Exploring the Heath Equity Impact of Current Digital Health Design Practices: A Protocol for a Scoping Review (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Evans ◽  
Jay Evans ◽  
Claudia Pagliari ◽  
Karin Källander
Keyword(s):  
Health Equity ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Narrative Synthesis ◽  
Exclusion Criteria ◽  
Design Practices ◽  
Scoping Reviews ◽  
The Impact

BACKGROUND The field of digital health has grown rapidly in part due to the potential to reduce heath inequities. However, such potential has not always been realized. The design approaches used in digital health are one of the known aspects to have an impact on health equity. OBJECTIVE The aim of this scoping review will be to understand how design approaches in digital health have an impact on health equity. METHODS A scoping review of studies that describe how design practices for digital health have an impact on health equity will be carried out. The scoping review will follow the methodology laid out by Arksey and O’Malley, the Joanna Briggs Institute, and the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews checklist. The PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and AMC Library will be searched for peer-reviewed papers. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses and Global Index Medicus databases will be searched for gray literature. The results will be screened against the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Subsequently, the data extracted from the included studies will be analyzed. RESULTS A twofold approach will be used to present the results. First, we will present a numerical overview of the amount, kind, and key themes of the studies. Second, we will write a narrative synthesis from the evidence extracted. CONCLUSIONS While there has been much discussion of the importance of design for lowering barriers to digital health participation, the evidence base demonstrating its impacts on health equity is less obvious. We hope our findings will contribute to better understanding the impact that design in digital health has on health equity and that these findings will translate into action that leads to stronger, more equitable healthcare systems.

scholarly journals Making change last? Exploring the value of sustainability approaches in healthcare: a scoping review

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Lennox ◽  
A. Linwood-Amor ◽  
L. Maher ◽  
J. Reed
Keyword(s):  
Scoping Review ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Vast Number ◽  
Community Healthcare ◽  
Healthcare Settings ◽  
Future Assessment ◽  
Scoping Reviews ◽  
Or Practice ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Appraisal Tool

Abstract Background Numerous models, tools and frameworks have been produced to improve the sustainability of evidence-based interventions. Due to the vast number available, choosing the most appropriate one is increasingly difficult for researchers and practitioners. To understand the value of such approaches, evidence warranting their use is needed. However, there is limited understanding of how sustainability approaches have been used and how they have impacted research or practice. This review aims to consolidate evidence on the application and impact of sustainability approaches in healthcare settings. Methods A systematic scoping review was designed to search for peer-reviewed publications detailing the use of sustainability approaches in practice. A 5-stage framework for scoping reviews directed the search strategy, and quality assessment was performed using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool. Searches were performed through electronic citation tracking and snowballing of references. Articles were obtained through Web of Science, PubMed and Google Scholar. Six outcome variables for sustainability were explored to ascertain impact of approaches. Results This review includes 68 articles demonstrating the application of sustainability approaches in practice. Results show an increase in the use of sustainability approaches in peer-reviewed studies. Approaches have been applied across a range of healthcare settings, including primary, secondary, tertiary and community healthcare. Approaches are used for five main purposes, namely analysis, evaluation, guidance, assessment and planning. Results outline benefits (e.g. improved conceptualisation of sustainability constructs and improved ability to interpret sustainability data) and challenges (e.g. issues with approach constructs and difficulty in application) associated with using a sustainability approach in practice. Few articles (14/68) reported the sustainability outcome variables explored; therefore, the impact of approaches on sustainability remains unclear. Additional sustainability outcome variables reported in retrieved articles are discussed. Conclusions This review provides practitioners and researchers with a consolidated evidence base on sustainability approaches. Findings highlight the remaining gaps in the literature and emphasise the need for improved rigour and reporting of sustainability approaches in research studies. To guide future assessment and study of sustainability in healthcare settings an updated list of sustainability outcome variables is proposed. Trial Registration This review was registered on the PROSPERO database CRD 42016040081 in June 2016.

scholarly journals Knowledge syntheses in medical education: A bibliometric analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren A. Maggio ◽  
Joseph A. Costello ◽  
Candace Norton ◽  
Erik W. Driessen ◽  
Anthony R. Artino Jr
Keyword(s):  
Medical Education ◽  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Educational Practice ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
The Past ◽  
Types Of Knowledge ◽  
Scoping Reviews ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Analysis Of Knowledge

Abstract Purpose This bibliometric analysis maps the landscape of knowledge syntheses in medical education. It provides scholars with a roadmap for understanding where the field has been and where it might go in the future, thereby informing research and educational practice. In particular, this analysis details the venues in which knowledge syntheses are published, the types of syntheses conducted, citation rates they produce, and altmetric attention they garner. Method In 2020, the authors conducted a bibliometric analysis of knowledge syntheses published in 14 core medical education journals from 1999 to 2019. To characterize the studies, metadata were extracted from PubMed, Web of Science, Altmetrics Explorer, and Unpaywall. Results The authors analyzed 963 knowledge syntheses representing 3.1% of the total articles published (n = 30,597). On average, 45.9 knowledge syntheses were published annually (SD = 35.85, median = 33), and there was an overall 2620% increase in the number of knowledge syntheses published from 1999 to 2019. The journals each published, on average, a total of 68.8 knowledge syntheses (SD = 67.2, median = 41) with Medical Education publishing the most (n = 189; 19%). Twenty-one types of knowledge synthesis were identified, the most prevalent being systematic reviews (n = 341; 35.4%) and scoping reviews (n = 88; 9.1%). Knowledge syntheses were cited an average of 53.80 times (SD = 107.12, median = 19) and received a mean Altmetric Attention Score of 14.12 (SD = 37.59, median = 6). Conclusions There has been considerable growth in knowledge syntheses in medical education over the past 20 years, contributing to medical education’s evidence base. Beyond this increase in volume, researchers have introduced methodological diversity in these publications, and the community has taken to social media to share knowledge syntheses. Implications for the field, including the impact of synthesis types and their relationship to knowledge translation, are discussed.

scholarly journals Knowledge syntheses in medical education: A bibliometric analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren A. Maggio ◽  
Joseph A. Costello ◽  
Candace Norton ◽  
Erik W. Driessen ◽  
Anthony R. Artino
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Medical Education ◽  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Knowledge Synthesis ◽  
The Past ◽  
Scoping Reviews ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Analysis Of Knowledge

AbstractPurposeThis bibliometric analysis maps the landscape of knowledge syntheses in medical education. It provides scholars with a roadmap for understanding where the field has been and where it might go in the future. In particular, this analysis details the venues in which knowledge syntheses are published, the types of syntheses conducted, citation rates they produce, and altmetric attention they garner.MethodIn 2020, the authors conducted a bibliometric analysis of knowledge syntheses published in 14 core medical education journals from 1999 to 2019. To characterize the studies, metadata was extracted from Pubmed, Web of Science, Altmetrics Explorer, and Unpaywall.ResultsThe authors analyzed 963 knowledge syntheses representing 3.1% of total articles published (n=30,597). On average, 45.9 knowledge syntheses were published annually (SD=35.85, Median=33), and there was an overall 2,620% increase in the number of knowledge syntheses published from 1999 to 2019. The journals each published, on average, a total of 68.8 knowledge syntheses (SD=67.2, Median=41) with Medical Education publishing the most (n=189; 19%). Twenty-one knowledge synthesis types were identified; the most prevalent types were systematic reviews (n=341; 35.4%) and scoping reviews (n=88; 9.1%). Knowledge syntheses were cited an average of 53.80 times (SD=107.12, Median=19) and received a mean Altmetric Attention Score of 14.12 (SD=37.59, Median=6).ConclusionsThere has been considerable growth in knowledge syntheses in medical education over the past 20 years, contributing to medical education’s evidence base. Beyond this increase in volume, researchers have introduced methodological diversity in these publications, and the community has taken to social media to share knowledge syntheses. Implications for the field, including the impact of synthesis types and their relationship to knowledge translation, are discussed.

scholarly journals Economic instruments for obesity prevention: results of a scoping review and modified delphi survey

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guy E. J. Faulkner ◽  
Paul Grootendorst ◽  
Van Hai Nguyen ◽  
Tatiana Andreyeva ◽  
Kelly Arbour-Nicitopoulos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Research Field ◽  
Delphi Survey ◽  
Economic Instruments ◽  
Scoping Reviews ◽  
The Impact

Background Comprehensive, multi-level approaches are required to address obesity. One important target for intervention is the economic domain. The purpose of this study was to synthesize existing evidence regarding the impact of economic policies targeting obesity and its causal behaviours (diet, physical activity), and to make specific recommendations for the Canadian context. Methods Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews was adopted for this study and this consisted of two phases: 1) a structured literature search and review, and 2) consultation with experts in the research field through a Delphi survey and an in-person expert panel meeting in April 2010. Results Two key findings from the scoping review included 1) consistent evidence that weight outcomes are responsive to food and beverage prices. The debate on the use of food taxes and subsidies to address obesity should now shift to how best to address practical issues in designing such policies; and 2) very few studies have examined the impact of economic instruments to promote physical activity and clear policy recommendations cannot be made at this time. Delphi survey findings emphasised the relatively modest impact any specific economic instrument would have on obesity independently. Based on empirical evidence and expert opinion, three recommendations were supported. First, to create and implement an effective health filter to review new and current agricultural polices to reduce the possibility that such policies have a deleterious impact on population rates of obesity. Second, to implement a caloric sweetened beverage tax. Third, to examine how to implement fruit and vegetable subsidies targeted at children and low income households. Conclusions In terms of economic interventions, shifting from empirical evidence to policy recommendation remains challenging. Overall, the evidence is not sufficiently strong to provide clear policy direction. Additionally, the nature of the experiments needed to provide definitive evidence supporting certain policy directions is likely to be complex and potentially unfeasible. However, these are not reasons to take no action. It is likely that policies need to be implemented in the face of an incomplete evidence base.

scholarly journals Economic instruments for obesity prevention: results of a scoping review and modified delphi survey

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guy E. J. Faulkner ◽  
Paul Grootendorst ◽  
Van Hai Nguyen ◽  
Tatiana Andreyeva ◽  
Kelly Arbour-Nicitopoulos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Research Field ◽  
Delphi Survey ◽  
Economic Instruments ◽  
Scoping Reviews ◽  
The Impact

Background Comprehensive, multi-level approaches are required to address obesity. One important target for intervention is the economic domain. The purpose of this study was to synthesize existing evidence regarding the impact of economic policies targeting obesity and its causal behaviours (diet, physical activity), and to make specific recommendations for the Canadian context. Methods Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews was adopted for this study and this consisted of two phases: 1) a structured literature search and review, and 2) consultation with experts in the research field through a Delphi survey and an in-person expert panel meeting in April 2010. Results Two key findings from the scoping review included 1) consistent evidence that weight outcomes are responsive to food and beverage prices. The debate on the use of food taxes and subsidies to address obesity should now shift to how best to address practical issues in designing such policies; and 2) very few studies have examined the impact of economic instruments to promote physical activity and clear policy recommendations cannot be made at this time. Delphi survey findings emphasised the relatively modest impact any specific economic instrument would have on obesity independently. Based on empirical evidence and expert opinion, three recommendations were supported. First, to create and implement an effective health filter to review new and current agricultural polices to reduce the possibility that such policies have a deleterious impact on population rates of obesity. Second, to implement a caloric sweetened beverage tax. Third, to examine how to implement fruit and vegetable subsidies targeted at children and low income households. Conclusions In terms of economic interventions, shifting from empirical evidence to policy recommendation remains challenging. Overall, the evidence is not sufficiently strong to provide clear policy direction. Additionally, the nature of the experiments needed to provide definitive evidence supporting certain policy directions is likely to be complex and potentially unfeasible. However, these are not reasons to take no action. It is likely that policies need to be implemented in the face of an incomplete evidence base.

scholarly journals Analytical methods to assess the impacts of activity-based funding (ABF): a scoping review

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gintare Valentelyte ◽  
Conor Keegan ◽  
Jan Sorensen
Keyword(s):  
Scoping Review ◽  
Analytical Methods ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Hospital Performance ◽  
Performance Outcomes ◽  
Scoping Reviews ◽  
Quasi Experimental ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Analytical Approaches

Abstract Background Activity-Based Funding (ABF) has been implemented across many countries as a means to incentivise efficient hospital care delivery and resource use. Previous reviews have assessed the impact of ABF implementation on a range of outcomes across health systems. However, no comprehensive review of the methods used to generate this evidence has been undertaken. The aim of this review is to identify and assess the analytical methods employed in research on ABF hospital performance outcomes. Methods We conducted a scoping review in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. Five academic databases and reference lists of included studies were used to identify studies assessing the impact of ABF on hospital performance outcomes. Peer-reviewed quantitative studies published between 2000 and 2019 considering ABF implementation outside the U.S. were included. Qualitative studies, policy discussions and commentaries were excluded. Abstracts and full text studies were double screened to ensure consistency. All analytical approaches and their relative strengths and weaknesses were charted and summarised. Results We identified 19 studies that assessed hospital performance outcomes from introduction of ABF in England, Korea, Norway, Portugal, Israel, the Netherlands, Canada, Italy, Japan, Belgium, China, and Austria. Quasi-experimental methods were used across most reviewed studies. The most commonly used assessment methods were different forms of interrupted time series analyses. Few studies used difference-in-differences or similar methods to compare outcome changes over time relative to comparator groups. The main hospital performance outcome measures examined were case numbers, length of stay, mortality and readmission. Conclusions Non-experimental study designs continue to be the most widely used method in the assessment of ABF impacts. Quasi-experimental approaches examining the impact of ABF implementation on outcomes relative to comparator groups not subject to the reform should be applied where possible to facilitate identification of effects. These approaches provide a more robust evidence-base for informing future financing reform and policy.

Primary Crime Prevention Apps: A Typology and Scoping Review

2021 ◽  
pp. 152483802098556
Author(s):  
Mark A. Wood ◽  
Stuart Ross ◽  
Diana Johns
Keyword(s):  
Crime Prevention ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
English Language ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Smartphone Apps ◽  
Initial Sample ◽  
Language Research ◽  
Meta Analyses

In the last decade, an array of smartphone apps have been designed to prevent crime, violence, and abuse. The evidence base of these apps has, however, yet to analyzed systematically. To rectify this, the aims of this review were (1) to establish the extent, range, and nature of research into smartphone apps with a primary crime prevention function; (2) to locate gaps in the primary crime prevention app literature; and (3) to develop a typology of primary crime prevention apps. Employing a scoping review methodology and following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, studies were identified via Web of Science, EBSCOhost, and Google Scholar. We included English-language research published between 2008 and 2020 that examined smartphone applications designed explicitly for primary crime prevention. Sixty-one publications met our criteria for review, out of an initial sample of 151 identified. Our review identified six types of crime prevention app examined in these publications: self-surveillance apps, decision aid apps, child-tracking apps, educational apps, crime-mapping/alert apps, and crime reporting apps. The findings of our review indicate that most of these forms of primary crime prevention apps have yet to be rigorously evaluated and many are not evidence-based in their design. Consequently, our review indicates that recent enthusiasm over primary crime prevention apps is not supported by an adequate evidence base.

scholarly journals Antimicrobial Use in COVID-19 Patients in the First Phase of the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: A Scoping Review

Antibiotics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 745
Author(s):  
Wenjuan Cong ◽  
Ak Narayan Poudel ◽  
Nour Alhusein ◽  
Hexing Wang ◽  
Guiqing Yao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critical Illness ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Clinical Evidence ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Severity Of Illness ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Antimicrobial Use ◽  
Clinical Scenarios ◽  
Scoping Reviews ◽  
The Impact

This scoping review provides new evidence on the prevalence and patterns of global antimicrobial use in the treatment of COVID-19 patients; identifies the most commonly used antibiotics and clinical scenarios associated with antibiotic prescribing in the first phase of the pandemic; and explores the impact of documented antibiotic prescribing on treatment outcomes in COVID-19 patients. The review complies with PRISMA guidelines for Scoping Reviews and the protocol is registered with the Open Science Framework. In the first six months of the pandemic, there was a similar mean antibiotic prescribing rate between patients with severe or critical illness (75.4%) and patients with mild or moderate illness (75.1%). The proportion of patients prescribed antibiotics without clinical justification was 51.5% vs. 41.9% for patients with mild or moderate illness and those with severe or critical illness. Comparison of patients who were provided antibiotics with a clinical justification with those who were given antibiotics without clinical justification showed lower mortality rates (9.5% vs. 13.1%), higher discharge rates (80.9% vs. 69.3%), and shorter length of hospital stay (9.3 days vs. 12.2 days). In the first 6 months of the pandemic, antibiotics were prescribed for COVID-19 patients regardless of severity of illness. A large proportion of antibiotic prescribing for mild and moderate COVID-19 patients did not have clinical evidence of a bacterial co-infection. Antibiotics may not be beneficial to COVID-19 patients without clinical evidence of a bacterial co-infection.

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

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.

scholarly journals Priority domains, aims, and testable hypotheses for implementation research: A scoping review and evidence map protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryan R Garner ◽  
Sheila Patel ◽  
M. Alexis Kirk
Keyword(s):  
Implementation Science ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Implementation Research ◽  
Research Effort ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Public Health Issue ◽  
Scientific Theories ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Evidence Map ◽  
Scoping Reviews

Abstract Background: The challenge of implementing evidence-based innovations within practice settings is a significant public health issue the field of implementation research (IR) is focused on addressing. Significant amounts of funding, time, and effort have been invested in IR to date, yet there remains significant room for advancement, especially regarding IR’s development of scientific theories as defined by the National Academy of Sciences (i.e., a comprehensive explanation of the relationship between variables that is supported by a vast body of evidence). Research priority setting (i.e., promoting consensus about areas where research effort will have wide benefits to society) is a key approach to helping accelerate research advancements. Thus, building upon existing IR, general principles of data reduction, and a general framework for moderated mediation, this article identifies priority domains, aims, and testable hypotheses for IR and describes a scoping review protocol to identify and map the extent to which IR has examined these priorities to date.Methods: Implementation Science is the leading journal for publishing IR and receives over 800 submissions annually. Thus, this scoping review will focus on IR published in Implementation Science between its inception in 2006 and 12/31/2019. The current scoping review and evidence map protocol has been developed in accordance with the approach developed by Arksey & O’Malley and advanced by Levac, Colquhoun, and O’Brien. All research articles and short reports will be reviewed. Because scoping reviews seek to provide an overview of the identified evidence base rather than synthesize findings from across studies, we plan to use our data-charting form to provide a descriptive overview of implementation research to-date and summarize the research via one or more summary tables. We will use the priority aims and testable hypotheses (PATH) diagram, which integrates the four priority domains, three priority aims, and four priority testable hypotheses, to develop a map of the evidence (or lack thereof).Discussion: This scoping review and evidence map is intended to help accelerate IR focused on one or more of IR’s priority aims and testable hypotheses, which in turn will accelerate IR’s development of NAS-defined scientific theories and, subsequently, improvements in public health.Systematic review registration: Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/3vhuj/

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document