scholarly journals Men’s grief following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss: a systematic review and emerging theoretical model

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Louise Obst ◽  
Clemence Due ◽  
Melissa Oxlad ◽  
Philippa Middleton
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Ecological Model ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Social Recognition ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Disenfranchised Grief ◽  
Female Partners ◽  
Registration Number

Abstract Background Emotional distress following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss is common, with enduring grief occurring for many parents. However, little is known about men’s grief, since the majority of existing literature and subsequent bereavement care guidelines have focused on women. To develop a comprehensive understanding of men’s grief, this systematic review sought to summarise and appraise the literature focusing on men’s grief following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss. Methods A systematic review was undertaken with searches completed across four databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and CINAHL). These were guided by two research questions: 1) what are men’s experiences of grief following pregnancy/neonatal loss; and 2) what are the predictors of men’s grief following pregnancy/neonatal loss? Eligible articles were qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods empirical studies including primary data on men’s grief, published between 1998 and October 2018. Eligibility for loss type included miscarriage or stillbirth (by any definition), termination of pregnancy for nonviable foetal anomaly, and neonatal death up to 28 days after a live birth. Results A final sample of 46 articles were identified, including 26 qualitative, 19 quantitative, and one mixed methods paper. Findings indicate that men’s grief experiences are highly varied, and current grief measures may not capture all of the complexities of grief for men. Qualitative studies identified that in comparison to women, men may face different challenges including expectations to support female partners, and a lack of social recognition for their grief and subsequent needs. Men may face double-disenfranchised grief in relation to the pregnancy/neonatal loss experience. Conclusion There is a need to increase the accessibility of support services for men following pregnancy/neonatal loss, and to provide recognition and validation of their experiences of grief. Cohort studies are required among varied groups of bereaved men to confirm grief-predictor relationships, and to refine an emerging socio-ecological model of men’s grief. Trials registration PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018103981

scholarly journals Men’s grief following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss: A systematic review and emerging theoretical model

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Obst ◽  
Clemence Due ◽  
Melissa Oxlad ◽  
Philippa Middleton
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Ecological Model ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Social Recognition ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Disenfranchised Grief ◽  
Female Partners ◽  
Pregnancy And Childbirth

Abstract Background Emotional distress following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss is common, with enduring grief occurring for many parents. However, little is known about men’s grief, since the majority of existing literature and subsequent bereavement care guidelines have focused on women. To develop a comprehensive understanding of men’s grief, this systematic review sought to summarise and appraise the literature focusing on men’s experiences of grief following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss.Methods Systematic searches were completed across four databases (PsycINFO, PubMed, Embase and CINAHL), guided by two research questions: 1) what are men’s experiences of grief following pregnancy/neonatal loss; and 2) what are the predictors of men’s grief following pregnancy/neonatal loss? Eligible articles were qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods empirical studies including primary data on men’s grief, published between 1998 and October 2018. Eligibility for loss type included any definition of miscarriage or stillbirth, and neonatal death up to 28 days after a live birth.Results A final sample of 46 articles were identified, of which 26 were qualitative, 19 quantitative, and one mixed methods. Findings indicate that men’s grief experiences are highly varied, and current grief measures may not capture all of the complexities of grief for men. Qualitative studies identified that in comparison to women, men may face different challenges including expectations to support female partners, and a lack of social recognition for their grief and subsequent support needs. Men may face double-disenfranchised grief in relation to the pregnancy/neonatal loss experience.Conclusion To refine an emerging socio-ecological model of men’s grief, cohort studies are needed among varied groups of bereaved men to confirm grief-predictor relationships. There remains a need to promote genuine and consistent involvement of fathers as equal partners throughout pregnancy and childbirth. Likewise, engaging men early in the grief process is essential to providing recognition and validation to their experience, and improving awareness of available support services.

scholarly journals Men’s grief following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss: A systematic review and emerging theoretical model

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Obst ◽  
Clemence Due ◽  
Melissa Oxlad ◽  
Philippa Middleton
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Ecological Model ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Social Recognition ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Disenfranchised Grief ◽  
Female Partners ◽  
Definition Of

Abstract Background: Emotional distress following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss is common, with enduring grief occurring for many parents. However, little is known about men’s grief, since the majority of existing literature and subsequent bereavement care guidelines have focused on women. To develop a comprehensive understanding of men’s grief, this systematic review sought to summarise and appraise the literature focusing on men’s grief following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss. Methods: A systematic review was undertaken with searches completed across four databases (PsycINFO, PubMed, Embase and CINAHL). These were guided by two research questions: 1) what are men’s experiences of grief following pregnancy/neonatal loss; and 2) what are the predictors of men’s grief following pregnancy/neonatal loss? Eligible articles were qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods empirical studies including primary data on men’s grief, published between 1998 and October 2018. Eligibility for loss type included any definition of miscarriage or stillbirth, termination of pregnancy for nonviable foetal anomaly, and neonatal death up to 28 days after a live birth. Results: A final sample of 46 articles were identified, of which 26 were qualitative, 19 quantitative, and one mixed methods. Findings indicate that men’s grief experiences are highly varied, and current grief measures may not capture all of the complexities of grief for men. Qualitative studies identified that in comparison to women, men may face different challenges including expectations to support female partners, and a lack of social recognition for their grief and subsequent needs. Men may face double-disenfranchised grief in relation to the pregnancy/neonatal loss experience. Conclusion: There is a need to increase the accessibility of support services for men following pregnancy/neonatal loss, and to provide recognition and validation to their experiences of grief. To refine an emerging socio-ecological model of men’s grief, cohort studies are required among varied groups of bereaved men to confirm grief-predictor relationships.

scholarly journals Men’s grief following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss: A systematic review and emerging theoretical model

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Obst ◽  
Clemence Due ◽  
Melissa Oxlad ◽  
Philippa Middleton
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Ecological Model ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Social Recognition ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Disenfranchised Grief ◽  
Female Partners ◽  
Final Sample

Abstract Background : Emotional distress following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss is common, with enduring grief occurring for many parents. However, little is known about men’s grief, since the majority of existing literature and subsequent bereavement care guidelines have focused on women. To develop a comprehensive understanding of men’s grief, this systematic review sought to summarise and appraise the literature focusing on men’s grief following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss. Methods : A systematic review was undertaken with searches completed across four databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and CINAHL). These were guided by two research questions: 1) what are men’s experiences of grief following pregnancy/neonatal loss; and 2) what are the predictors of men’s grief following pregnancy/neonatal loss? Eligible articles were qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods empirical studies including primary data on men’s grief, published between 1998 and October 2018. Eligibility for loss type included miscarriage or stillbirth (by any definition), termination of pregnancy for nonviable foetal anomaly, and neonatal death up to 28 days after a live birth. Results : A final sample of 46 articles were identified, including 26 qualitative, 19 quantitative, and one mixed methods paper. Findings indicate that men’s grief experiences are highly varied, and current grief measures may not capture all of the complexities of grief for men. Qualitative studies identified that in comparison to women, men may face different challenges including expectations to support female partners, and a lack of social recognition for their grief and subsequent needs. Men may face double-disenfranchised grief in relation to the pregnancy/neonatal loss experience. Conclusion : There is a need to increase the accessibility of support services for men following pregnancy/neonatal loss, and to provide recognition and validation of their experiences of grief. Cohort studies are required among varied groups of bereaved men to confirm grief-predictor relationships, and to refine an emerging socio-ecological model of men’s grief.

scholarly journals Men’s grief following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss: A systematic review and emerging theoretical model

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Obst ◽  
Clemence Due ◽  
Melissa Oxlad ◽  
Philippa Middleton
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Ecological Model ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Social Recognition ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Disenfranchised Grief ◽  
Female Partners ◽  
Final Sample

Abstract Background: Emotional distress following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss is common, with enduring grief occurring for many parents. However, little is known about men’s grief, since the majority of existing literature and subsequent bereavement care guidelines have focused on women. To develop a comprehensive understanding of men’s grief, this systematic review sought to summarise and appraise the literature focusing on men’s grief following pregnancy loss and neonatal loss. Methods: A systematic review was undertaken with searches completed across four databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and CINAHL). These were guided by two research questions: 1) what are men’s experiences of grief following pregnancy/neonatal loss; and 2) what are the predictors of men’s grief following pregnancy/neonatal loss? Eligible articles were qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods empirical studies including primary data on men’s grief, published between 1998 and October 2018. Eligibility for loss type included miscarriage or stillbirth (by any definition), termination of pregnancy for nonviable foetal anomaly, and neonatal death up to 28 days after a live birth. Results: A final sample of 46 articles were identified, including 26 qualitative, 19 quantitative, and one mixed methods paper. Findings indicate that men’s grief experiences are highly varied, and current grief measures may not capture all of the complexities of grief for men. Qualitative studies identified that in comparison to women, men may face different challenges including expectations to support female partners, and a lack of social recognition for their grief and subsequent needs. Men may face double-disenfranchised grief in relation to the pregnancy/neonatal loss experience. Conclusion: There is a need to increase the accessibility of support services for men following pregnancy/neonatal loss, and to provide recognition and validation of their experiences of grief. Cohort studies are required among varied groups of bereaved men to confirm grief-predictor relationships, and to refine an emerging socio-ecological model of men’s grief.

scholarly journals Recurrence of cervical artery dissection: protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. e037124
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Lounsbury ◽  
Brian Dewar ◽  
Alexandra Davis ◽  
Dean A Fergusson ◽  
Dar Dowlatshahi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Vertebral Artery Dissection ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Artery Dissection ◽  
Cervical Artery Dissection ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Minor Trauma ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Cervical Artery ◽  
Registration Number

IntroductionCervical artery dissection, including carotid and vertebral artery dissection, is an important cause of stroke in the young. Risk of developing cervical artery dissection has been associated with physical activity in various forms and has been presumed to be related to minor trauma and mechanical stretching of the cervical arteries. This systematic review will aim to synthesise data on the risk of recurrent cervical artery dissection after an initial dissection. This information may be applied to further understand the natural history of this disease, and potentially to help direct evidence-based discussions on safe return to activity after dissection.Methods and analysisA broad search of multiple electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science) will be conducted to identify studies published as of 13 November 2019, examining all-comers with cervical artery dissection observed over time. Studies will be screened by two independent reviewers in a two-level process to determine eligibility for inclusion. Data will be pooled from eligible articles and the main outcome of recurrent cervical artery dissection at 5 years will be determined using quantitative analysis.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not necessary as no primary data are being collected. The information will be disseminated in the form of a systematic review article which will be submitted to a peer-reviewed medical journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020166105.

scholarly journals How defensive medicine is defined and understood in European medical literature: protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e034300
Author(s):  
Nathalie Baungaard ◽  
Pia Skovvang ◽  
Elisabeth Assing Hvidt ◽  
Helle Gerbild ◽  
Merethe Kirstine Andersen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Medical Research ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Defensive Medicine ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
The Us ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Meta Analyses

IntroductionThe term defensive medicine, referring to actions motivated primarily by litigious concerns, originates from the USA and has been used in medical research literature since the late 1960s. Differences in medical legal systems between the US and most European countries with no tort legislation raise the question whether the US definition of defensive medicine holds true in Europe.AimTo present the protocol of a systematic review investigating variations in definitions and understandings of the term ‘defensive medicine’ in European research articles.Methods and analysisIn concordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic review of all medical research literature that investigate defensive medicine will be performed by two independent reviewers. The databases PubMed, Embase and Cochrane will be systematically searched on the basis of predetermined criteria. Data from all included European studies will systematically be extracted including the studies’ definitions and understandings of defensive medicine, especially the motives for doing medical actions that the study regards as ‘defensive’.Ethics and disseminationNo ethics clearance is required as no primary data will be collected. The results of the systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed, international journal.PROSPERO registration numberThis review has been submitted to International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) and is awaiting registration.

scholarly journals Informal caregiving for adults, loneliness and social isolation: a study protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. e044902
Author(s):  
André Hajek ◽  
Benedikt Kretzler ◽  
Hans-Helmut König
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Social Isolation ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Chronically Ill ◽  
Informal Caregiving ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Cross Sectional

IntroductionSome empirical studies have identified an association between informal caregiving for adults and loneliness or social isolation. However, there is a lack of a review systematically synthesising empirical studies that have examined these associations. Hence, the aim of this systematic review is to provide an overview of evidence from observational studies.Methods and analysisThree electronic databases (Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL) will be searched (presumably in May 2021), and reference lists of included studies will be searched manually. Cross-sectional and longitudinal observational studies examining the association between informal caregiving for adults and loneliness or social isolation will be included. Studies focusing on grandchildren care or private care for chronically ill children will be excluded. Data extraction will include information related to study design, definition and measurement of informal caregiving, loneliness and social isolation, sample characteristics, statistical analysis and main results. The quality of the studies will be evaluated using the National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Two reviewers will perform the selection of studies, data extraction and assessment of study quality. Figures and tables will be used to summarise and report results. A narrative summary of the findings will be provided. If data permit, a meta-analysis will be conducted.Ethics and disseminationNo primary data will be collected. Therefore, approval by an ethics committee is not required. We plan to publish our findings in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020193099.

scholarly journals Relationship between management and resilience in healthcare: a study protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e047855
Author(s):  
Erika E Petersen ◽  
Hilda Bø Lyng ◽  
Eline Ree ◽  
Siri Wiig
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Flow Diagram ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Management Approaches ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionManagement has been identified as a critical component of organisational resilience when responding to adverse events and crises, as managers must ensure an effective operational response and provide direction and guidance to teams. While there are many management approaches, strategies and interventions that have been applied and studied in healthcare, the impact of them in relation to resilience in healthcare has not been explored, particularly at the organisational level. Understanding the impact of management approaches, strategies and interventions on resilience has the potential to inform healthcare organisations on how to better use management to prepare and respond to organisational adverse events. The objective of this mixed-methods systematic review is to understand the relationship between management and organisational resilience in healthcare, including management approaches and strategies that promote resilience in healthcare.Methods and analysisA search through MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PubMed and EMBASE will be conducted between 1 August 2021 and 31 December 21. This review will consider empirical quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies published in English from 2010 to the present that meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Selected studies will be assessed in detail and extracted data will be reviewed by two independent reviewers. Results of the search will be reported in full in the final systematic review and presented in a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis flow diagram. This review will follow a convergent integrated approach to data synthesis and integration.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic literature review includes no collection of primary data; hence ethical approval will not be sought. The outcomes from this review will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal, as conference presentation, and as condensed summary for managers in healthcare and policy-makers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020223362.

scholarly journals Barriers and enablers to Caregivers Responsive feeding Behaviour (CRiB): A mixed method systematic review protocol

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 2
Author(s):  
Vicki Slater ◽  
Jennie Rose ◽  
Ellinor Olander ◽  
Karen Matvienko-Sikar ◽  
Sarah Redsell
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Personal Information ◽  
Behavioural Change ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Overweight And Obesity ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Public Health Issue ◽  
Healthy Weight ◽  
Barriers And Enablers

Background: Childhood overweight and obesity is a major public health issue. Responsive feeding has been identified as having a protective effect against child overweight and obesity, and is associated with healthy weight gain during infancy. Responsive feeding occurs when the caregiver recognises and responds in a timely and developmentally appropriate manner to infant hunger and satiety cues. Despite its benefits, responsive feeding is not ubiquitous. To better support caregivers to engage in responsive feeding behaviours, it is necessary to first systematically identify the barriers and enablers associated with this behaviour. This mixed-methods systematic review therefore aims to synthesise evidence on barriers and enablers to responsive feeding using the COM-B model of behavioural change. Methods: 7 electronic databases will be searched (Maternal and Infant Care, CINAHL, Cochrane, PubMed, Medline, PsycINFO, EMBASE). Studies examining factors associated with parental responsive and non-responsive feeding of infants and children (<2 years) will be included. Papers collecting primary data, or analysing primary data through secondary analysis will be included. All titles, abstracts and full texts will be screened by two reviewers. Quantitative and qualitative data from all eligible papers will be independently extracted by at least two reviewers using pre-determined standardised data extraction forms. Two reviewers will independently assess the methodological quality of the studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). This review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA). Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is not required for this review as no primary data will be collected, and no identifying personal information will be present. The review will be disseminated in a peer reviewed journal. PROSPERO registration: CRD42019144570 (06/08/2019)

scholarly journals Improving the sustainability of hospital-based interventions: a study protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. e025069 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Cowie ◽  
Pauline Campbell ◽  
Elena Dimova ◽  
Avril Nicoll ◽  
Edward A S Duncan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Hand Search ◽  
Effective Interventions ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Study Characteristics

IntroductionSustaining effective interventions in hospital environments is essential to improving health outcomes, and reducing research waste. Current evidence suggests many interventions are not sustained beyond their initial delivery. The reason for this failure remains unclear. Increasingly research is employing theoretical frameworks and models to identify critical factors that influence the implementation of interventions. However, little is known about the value of these frameworks on sustainability. The aim of this review is to examine the evidence regarding the use of theoretical frameworks to maximise effective intervention sustainability in hospital-based settings in order to better understand their role in supporting long-term intervention use.Methods and analysisSystematic review. We will systematically search the following databases: Medline, AMED, CINAHL, Embase and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL, CDSR, DARE, HTA). We will also hand search relevant journals and will check the bibliographies of all included studies. Language and date limitations will be applied. We will include empirical studies that have used a theoretical framework (or model) and have explicitly reported the sustainability of an intervention (or programme). One reviewer will remove obviously irrelevant titles. The remaining abstracts and full-text articles will be screened by two independent reviewers to determine their eligibility for inclusion. Disagreements will be resolved by discussion, and may involve a third reviewer if required. Key study characteristics will be extracted (study design, population demographics, setting, evidence of sustained change, use of theoretical frameworks and any barriers or facilitators data reported) by one reviewer and cross-checked by another reviewer. Descriptive data will be tabulated within evidence tables, and key findings will be brought together within a narrative synthesis.Ethics and disseminationFormal ethical approval is not required as no primary data will be collected. Dissemination of results will be through peer-reviewed journal publications, presentation at an international conference and social media.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017081992.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document