years have seen an expansion of community engagement activities linked to health research, but debates and inconsistencies remain about the aims of different types of engagement, mechanisms underpinning their implementation and impact, and influential contextual factors. Greater commitment to and consistency around community engagement by health research programs, implementers and funders requires a more coherent evidence base. This realist review is designed to improve our understanding of how and why community engagement contributes to intended and unintended outcomes (including research and ethical outcomes) in different contexts. Given the breadth and diversity of the literature on community engagement in health research, the review will initially focus on malaria research in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and draw on wider global health literature where needed. Methods and analysis: Community engagement in practice is often a complex set of interventions. We will conduct a realist review – a theory driven approach to evidence synthesis – to provide explanations for how and why community engagement with health research produces the pattern of outcomes observed across different contexts of application. We will consolidate evidence from a range of documents, including qualitative, quantitative and mixed method studies. The review will follow several stages: devising an initial programme theory, searching evidence, selecting appropriate documents, extracting data, synthesizing and refining the programme theory, and reiteration of these steps as needed. Ethics and dissemination: A formal ethics review is not required for this literature review.  Findings will be disseminated in a peer reviewed journal, through national and international conferences, and through a set of short briefings tailored for audiences with an interest in community engagement. Outputs and presentations will be informed by and feed into our network of community engagement experts. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019125687

scholarly journals Recruiters’ perspectives and experiences of trial recruitment processes: a qualitative evidence synthesis protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. e045233
Author(s):  
Nicola Farrar ◽  
Daisy Elliott ◽  
Marcus Jepson ◽  
Catherine Houghton ◽  
Bridget Young ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Ovid Medline ◽  
Qualitative Evidence ◽  
Effective Interventions ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Critical Appraisal Skills

IntroductionRecruitment to randomised trials (RCTs) is often challenging. Reviews of interventions to improve recruitment have highlighted a paucity of effective interventions aimed at recruiters and the need for further research in this area. Understanding the perspectives and experiences of those involved in RCT recruitment can help to identify barriers and facilitators to recruitment, and subsequently inform future interventions to support recruitment. This protocol describes methods for a proposed qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) of recruiters’ perspectives and experiences relating to RCT recruitment.Methods and analysisThe proposed review will synthesise studies reporting clinical and non-clinical recruiters’ perspectives and experiences of recruiting to RCTs. The following databases will be searched: Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ORRCA and Web of Science. A thematic synthesis approach to analysing the data will be used. An assessment of methodological limitations of each study will be performed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool. Assessing the confidence in the review findings will be evaluated using the GRADE Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual) tool.Ethics and disseminationThe proposed QES will not require ethical approval as it includes only published literature. The results of the synthesis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and publicised using social media. The results will be considered alongside other work addressing factors affecting recruitment in order to inform future development and refinement of recruitment interventions.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020141297.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of aliskiren combination therapy: a protocol for an umbrella review

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. e043807
Author(s):  
Jiantong Shen ◽  
Wenming Feng ◽  
Yike Wang ◽  
Qiyuan Zhao ◽  
Billong Laura Flavorta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Umbrella Review ◽  
Quality Of Reporting ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Third Person ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionEfficacy of aliskiren combination therapy with other antihypertensive has been evaluated in the treatment of patients with hypertension in recent systematic reviews. However, most previous reviews only focused on one single health outcome or one setting, none of them made a full summary that assessed the impact of aliskiren combination treatment comprehensively. As such, this umbrella review based on systematic reviews and meta-analyses is aimed to synthesise the evidences on efficacy, safety and tolerability of aliskiren-based therapy for hypertension and related comorbid patients.Methods and analysisA comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI published from inception to August 2020 will be conducted. The selected articles are systematic reviews which evaluated efficacy, safety and tolerability of aliskiren combination therapy. Two reviewers will screen eligible articles, extract data and evaluate quality independently. Any disputes will be resolved by discussion or the arbitration of a third person. The quality of reporting evidence will be assessed using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews V.2 tool tool. We will take a mixed-methods approach to synthesising the review literatures, reporting summary of findings tables and iteratively mapping the results.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for the study, as we would only collect data from available published materials. This umbrella review will be also submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication after completion.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020192131.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document