scholarly journals How effective are digital interventions in increasing flu vaccination amongst pregnant women? A systematic review protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jo Parsons ◽  
Helen Atherton
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Flu Vaccination ◽  
Digital Interventions ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Study Country ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Uk

Abstract Background: Pregnant women and their unborn babies are at increased risk of complications as a result of flu, yet uptake of the flu vaccination in the UK remains low. Digital interventions have proven effectiveness in changing health behaviour, but their effectiveness in increasing flu vaccination amongst pregnant women has not been examined. This protocol details the design and methodology of a systematic review and meta-analysis, examining the effectiveness of digital interventions in increasing flu vaccination amongst pregnant women.Methods: Bibliographic databases will be searched using appropriate search terms related to vaccination, pregnancy and flu. Randomised, non-randomised, quasi randomised controlled trials and other quantitative study designs will be eligible for inclusion, and studies will present the rate of flu vaccination amongst pregnant women of digital interventions compared to non-digital interventions, or usual care. No date or study country restrictions will be put on included studies, but studies will be published in English. Discussion: This is the first known systematic review to examine the effectiveness of digital interventions in increasing the rate of flu vaccination amongst pregnant women. This review has the potential to inform whether digital interventions are an appropriate and successful method of increasing flu vaccination amongst pregnant women, and to determine which mode of digital intervention is most effective.Registration: This systematic review is registered on the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO). Registration number: INSERT NUMBER.

scholarly journals How effective are digital interventions in increasing flu vaccination amongst pregnant women? A systematic review protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jo Parsons ◽  
Helen Atherton
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Flu Vaccination ◽  
Digital Interventions ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Study Country ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Uk

Abstract Background Pregnant women and their unborn babies are at increased risk of complications as a result of flu, yet uptake of the flu vaccination in the UK remains low. Digital interventions have proven effectiveness in changing health behaviour, but their effectiveness in increasing flu vaccination amongst pregnant women has not been examined. This protocol details the design and methodology of a systematic review and meta-analysis, examining the effectiveness of digital interventions in increasing flu vaccination amongst pregnant women. Methods Bibliographic databases will be searched using appropriate search terms related to vaccination, pregnancy and flu. Randomised, non-randomised, quasi randomised controlled trials and other quantitative study designs will be eligible for inclusion, and studies will present the rate of flu vaccination amongst pregnant women of digital interventions compared to non-digital interventions, or usual care. No date or study country restrictions will be put on included studies, but studies will be published in English. Discussion This is the first known systematic review to examine the effectiveness of digital interventions in increasing the rate of flu vaccination amongst pregnant women. This review has the potential to inform whether digital interventions are an appropriate and successful method of increasing flu vaccination amongst pregnant women, and to determine which mode of digital intervention is most effective. Registration This systematic review is registered on the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO). Registration number to follow.

scholarly journals The development of a digital intervention to increase influenza vaccination amongst pregnant women

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 205520762110121
Author(s):  
Joanne E Parsons ◽  
Katie V Newby ◽  
David P French ◽  
Elizabeth Bailey ◽  
Nadia Inglis
Keyword(s):  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Qualitative Methodology ◽  
Intervention Mapping ◽  
Vaccine Uptake ◽  
Flu Vaccination ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Diverse Area ◽  
Seasonal Flu ◽  
Flu Vaccine ◽  
The Uk

Objective Pregnant women and unborn babies are at increased risk of complications from influenza, including pneumonia, yet in the UK, uptake of flu vaccination amongst this population remains <50%. Pregnant women hold beliefs about risks of flu and efficacy of vaccination that consistently predict them to decline vaccination. This study aimed to develop a theory and evidence-based intervention addressing these beliefs to promote flu vaccine uptake. Methods The intervention was developed by behavioural scientists, pregnant women, midwives, clinicians and Public Health professionals, informed by Intervention Mapping. Six predefined steps were performed in line with Intervention Mapping. Results The intervention is an animation addressing beliefs about risks of flu and efficacy of vaccination. Preliminary testing using qualitative methodology indicates the information within the animation is appropriate, and the animation is acceptable to pregnant women. Conclusions This is the first known intervention for pregnant women, aiming to increase flu vaccination through addressing risk and efficacy appraisals. It has been implemented within seasonal flu vaccination campaigns during 2018/19 and 2019/20 within one geographically and ethnically diverse area of the UK.

Two decades of digital interventions for anxiety disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment effectiveness

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Darin Pauley ◽  
Pim Cuijpers ◽  
Davide Papola ◽  
Clara Miguel ◽  
Eirini Karyotaki
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Anxiety Disorders ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Wait List ◽  
Digital Interventions ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background Digital interventions for anxiety disorders are a promising solution to address barriers to evidence-based treatment access. Precise and powerful estimates of digital intervention effectiveness for anxiety disorders are necessary for further adoption in practice. The present systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effectiveness of digital interventions across all anxiety disorders and specific to each disorder v. wait-list and care-as-usual controls. Methods A systematic search of bibliographic databases identified 15 030 abstracts from inception to 1 January 2020. Forty-seven randomized controlled trials (53 comparisons; 4958 participants) contributed to the meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were conducted by an anxiety disorder, risk of bias, treatment support, recruitment, location and treatment adherence. Results A large, pooled effect size of g = 0.80 [95% Confidence Interval: 0.68–0.93] was found in favor of digital interventions. Moderate to large pooled effect sizes favoring digital interventions were found for generalized anxiety disorder (g = 0.62), mixed anxiety samples (g = 0.68), panic disorder with or without agoraphobia (g = 1.08) and social anxiety disorder (g = 0.76) subgroups. No subgroups were significantly different or related to the pooled effect size. Notably, the effects of guided interventions (g = 0.84) and unguided interventions (g = 0.64) were not significantly different. Supplemental analysis comparing digital and face-to-face interventions (9 comparisons; 683 participants) found no significant difference in effect [g = 0.14 favoring digital interventions; Confidence Interval: −0.01 to 0.30]. Conclusion The precise and powerful estimates found further justify the application of digital interventions for anxiety disorders in place of wait-list or usual care.

scholarly journals Childhood maltreatment and adult suicidality: a comprehensive systematic review with meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (07) ◽  
pp. 1057-1078 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ioannis Angelakis ◽  
Emma Louise Gillespie ◽  
Maria Panagioti
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Childhood Abuse ◽  
Childhood Maltreatment ◽  
Emotional Abuse ◽  
Suicide Attempts ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Different Types

AbstractThis comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis aims to quantify the association between different types of childhood maltreatment and suicidality. We searched five bibliographic databases, including Medline, PsychINFO, Embase, Web of Science and CINAHL, until January 2018. Random-effects meta-analysis was employed followed by univariable and multivariable meta-regressions. Heterogeneity was quantified using theI2statistic and formal publication bias tests were undertaken. The methodological quality of the studies was critically appraised and accounted in the meta-regression analyses. Data from 68 studies based onn= 261.660 adults were pooled. All different types of childhood maltreatment including sexual abuse [odds ratio (OR) 3.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.76–3.64], physical abuse (OR 2.52, 95% CI 2.09–3.04) and emotional abuse (OR 2.49, 95% CI 1.64–3.77) were associated with two- to three-fold increased risk for suicide attempts. Similar results were found for the association between childhood maltreatment and suicidal ideation. Complex childhood abuse was associated with a particularly high risk for suicide attempts in adults (OR 5.18, 95% CI 2.52–10.63). Variations across the studies in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics of the participants and other core methodological factors did not affect the findings of the main analyses. We conclude that there is solid evidence that childhood maltreatment is associated with increased odds for suicidality in adults. The main outstanding challenge is to better understand the mechanisms which underpin the development of suicidality in people exposed to childhood maltreatment because current evidence is scarce.

scholarly journals Effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for insomnia: a protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. e029206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu He ◽  
Nianyi Sun ◽  
Zhiqiang Wang ◽  
Wenchen Zou
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Manual Search ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionRepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), a non-invasive brain stimulation approach, might be a promising technique in the management of insomnia. A systematic review of the available literature on this topic is warranted. The systematic review described in this protocol aims to investigate the efficacy of rTMS as a physical therapy in patients with insomnia.Methods and analysisThis protocol was developed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. We will retrieve relevant literatures across the following electronic bibliographic databases: CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, PEDro, CBM, CNKI, WANFANG and VIP. A manual search of the reference lists of all relevant articles will be performed for any additional studies. We will include randomised controlled trials published in English and Chinese examining efficacy of rTMS on patients with insomnia. Two reviewers will independently complete the article selection, data extraction and rating. PEDro scale will be used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Narrative and quantitative synthesis will be done accordingly.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval will not be required for this review. The results of this review will be disseminated in a peer-review journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018115033.

scholarly journals Effect of COVID-19 on Mortality of Pregnant and Postpartum Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-33
Author(s):  
Leila Karimi ◽  
Somayeh Makvandi ◽  
Amir Vahedian-Azimi ◽  
Thozhukat Sathyapalan ◽  
Amirhossein Sahebkar
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cesarean Section ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Gastrointestinal Symptoms ◽  
Severe Illness ◽  
Postpartum Women ◽  
Presenting Symptoms ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Adverse Pregnancy

Background. Based on what is known at this time, pregnant women are at an increased risk of severe illness from COVID-19 compared to nonpregnant women. Additionally, pregnant women with COVID-19 might have an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. To investigate the effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on mortality of pregnant and postpartum women, we performed a systematic review of available published literature on pregnancies affected by COVID-19. Methods. Web of Science, SCOPUS, and MEDLINE- databases were searched for original studies concerning the effect of COVID-19 on mortality of pregnant and postpartum women published by July 10, 2020. Meta-analyses of proportions were used to combine data and report pooled proportions. Results. 117 studies with a total of 11758 pregnant women were included. The age ranged between 15 and 48 years. Most subjects were infected with SARS-CoV-2 in the third trimester. Disease severity was not reported in 1125 subjects. Maternal mortality was 1.3%. In 100% of fatal cases with adequate data, fever alone or with cough was one of the presenting symptoms. Also, dyspnea (58.3%) and myalgia (50%) were the most common symptoms. Sore throat (8.3%) and gastrointestinal symptoms (anorexia, nausea) (8.3%) were rare. The rate of comorbidities was 20% among COVID-19 deaths. The majority of COVID-19-infected women who died had cesarean section (58.3%), 25% had a vaginal delivery, and 16.7% of patients were not full term. Conclusion. COVID-19 infection in pregnant women was associated with higher rates (and pooled proportions) of cesarean section and mortality. Because new data are continuously being generated and published, the findings of this study can be complete and updated with new researches. The results of this study can guide and improve prenatal counseling of COVID-19-infected pregnant women.

scholarly journals Risk of infection associated with intravenous iron preparations: protocol for updating a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. e024618 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akshay Shah ◽  
Anita Sugavanam ◽  
Jack Reid ◽  
Antony J Palmer ◽  
Edward Dickson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Intravenous Iron ◽  
Cochrane Collaboration ◽  
Assessment Development ◽  
Evaluation Approach ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionThe benefits and risk of intravenous iron have been documented in previous systematic reviews and continue to be the subject of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). An ongoing issue that continues to be raised is the relationship between administering iron and developing infection. This is supported by biological plausibility from animal models. We propose an update of a previously published systematic review and meta-analysis with the primary focus being infection.Methods and analysisWe will include RCTs and non-randomised studies (NRS) in this review update. We will search the relevant electronic databases. Two reviewers will independently extract data. Risk of bias for RCTs and NRS will be assessed using the relevant tools recommended by The Cochrane Collaboration. Data extracted from RCTs and NRS will be analysed and reported separately. Pooled data from RCTs will be analysed using a random effects model. We will also conduct subgroup analyses to identify any patient populations that may be at increased risk of developing infection. We will provide a narrative synthesis on the definitions, sources and responsible pathogens for infection in the included studies. Overall quality of evidence on the safety outcomes of mortality and infection will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review will only investigate published studies and therefore ethical approval is not required. The results will be broadly distributed through conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications.Trial registration numberPROSPERO (CRD42018096023).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document