Implementation of health-focused interventions in vulnerable populations: protocol for a scoping review

IntroductionVulnerable populations face significant challenges in navigating the care continuum, ranging from diagnosis of illness to linkage and retention in healthcare. Understanding how best to move individuals within these vulnerable populations across the care continuum is critical to improving their health. A large body of literature has focused on evaluation of implementation of various health-focused interventions in this population. However, we do not fully understand the unique challenges to implementing healthcare interventions for vulnerable populations. This study aims to examine the literature describing implementation of health service interventions among vulnerable populations to identify how implementations using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research are adapted. Findings from this review will be useful to implementation scientists to identify gaps in evidence and for adapting similar interventions in unique settings.Methods and analysisThis study protocol outlines a scoping review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature, using established approaches delineated in Arksey and O'Malley’s scoping review framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist. Search strategies will be developed and refined by a medical librarian in collaboration with the research team. Searches will be conducted in electronic databases (CINAHL, Cochrane, PsychINFO, PubMed, Social Services Abstracts, Web of Science, Google and Google Scholar) and limited to studies published between 1 August 2009 and 1 June 2020. Additionally, hand searches will be conducted in three relevant journals—Implementation Science, Systematic Reviews and BMJ Open. English-language studies and reports meeting inclusion criteria will be screened independently by two reviewers and the final list will be abstracted and charted in duplicate.Ethics and disseminationThis is a review of the literature; ethics approval is not indicated. We will disseminate findings from this study in peer-reviewed journals as well as presentations to relevant stakeholders and conferences.

Download Full-text

Experimental assessment of thermal sensation and thermal comfort of sedentary subjects: a scoping review protocol

International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Safety ◽

10.24840/2184-0954_004.002_0006 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 4 (2) ◽

pp. 80-88

Author(s):

Daniele Costa ◽

J. C. Guedes ◽

J. Santos Baptista

Keyword(s):

Thermal Comfort ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Scoping Review ◽

Thermal Sensation ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Office Work ◽

Experimental Assessment ◽

Scoping Reviews ◽

Review Protocol ◽

Meta Analyses

Thermal comfort affects satisfaction in the workplace, which impacts work efficiency and productivity. Since office workers spend most of their working hours performing sedentary tasks, a scoping review is proposed to contextualize how thermal sensation and thermal comfort are experimentally assessed in the scientific literature. This work presents the scoping review protocol for the scoping review. It follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for systematic review protocols (PRISMA-P). The scoping review will be elaborated based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). The scoping review will consider peer-reviewed articles written in English, published or in-press. Grey literature and conference papers will be excluded. Only studies performing the experimental assessment of thermal sensation and thermal comfort of human subjects engaged in sedentary activities within homogeneous environments will be considered suitable for the scoping review. Studies will be retrieved from the Journal Storage (JSTOR), PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. The search strategy will consist of the use of the expression ("thermal comfort" OR "therm* sensation" OR "thermosensation") AND ("sedentary" or "office work*" or "office task*"). After removing duplicates, the remaining studies will have their title, abstract, and keywords screened. Studies meeting the eligibility criteria will be selected for full-text screening. Data items will be summarized using summary tables, and their reporting will consider the PRISMA-ScR checklist. The scoping review aims to summarize the existing scientific evidence and identify research needs to experimentally assess the thermal sensation and the thermal comfort of subjects performing sedentary tasks.

Download Full-text

Biologics in professional and Olympic sport: a scoping review

The Bone & Joint Journal ◽

10.1302/0301-620x.103b7.bjj-2020-2282.r1 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 103-B (7) ◽

pp. 1189-1196

Author(s):

Iain R. Murray ◽

Navnit S. Makaram ◽

Scott A. Rodeo ◽

Marc R. Safran ◽

Seth L. Sherman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Reviews ◽

Scoping Review ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Musculoskeletal Injuries ◽

American Football ◽

Biologic Therapies ◽

Olympic Athletes ◽

Hamstring Injuries ◽

Consensus Statements ◽

Scoping Reviews

Aims The aim of this study was to prepare a scoping review to investigate the use of biologic therapies in the treatment of musculoskeletal injuries in professional and Olympic athletes. Methods Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews and Arksey and O’Malley frameworks were followed. A three-step search strategy identified relevant published primary and secondary studies, as well as grey literature. The identified studies were screened with criteria for inclusion comprising clinical studies evaluating the use of biologic therapies in professional and Olympic athletes, systematic reviews, consensus statements, and conference proceedings. Data were extracted using a standardized tool to form a descriptive analysis and a thematic summary. Results A total of 202 studies were initially identified, and 35 met criteria for the scoping review; 33 (94.3%) were published within the last eight years, and 18 (51.4%) originated from the USA. Platelet rich plasma was the most studied biologic therapy, being evaluated in 33 (94.3%) studies. Ulnar collateral ligament and hamstring injuries were the conditions most studied (nine (25.7%) studies and seven (20.0%) studies, respectively). Athletes most frequently participated in baseball, soccer, and American football. Only two (5.7%) studies were level 1 evidence, with interpretation and comparison between studies limited by the variations in the injury profile, biologic preparations, and rehabilitation protocols. Conclusion There is diverse use of biologic therapies in the management of musculoskeletal injuries in professional and Olympic athletes. There is currently insufficient high-level evidence to support the widespread use of biologic therapies in athletes. Further research priorities include the development of condition/pathology-specific preparations of biologic therapies, and of outcome measures and imaging modalities sufficiently sensitive to detect differences in outcomes, should they exist. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7):1189–1196.

Download Full-text

Problemas de coagulação em adultos com síndroma respiratório agudo grave devido a infeção por coronavírus 2 (SARS-CoV-2): uma revisão abrangente

Revista Portuguesa de Clínica Geral ◽

10.32385/rpmgf.v37i5.13086 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 37 (5) ◽

pp. 421-434

Author(s):

Susana Pereira Costa ◽

◽

Inês Lopes Antunes ◽

Ana Margarida Gomes ◽

Cláudia Ho ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Reviews ◽

Scoping Review ◽

Web Of Science ◽

Scoping Reviews ◽

Meta Analyses

Objetivos: Resumir as informações publicadas acerca dos problemas de coagulação em adultos com SARS-CoV-2, incluindo características, fisiopatologia, diagnóstico e resposta ao uso profilático ou terapêutico de anticoagulantes ou antiagregantes plaquetários. Métodos: Realizada uma revisão abrangente, de acordo com as guidelines Joanna Briggs Institute Guidelines on Scoping Reviews e Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Scoping Review guidelines (PRISMA-ScR). Efetuada pesquisa nas bases de dados MEDLINE®, SciELO® e Web of Science® entre 1 e 2 de maio de 2020. A seleção dos artigos foi dividida em etapas sequenciais considerando: título, resumo e artigo integral. Em cada etapa os artigos foram aceites ou rejeitados tendo em conta os critérios de inclusão e exclusão. Foi feito o mapeamento dos dados e a evidência relevante foi sumarizada. Resultados: Após seleção obtiveram-se 106 artigos. Destes, 36 correspondiam a cartas, 28 a estudos originais, 25 a revisões e 14 a relatos de caso; uma meta-análise, um comentário e um consenso também foram incluídos. Os resultados mostraram associação entre COVID-19 e complicações trombóticas, embora com diferentes tipos de eventos e taxas de frequência. A tríade inflamação, disfunção endotelial e coagulopatia parecem estar subjacentes às alterações fisiopatológicas. As técnicas laboratoriais e de imagem podem ser úteis para uma intervenção adequada. A profilaxia com anticoagulantes parentéricos, preferencialmente heparina de baixo peso molecular (HBPM) em dose intermédia, entre as comummente utilizadas para profilaxia ou tratamento, está indicada em pacientes hospitalizados, especialmente com doença grave. Deve ser mantida por um período variável após a alta, dependendo do doente. A anticoagulação terapêutica parece não diferir de outras situações previamente conhecidas. Conclusões: Várias incertezas persistem na abordagem dos problemas da coagulação em pacientes com infeção por SARS-CoV-2. As informações existentes dizem respeito principalmente ao contexto hospitalar e têm origem em fontes pouco robustas. Assim, são necessários ensaios clínicos aleatorizados e controlados para sustentar as decisões clínicas em todos os estadios.

Download Full-text

What you need to know about scoping reviews

Medwave ◽

10.5867/medwave.2021.02.8144 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (02) ◽

pp. e8144-e8144

Author(s):

Catalina Verdejo ◽

Luis Tapia-Benavente ◽

Bastián Schuller-Martínez ◽

Laura Vergara-Merino ◽

Manuel Vargas-Peirano ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Reviews ◽

Scoping Review ◽

Clinical Epidemiology ◽

Recent Model ◽

Reporting Guideline ◽

Scoping Reviews ◽

Literature Reviews ◽

Different Types ◽

Reproducible Method ◽

Meta Analyses

The increasing amount of evidence has caused an increasing amount of literature reviews. There are different types of reviews —systematic reviews are the best known—, and every type of review has different purposes. The scoping review is a recent model that aims to answer broad questions and identify and expose the available evidence for a broader question, using a rigorous and reproducible method. In the last two decades, researchers have discussed the most appropriate method to carry out scoping reviews, and recently the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses’ for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) reporting guideline was published. This is the fifth article of a methodological collaborative series of narrative reviews about general topics on biostatistics and clinical epidemiology. This review aims to describe what scoping reviews are, identify their objectives, differentiate them from other types of reviews, and provide considerations on how to carry them out.

Download Full-text

Factors contributing to practitioner choice when declining involvement in legally available care: A scoping protocol

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023901 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 8 (8) ◽

pp. e023901

Author(s):

Janine Brown ◽

Donna Goodridge ◽

Lilian Thorpe ◽

Mary Chipanshi

Keyword(s):

Scoping Review ◽

English Language ◽

Current Knowledge ◽

Contextual Information ◽

Research Question ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Professional Networks ◽

Medical Treatments ◽

Team Members ◽

Meta Analyses

IntroductionAs legislation addressing medical treatments continues to evolve, there are several circumstances (eg, abortion, assisted dying) in which health practitioners may choose to not provide legally available care options. It is not always clear what underlies practitioner choice, as some research has suggested non-participation in care provision is not always due to an ethical abstention but may represent other factors. This results in tension between a practitioner’s right to refrain from practices deemed morally objectionable by the practitioner, and the care recipient’s right to access legally available treatments. The aim of this systematic scoping review is to identify the current knowledge regarding all the factors influencing practitioner’s choices when declining involvement in legally available healthcare options.Methods and analysisArksey and O’Malley’s scoping framework in concert with Levacet al’s enhancements will guide the systematic scoping review methodological processes. English language documents from 1 January 1998 to current will be sought using Medline, CINAHL, JSTOR, EMBASE, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, PsychINFO and Sociological Abstracts. MeSH headings, keywords and synonyms will be adjusted using an iterative search process. Theses and dissertations will be included in the search protocol; however, other grey literature will be accessed only as required. Two research team members will screen the abstracts and full articles against inclusion criteria. Article information will be extracted via a data collection tool and undergo thematic analysis. Descriptive summary (visual summary and study contextual information) and a presentation of analytical themes will align findings back to the research question.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist will be used to support transparency and guide translation of findings. Findings will be disseminated through professional networks, in peer-reviewed journals and conferences via abstract and presentation.

Download Full-text

Sexual health and COVID-19: Protocol for a scoping review

10.21203/rs.3.rs-59514/v3 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Navin Kumar ◽

Kamila Janmohamed ◽

Kate Nyhan ◽

Laura Forastiere ◽

Wei-Hong Zhang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trials ◽

Sexual Health ◽

Scoping Review ◽

English Language ◽

Current Knowledge ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Well Being ◽

World Health ◽

Original Research ◽

Scoping Reviews

Abstract Background: Global responses to the COVID-19 pandemic have exposed and exacerbated existing socioeconomic and health inequities that disproportionately affect the sexual health and well-being of many populations, including people of color, ethnic minority groups, women, and sexual and gender minority populations. Although there have been several reviews published on COVID-19 and health disparities across various populations, none have focused on sexual health. We plan to conduct a scoping review that seeks to fill several of the gaps in the current knowledge of sexual health in the COVID-19 era.Methods: A scoping review focusing on sexual health and COVID-19 will be conducted. We will search (from January 2020 onwards) CINAHL, Africa-Wide Information, Web of Science Core Collection, Embase, Gender Studies Database, Gender Watch, Global Health, WHO Global Literature on Coronavirus Disease Database, WHO Global Index Medicus, PsycINFO, MEDLINE and Sociological Abstracts. Grey literature will be identified using Disaster Lit, Google Scholar, governmental websites and clinical trials registries (e.g. ClinicalTrial.gov, World Health Organization, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and International Standard Randomized Con-trolled Trial Number registry). Study selection will conform to Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual 2015 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 mitigate the risks ofCOVID-19 on sexual health. The planned scoping review will help to address this gap.

Download Full-text

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

10.21203/rs.3.rs-416531/v1 ◽

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).

Download Full-text

Use of telehealth in the provision of after-hours palliative care services in rural and remote Australia: A scoping review protocol

PLoS ONE ◽

10.1371/journal.pone.0261962 ◽

2022 ◽

Vol 17 (1) ◽

pp. e0261962

Author(s):

Pathmavathy Namasivayam ◽

Dung T. Bui ◽

Christine Low ◽

Tony Barnett ◽

Heather Bridgman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Palliative Care ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Scoping Review ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Rural And Remote ◽

Remote Communities ◽

Care Services ◽

Scoping Reviews ◽

Palliative Care Services ◽

After Hours

Introduction After-hours services are essential in ensuring patients with life limiting illness and their caregivers are supported to enable continuity of care. Telehealth is a valuable approach to meeting after-hours support needs of people living with life-limiting illness, their families, and caregivers in rural and remote communities. It is important to explore the provision of after-hours palliative care services using telehealth to understand the reach of these services in rural and remote Australia. A preliminary search of databases failed to reveal any scoping or systematic reviews of telehealth in after-hours palliative care services in rural or remote Australia. Aim To review and map the available evidence about the use of telehealth in providing after-hours palliative care services in Australian rural and remote communities. Methods The proposed scoping review will be conducted using the Arksey and O’Malley methodological framework and in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. The reporting of the scoping review will be guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). This review will consider research and evaluation of after-hours services using telehealth for palliative care stakeholders in rural and remote Australia. Peer reviewed studies and grey literature published in English from 2000 to May 2021 will be included. Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL Complete, Embase via Ovid, PsycINFO via Ovid, Emcare via Ovid, Medline via Ovid, and grey literature will be searched for relevant articles. Titles and abstracts will be screened by two independent reviewers for assessment against the inclusion criteria. Data will be extracted and analysed by two reviewers using an adapted data extraction tool and thematic analysis techniques. Diagrams, tables, and summary narratives will be used to map, summarise and thematically group the characteristics of palliative care telehealth services in rural and remote Australia, including stakeholders’ perceptions and benefits and challenges of the services.

Download Full-text

A gestão do conhecimento em contexto hospitalar: uma scoping review

Revista de Investigação & Inovação em Saúde ◽

10.37914/riis.v4i2.172 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 4 (2) ◽

Author(s):

Andreia Mesquita ◽

Diana Santos ◽

Vítor Raposo

Keyword(s):

Systematic Reviews ◽

Scoping Review ◽

Scoping Reviews ◽

Meta Analyses

Enquadramento: a implementação da gestão do conhecimento nas organizações hospitalares é considerada um elemento essencial de uma boa governação, que permite dar resposta aos desafios que surgem diariamente com maior facilidade, efetividade e eficiência. Contudo, existem inúmeros fatores influenciadores da implementação deste conceito de interesse nas organizações hospitalares, sendo pertinente identificá-los. Objetivo: mapear os fatores que influenciam a implementação da gestão do conhecimento no contexto hospitalar pelos clínicos e pelos gestores em saúde. Metodologia: scoping review realizada segundo: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. Foi realizada uma pesquisa em bases de dados científicas sem restrição ao espaço temporal e nos idiomas português, inglês e espanhol. O processo de seleção de estudos, extração de dados e síntese da informação foi concretizado apenas por um autor. Resultados: através dos quatro estudos incluídos nesta revisão, foi possível identificar 16 fatores influenciadores da implementação da gestão do conhecimento em contexto hospitalar pelos clínicos e gestores em saúde. Conclusão: o mapeamento dos fatores influenciadores permite o desenvolvimento de estratégias organizacionais para potenciar ou colmatar os mesmos, tendo em vista ganhos em saúde e uma boa governação hospitalar. Também serão necessários mais estudos primários, essencialmente em contexto português

Download Full-text

Perioperative management for people with chronic kidney disease receiving dialysis undergoing major surgery: a protocol for a scoping review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038725 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (9) ◽

pp. e038725

Author(s):

Tyrone G Harrison ◽

Brenda R Hemmelgarn ◽

Janine F Farragher ◽

Connor O'Rielly ◽

Maoliosa Donald ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Chronic Kidney Disease ◽

Kidney Disease ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Scoping Review ◽

Perioperative Management ◽

Evidence Synthesis ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Major Surgery ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Scoping Reviews

IntroductionPeople with chronic kidney disease receiving dialysis (CKD G5D) have an increased risk of poor postoperative outcomes and a high incidence of major surgery. Despite the high burden of these combined risks, there is a paucity of evidence to support tailored perioperative strategies to manage this population. A comprehensive evidence synthesis would inform the management of these patients in the perioperative period and identify knowledge gaps. We describe a protocol for a scoping review of the literature to identify existing perioperative strategies, protocols, pathways and interventions for people with CKD G5D undergoing major surgery.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a scoping review in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and report per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. In February 2020, we will complete our search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry for published literature from inception to present. All study types are eligible for inclusion, without language restriction. Studies reporting a perioperative intervention in adult patients with CKD G5D are eligible for inclusion. Studies in prevalent kidney transplant patients or patients with acute kidney injury, and studies that report on surgical approaches without consideration of perioperative management strategies, will be excluded. Reviewers will independently assess abstracts for all identified studies in duplicate, and again at the full-text stage. Following published literature searches, a search of the grey literature will be developed. We will extract and narratively report study, participant and intervention details. This will include a summary table outlining the strategies employed, organised into post hoc developed perioperative domains.Ethics and disseminationEthical considerations do not apply to this scoping review. Findings will be disseminated through relevant conference presentations and publications.

Download Full-text