scholarly journals Frameworks, measures, and interventions for HIV-related internalised stigma and stigma in healthcare and laws and policies: systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. e053608
Author(s):  
Susanne Hempel ◽  
Laura Ferguson ◽  
Maria Bolshakova ◽  
Sachi Yagyu ◽  
Ning Fu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Gap Analysis ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Critical Factors ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Stigma And Discrimination ◽  
Related Stigma ◽  
Laws And Policies

IntroductionThere is strong global commitment to eliminate HIV-related stigma. Wide variation exists in frameworks and measures, and many strategies to prevent, reduce or mitigate stigma have been proposed but critical factors determining success or failure remain elusive.Methods and analysisBuilding on existing knowledge syntheses, we designed a systematic review to identify frameworks, measures and intervention evaluations aiming to address internalised stigma, stigma and discrimination in healthcare, and stigma and discrimination at the legal or policy level. The review addresses four key questions (KQ): KQ1: Which conceptual frameworks have been proposed to assess internal stigma, stigma and discrimination experienced in healthcare settings, and stigma and discrimination entrenched in national laws and policies? KQ2: Which measures of stigma have been proposed and what are their descriptive properties? KQ3: Which interventions have been evaluated that aimed to reduce these types of stigma and discrimination or mitigate their adverse effects and what are the effectiveness and unintended consequences? KQ4: What common ‘critical factors for success or failure’ can be identified across interventions that have been evaluated? We will search PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Universal Human Rights Index, HeinOnline, PAIS, HIV Legal Network, CDSR, Campbell Collaboration, PROSPERO and Open Science Framework. Critical appraisal will assess the source, processes and consensus finding for frameworks; COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments criteria for measures; and risk of bias for interventions. Quality of evidence grading will apply . A gap analysis will provide targeted recommendations for future research. We will establish a compendium of frameworks, a comprehensive catalogue of available measures, and a synthesis of intervention characteristics to advance the science of HIV-related stigma.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021249348.

scholarly journals Apathy Measures in Older Adults and People with Dementia: A Systematic Review of Measurement Properties Using the COSMIN Methodology

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Clare Burgon ◽  
Sarah Elizabeth Goldberg ◽  
Veronika van der Wardt ◽  
Catherine Brewin ◽  
Rowan H. Harwood
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Evaluation Procedure ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
People With Dementia ◽  
Patient Reported

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Apathy is highly prevalent in dementia and is also seen in mild cognitive impairment and the general population. Apathy contributes to failure to undertake daily activities and can lead to health problems or crises. It is therefore important to assess apathy. However, there is currently no gold standard measure of apathy. A comprehensive systematic review of the measurement properties of apathy scales is required. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (ID: CRD42018094390). MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were searched for studies that aimed to develop or assess the validity or reliability of an apathy scale in participants over 65 years, living in the community. A systematic review was conducted in line with the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments procedure for reviewing patient-reported outcome measures. The studies’ risk of bias was assessed, and all relevant measurement properties were assessed for quality. Results were pooled and rated using a modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation procedure. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Fifty-seven publications regarding 18 measures and 39 variations met the eligibility criteria. The methodological quality of individual studies ranged from inadequate to very good and measurement properties ranged from insufficient to sufficient. Similarly, the overall evidence for measurement properties ranged from very low to high quality. The Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES) and Lille Apathy Rating Scale (LARS) had sufficient content validity, reliability, construct validity, and where applicable, structural validity and internal consistency. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Numerous scales are available to assess apathy, with varying psychometric properties. The AES and LARS are recommended for measuring apathy in older adults and people living with dementia. The apathy dimension of the commonly used Neuropsychiatric Inventory should be limited to screening for apathy.

Factors associated with dementia-related stigma and associated domains in adolescents: A Systematic Review Protocol v1

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mrs Esra Hassan ◽  
Prof Naji Tabet ◽  
n.farina not provided
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Related Stigma ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
Learning Software ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Theses And Dissertations ◽  
Appraisal Tool

Background: To develop evidence-based anti-stigma programmes for adolescents, underlying factors that drive dementia-related stigma in adolescents need to be captured. However, it is unclear which factors play a role in dementia attitude formation in adolescents. This is a protocol for a systematic review that will seek to identify factors associated with dementia attitudes in adolescents (10-18 years old). Methods: A systematic search strategy will be used to identify observational data in which factors are associated with dementia-related stigma and associated domains (e.g. attitudes, beliefs, perceptions). Systematic searches for articles will be conducted in the following databases: PubMed, PsycInfo, Web of Science, SCOPUS and Open Access Theses and Dissertations. Titles and abstracts will be screened with the assistance of machine learning software (ASReview), prior to reviewing full texts. Following data extraction, quality assessment of study and risk of bias will be assessed using the mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT). The protocol is written in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Protocol (PRISMA-P) guidelines. Results: Descriptive data of the studies will be reported in tables and summarised narratively and split into thematic headings guided by the results of the systematic review. Identifying which factors are implicated in attitudes towards people living with dementia will allow researchers to be better informed in which factors may be a useful target for more tailored and effective dementia related anti-stigma-initiatives. Discussion: The findings from this systematic review will help guide future research to identify groups that may be at the greatest risk of developing stigmatising attitudes and potential targets for future intervention.

scholarly journals SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND GAP ANALYSIS ON ALZHEIMER’S DISEASE IN ASIAN AMERICANS, NATIVE HAWAIIANS, AND PACIFIC ISLANDERS

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S117-S117
Author(s):  
Sahnah Lim ◽  
Timothy Roberts ◽  
Jazmine Wong ◽  
Sadia Mohaimin ◽  
Young-Jin Sohn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Asian American ◽  
Gap Analysis ◽  
Research Policy ◽  
Native Hawaiians ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Publication Date ◽  
Study Objective

Abstract Background: The Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) aging population is rapidly growing and the burden of Alzheimer’s disease and its related dementias (AD/ADRD) will likely mirror this demographic growth. AANHPIs face significant barriers in obtaining timely AD/ADRD diagnosis and services; yet little is known about AD/ADRD in this population. The study objective is to conduct a systematic review on the published literature on AD/ADRD among AANHPIs to identify gaps and priorities to inform future research and action plans. Methods: The systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA Protocol for Systematic Reviews. Co-author (TR), an experienced Medical Librarian, searched PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central of Clinical Trials, Ageline and Web of Science for peer-reviewed articles describing AD/ADRD among AANHPIs. The search was not limited by language or publication date. Each citation was reviewed by two trained independent reviewers. Conflicts were resolved through consensus. Results: The title/abstract and full texts of 1,447 unique articles were screened for inclusion, yielding 310 articles for analysis. Major research topics included prevalence, risk factors, comorbidities, interventions and outreach, knowledge/perceptions/attitudes, caregiving, and detection tools. A limited number of studies reported on national data, on NHPI communities generally, and on efficacy of interventions targeting AANHPI communities. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review on AD/ADRD among AANHPI populations. Our review provides a first step in mapping the extant literature on AD/ADRD among this underserved and under-researched population and will serve as a guide for future research, policy and intervention.

scholarly journals Measures of central sensitisation and their measurement properties in the adult musculoskeletal trauma population: a protocol for a systematic review and data synthesis

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. e023204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicola Middlebrook ◽  
Alison B Rushton ◽  
Nicola R Heneghan ◽  
Deborah Falla
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Central Sensitisation ◽  
Trauma Population ◽  
Musculoskeletal Trauma

IntroductionPain following musculoskeletal trauma is common with poor outcomes and disability well documented. Pain is complex in nature and can include the four primary mechanisms of pain: nociceptive, neuropathic, inflammatory and central sensitisation (CS). CS can be measured in multiple ways; however, no systematic review has evaluated the measurement properties of such measures in the musculoskeletal trauma population. This systematic review aims to evaluate the measurement properties of current measures of CS in this population.Methods/analysisThis protocol is informed and reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis-P. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ZETOC, Web of Science, PubMed and Google Scholar as well as key journals and grey literature will be searched in two stages to (1) identify what measures are being used to assess CS in this population and (2) evaluate the measurement properties of the identified measures. Two independent reviewers will conduct the search, extract the data, assess risk of bias for included studies and assess overall quality. The Consensus-based Standards for the selection of Health Measurement Instruments Risk of Bias Checklist and a modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines will be used. Meta-analysis will be conducted if deemed appropriate. Alternatively, a narrative synthesis will be conducted and summarised per measurement property per outcome measure.Ethics and disseminationThis review will aid clinicians in using the most appropriate tool for assessing central sensitisation in this population and is the first step towards a more standardised approach in pain assessment. The results of this study will be submitted to a peer reviewed journal and presented at conferences.PROSPERO registrationnumberCRD42018091531.

scholarly journals Reducing HIV-related stigma and discrimination in healthcare settings: A systematic review of quantitative evidence

PLoS ONE ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. e0211298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Garumma Tolu Feyissa ◽  
Craig Lockwood ◽  
Mirkuzie Woldie ◽  
Zachary Munn
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Quantitative Evidence ◽  
Stigma And Discrimination ◽  
Healthcare Settings ◽  
Related Stigma

scholarly journals A Systematic Review Evaluating Psychometric Properties of Parent or Caregiver Report Instruments on Child Maltreatment: Part 2: Internal Consistency, Reliability, Measurement Error, Structural Validity, Hypothesis Testing, Cross-Cultural Validity, and Criterion Validity

2020 ◽  
pp. 152483802091559
Author(s):  
Sangwon Yoon ◽  
Renée Speyer ◽  
Reinie Cordier ◽  
Pirjo Aunio ◽  
Airi Hakkarainen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Child Maltreatment ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Content Validity ◽  
Public Health Issue ◽  
Global Public Health ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Patient Report Outcome ◽  
Psychometric Data

Aims: Child maltreatment (CM) is global public health issue with devastating lifelong consequences. Global organizations have endeavored to eliminate CM; however, there is lack of consensus on what instruments are most suitable for the investigation and prevention of CM. This systematic review aimed to appraise the psychometric properties (other than content validity) of all current parent- or caregiver-reported CM instruments and recommend the most suitable for use. Method: A systematic search of the CINAHL, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Sociological Abstracts databases was performed. The evaluation of psychometric properties was conducted according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines for systematic reviews of patient-report outcome measures. Responsiveness was beyond the scope of this systematic review, and content validity has been reported on in a companion paper (Part 1). Only instruments developed and published in English were included. Results: Twenty-five studies reported on selected psychometric properties of 15 identified instruments. The methodological quality of the studies was overall adequate. The psychometric properties of the instruments were generally indeterminate or not reported due to incomplete or missing psychometric data; high-quality evidence on the psychometric properties was limited. Conclusions: No instruments could be recommended as most suitable for use in clinic and research. Nine instruments were identified as promising based on current psychometric data but would need further psychometric evidence for them to be recommended.

scholarly journals Psychometric properties of the Jefferson Scale of Empathy: a COSMIN systematic review protocol

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brett Williams ◽  
Bronwyn Beovich
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Jefferson Scale Of Empathy

Abstract Background Empathy is an important characteristic to possess for healthcare professionals. It has been found to improve communication between professionals and patients and to improve clinical health outcomes. The Jefferson Scale of Empathy (JSE) was developed to measure this quality and has been used extensively, and psychometrically appraised, with a variety of cohorts and in different cultural environments. However, no study has been undertaken to systematically examine the methodological quality of studies which have assessed psychometric factors of the JSE. This systematic review will examine the quality of published papers that have reported on psychometric factors of the JSE. Methods A systematic review of studies which report on the psychometric properties of the JSE will be conducted. We will use a predefined search strategy to identify studies meeting the following eligibility criteria: original data is reported on for at least one of the psychometric measurement properties described in the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias checklist, examines the JSE in a healthcare cohort (using the student, physician or health profession versions of the JSE), and is published from January 2001 and in the English language. Conference abstracts, editorials and grey literature will be excluded. Six electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, PsychInfo, PubMed, Web of Science and CINAHL) will be systematically searched for articles meeting these criteria and studies will be assessed for eligibility by two review authors. The methodological quality of included papers will be examined using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. Discussion A narrative description of the findings will be presented along with summary tables. Recommendations for use of the JSE with various cohorts and circumstances will be offered which may inform future research in this field. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42018111412

scholarly journals People with intellectual disabilities, relationship and sex education programmes: A systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 78 (8) ◽  
pp. 885-900 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward McCann ◽  
Lynne Marsh ◽  
Michael Brown
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Intellectual Disabilities ◽  
Sex Education ◽  
Education Programme ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Policy Practice ◽  
Sexual Activities ◽  
People With Intellectual Disabilities

Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to examine the research evidence concerning the views and experiences of people with intellectual disabilities regarding their participation in and the effectiveness of relationship and sex education programmes. Methods: A systematic search of relevant electronic databases was conducted using defined inclusion criteria. All papers reviewed were from October 1998 to October 2018. PRISMA guidelines were followed in the design and reporting of the systematic review. Results: A total of eight studies published in English were included in the review. Data were analysed and the key themes identified were (1) designing and developing relationship and sex education programmes, (2) participating in relationship and sex education programmes and (3) perceived benefits of relationship and sex education programme participation. Conclusion: This review identified that people with intellectual disabilities are accessing relationship and sex education programmes and appear to find them helpful. Further research is required to investigate the extent to which programmes impact on long-term behaviours that enable the development of sustainable relationships and reduce the unintended consequences of sexual activities. Implications for policy, practice and future research developments are discussed.

Instruments for Measuring Satisfaction With Physical Therapy Care: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 100 (9) ◽  
pp. 1690-1700
Author(s):  
Daniel Gutiérrez-Sánchez ◽  
David Pérez-Cruzado ◽  
Antonio I Cuesta-Vargas
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Physical Therapy ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract Objective Several instruments to measure patient satisfaction have been developed to assess satisfaction with physical therapy care. The selection of the most appropriate instrument is very important. The purpose of this study was to identify instruments for assessing satisfaction with physical therapy care and their psychometric properties and to evaluate the methodological quality of studies on psychometric properties. Methods A systematic search was conducted in ProQuest Medline, SciELO, ProQuest PsycINFO, Theseus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. Articles published from 1990 to 2019, in English and Spanish, were used as limits. This systematic review followed the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards. The articles were evaluated by 2 independent reviewers using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments 4-point checklist. Eighteen studies were included. Results Nine instruments were found to be specifically designed to assess satisfaction with physical therapy care. The methodological quality of the studies was “fair” for most of the psychometric characteristics analyzed (43 items), with 24 properties scored as “poor,” 5 as “good,” and 3 as “excellent.” Conclusions Different instrument characteristics—such as the scope and population with which the instrument will be used, its dimensions, the number of items, and the evidence shown in the evaluation of each psychometric property—should be considered by clinicians and researchers to decide which instrument is the best to measure the construct of patient satisfaction with physical therapy. Impact Evaluating patient satisfaction is very useful in clinical practice at the hospital, community, and primary care levels. Physical therapist clinicians and researchers can use this systematic review to select instruments whose characteristics will best measure their patients’ satisfaction with physical therapy care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document