Systematic Reviews of Health Care Interventions: An Essential Component of Health Sciences Graduate Programs

2004 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shelley Peacock ◽  
Dorothy Forbes
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Graduate Programs ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Opportunity To Learn ◽  
Health Science ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Unpublished Studies ◽  
Unpublished Research

Systematic reviews are an objective, rigorous assessment of both published and unpublished research that enable the reviewer to make recommendations to clinicians, policy-makers, consumers, and researchers. The steps in a systematic review include: (a) developing a research question, (b) developing relevance and validity tools, (c) conducting a thorough literature search of published and unpublished studies, (d) using relevance and validity tools to assess the studies, (e) completing data extraction for each study, (f) synthesizing the findings and, (g) writing the report. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the value of providing health science graduate students with the opportunity to learn about the conduct of a systematic review. An example of a thesis utilizing the method of a systematic review is presented.

Understanding and Appraising Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 317-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neeti Mittal ◽  
Manoj Goyal ◽  
Parteek K Mittal
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Methodological Rigor ◽  
Reproducible Method ◽  
Evidence Based Dentistry

Systematic reviews and meta-analysis seek to answer a pre-framed research question to lead to a valid answer through a systematic, explicit and reproducible method of locating; identifying, including and appraising appropriate trials. The results are synthesized considering the methodological rigor of included trials. While the meta-analysis quantitatively pools the results from individual included studies, the systematic review summarizes the findings as qualitative conclusions. These reviews are crux of evidence based dentistry for various stake-holders, i.e., clinicians, researchers and policy-makers. Although the meticulous methodology of systematic review and meta-analysis minimizes the elements of bias, yet the validity and reliability of their findings should be explored prior to translating their conclusions to practice. The goal of this paper is to familiarize readers with rationale, conduct and appraisal of systematic review and meta-analysis. Further, guidance is provided on tracing potential elements of bias in the review to enable readers to judge the quality of evidence generated from the review.

scholarly journals Development of the ACTIVE framework to describe stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 245-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Pollock ◽  
Pauline Campbell ◽  
Caroline Struthers ◽  
Anneliese Synnot ◽  
Jack Nunn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Stakeholder Involvement ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Literature Searching ◽  
Health Decision

Objectives Involvement of patients, health professionals, and the wider public (‘stakeholders’) is seen to be beneficial to the quality, relevance and impact of research and may enhance the usefulness and uptake of systematic reviews. However, there is a lack of evidence and resources to guide researchers in how to actively involve stakeholders in systematic reviews. In this paper, we report the development of the ACTIVE framework to describe how stakeholders are involved in systematic reviews. Methods We developed a framework using methods previously described in the development of conceptual frameworks relating to other areas of public involvement, including: literature searching, data extraction, analysis, and categorization. A draft ACTIVE framework was developed and then refined after presentation at a conference workshop, before being applied to a subset of 32 systematic reviews. Data extracted from these systematic reviews, identified in a systematic scoping review, were categorized against pre-defined constructs, including: who was involved, how stakeholders were recruited, the mode of involvement, at what stage there was involvement and the level of control or influence. Results The final ACTIVE framework described whether patients, carers and/or families, and/or other stakeholders (including health professionals, health decision makers and funders) were involved. We defined: recruitment as either open or closed; the approach to involvement as either one-time, continuous or combined; and the method of involvement as either direct or indirect. The stage of involvement in reviews was defined using the Cochrane Ecosystem stages of a review. The level of control or influence was defined according to the roles and activities of stakeholders in the review process, and described as the ACTIVE continuum of involvement. Conclusions The ACTIVE framework provides a structure with which to describe key components of stakeholder involvement within a systematic review, and we have used this to summarize how stakeholders have been involved in a subset of varied systematic reviews. The ACTIVE continuum of involvement provides a new model that uses tasks and roles to detail the level of stakeholder involvement. This work has contributed to the development of learning resources aimed at supporting systematic review authors and editors to involve stakeholders in their systematic reviews. The ACTIVE framework may support the decision-making of systematic review authors in planning how to involve stakeholders in future reviews.

A Systematic Review of Gamification Within E-Learning

2022 ◽  
pp. 123-140
Author(s):  
Samuel Muthee Kamunya ◽  
Robert Obwocha Oboko ◽  
Elizaphan Muuro Maina ◽  
Evans Kirimi Miriti
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Learning Platform ◽  
E Learning ◽  
Learning Platforms ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Enhanced Learning ◽  
User Motivation

The focus of this study was to review and evaluate the effectiveness of gamification within e-learning platforms. The study deployed systematic literature review methodology to evaluate how effective gamification has been used within e-learning platforms. The study used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Approach (PRISMA), starting with 366 articles, shifting to a final 34 articles for consideration. It was established that gamification positively influences and enhances learning within the e-learning platform. Therefore, the study recommends policy makers, designers, and implementers of e-learning platforms to consider incorporating gamification elements in order to increase user motivation and engagement for enhanced learning.

scholarly journals Relationship between arginine intake in parenteral nutrition and preterm neonatal population plasma arginine concentrations: a systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 77 (12) ◽  
pp. 878-889
Author(s):  
Chandini M Premakumar ◽  
Mark A Turner ◽  
Colin Morgan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Parenteral Nutrition ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Preterm Neonates ◽  
Very Preterm ◽  
Dose Concentration ◽  
Plasma Arginine ◽  
Relationship Of

AbstractContextVery preterm neonates (VPNs) are unable to digest breast milk and therefore rely on parenteral nutrition (PN) formulations. This systematic review was prepared following PRISMA-P 2015 guidelines. For the purpose of this review, desirable mean plasma arginine concentration is defined as ≥80 micromoles/L.ObjectiveThe review was performed to answer the following research question: “In VPNs, are high amounts of arginine in PN, compared with low amounts of arginine, associated with appropriate circulating concentrations of arginine?” Therefore, the aims were to 1) quantify the relationship between parenteral arginine intakes and plasma arginine concentrations in PN-dependent VPNs; 2) identify any features of study design that affect this relationship; and 3) estimate the target parenteral arginine dose to achieve desirable preterm plasma arginine concentrations.Data SourcesThe PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched regardless of study design; review articles were not included.Data ExtractionOnly articles that discussed amino acid (AA) intake and measured plasma AA profile post PN in VPNs were included. Data were obtained using a data extraction checklist that was devised for the purpose of this review.Data AnalysisTwelve articles met the inclusion criteria. The dose–concentration relationship of arginine content (%) and absolute arginine intake (mg/(kg × d)) with plasma arginine concentrations showed a significant positive correlation (P < 0.001).ConclusionFuture studies using AA solutions with arginine content of 17%–20% and protein intakes of 3.5–4.0 g/kg per day may be needed to achieve higher plasma arginine concentrations.

scholarly journals Pre-arrest and intra-arrest prognostic factors associated with survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest: systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. l6373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon M Fernando ◽  
Alexandre Tran ◽  
Wei Cheng ◽  
Bram Rochwerg ◽  
Monica Taljaard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
English Language ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Strategy ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Abstract Objective To determine associations between important pre-arrest and intra-arrest prognostic factors and survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to 4 February 2019. Primary, unpublished data from the United Kingdom National Cardiac Arrest Audit database. Study selection criteria English language studies that investigated pre-arrest and intra-arrest prognostic factors and survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Data extraction PROGRESS (prognosis research strategy group) recommendations and the CHARMS (critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies) checklist were followed. Risk of bias was assessed by using the QUIPS tool (quality in prognosis studies). The primary analysis pooled associations only if they were adjusted for relevant confounders. The GRADE approach (grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation) was used to rate certainty in the evidence. Results The primary analysis included 23 cohort studies. Of the pre-arrest factors, male sex (odds ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.73 to 0.95, moderate certainty), age 60 or older (0.50, 0.40 to 0.62, low certainty), active malignancy (0.57, 0.45 to 0.71, high certainty), and history of chronic kidney disease (0.56, 0.40 to 0.78, high certainty) were associated with reduced odds of survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Of the intra-arrest factors, witnessed arrest (2.71, 2.17 to 3.38, high certainty), monitored arrest (2.23, 1.41 to 3.52, high certainty), arrest during daytime hours (1.41, 1.20 to 1.66, high certainty), and initial shockable rhythm (5.28, 3.78 to 7.39, high certainty) were associated with increased odds of survival. Intubation during arrest (0.54, 0.42 to 0.70, moderate certainty) and duration of resuscitation of at least 15 minutes (0.12, 0.07 to 0.19, high certainty) were associated with reduced odds of survival. Conclusion Moderate to high certainty evidence was found for associations of pre-arrest and intra-arrest prognostic factors with survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42018104795

Clinical handover and handoff in healthcare: a systematic review of systematic reviews

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa Desmedt ◽  
Dorien Ulenaers ◽  
Joep Grosemans ◽  
Johan Hellings ◽  
Jochen Bergs
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Implementation Process ◽  
Healthcare Setting ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Role Playing ◽  
Included Study ◽  
Clinical Handover ◽  
Review Team

Abstract Purpose The purpose of this systematic review is to appraise and summarize existing literature on clinical handover. Data sources We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Study selection Included articles were reviewed independently by the review team. Data extraction The review team extracted data under the following headers: author(s), year of publication, journal, scope, search strategy, number of studies included, type of studies included, study quality assessment, used definition of handover, healthcare setting, outcomes measured, findings and finally some comments or remarks. Results of data synthesis First, research indicates that poor handover is associated with multiple potential hazards such as lack of availability of required equipment for patients, information omissions, diagnosis errors, treatment errors, disposition errors and treatment delays. Second, our systematic review indicates that no single tool arises as best for any particular specialty or use to evaluate the handover process. Third, there is little evidence delineating what constitutes best handoff practices. Most efforts facilitated the coordination of care and communication between healthcare professionals using electronic tools or a standardized form. Fourth, our review indicates that the principal teaching methods are role-playing and simulation, which may result in better knowledge transfer to the work environment, better health and patients’ well-being. Conclusions This review emphasizes the importance of staff education (including simulation-based and team training), non-technical skills and the implementation process of clinical handover in healthcare settings.

scholarly journals Assessment of humoral and cell-mediated immune responses to pertussis vaccination: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. e028109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Funbi Akinola ◽  
Rudzani Muloiwa ◽  
Gregory, D Hussey ◽  
Violette Dirix ◽  
Benjamin Kagina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Immune Response ◽  
Immune Responses ◽  
Public Space ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Population Type

IntroductionGlobally, some studies show a resurgence of pertussis. The risks and benefits of using whole-cell pertussis (wP) or acellular pertussis (aP) vaccines in the control of the disease have been widely debated. Better control of pertussis will require improved understanding of the immune response to pertussis vaccines. Improved understanding and assessment of the immunity induced by pertussis vaccines is thus imperative. Several studies have documented different immunological outcomes to pertussis vaccination from an array of assays. We propose to conduct a systematic review of the different immunological assays and outcomes used in the assessment of the humoraland cell-mediated immune response following pertussis vaccination.Methods and analysisThe primary outcomes for consideration are quality and quantity of immune responses (humoral and cell-mediated) post-pertussis vaccination. Of interest as secondary outcomes are types of immunoassays used in assessing immune responses post-pertussis vaccination, types of biological samples used in assessing immune responses post-pertussis vaccination, as well as the types of antigens used to stimulate these samples during post-pertussis vaccination immune response assessments. Different electronic databases (including PubMed, Cochrane, EBSCO Host, Scopus and Web of Science) will be accessed for peer-reviewed published and grey literature evaluating immune responses to pertussis vaccines between 1990 and 2019. The quality of included articles will be assessed using standardised risk and quality assessment tools specific to the study design used in each article. Data extraction will be done using a data extraction form. The extracted data will be analysed using STATA V.14.0 and RevMan V.5.3 software. A subgroup analysis will be conducted based on the study population, type of vaccine (wP or aP) and type of immune response (cell-mediated or humoral). Guidelines for reporting systematic reviews in the revised 2009 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement will be used in this study.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this study as it is a systematic review. We will only make use of data already available in the public space. Findings will be reported via publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific meetings and workshops.Trial registration numberCRD42018102455.

scholarly journals Clinical, laboratory and imaging predictors for critical illness and mortality in patients with COVID-19: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e039813
Author(s):  
Xinxing Lai ◽  
Jian Liu ◽  
Tianyi Zhang ◽  
Luda Feng ◽  
Ping Jiang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Critical Illness ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Clinical Laboratory ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Early Management ◽  
Modifiable Factors

IntroductionWith the threat of a worldwide pandemic of COVID-19, it is important to identify the prognostic factors for critical conditions among patients with non-critical COVID-19. Prognostic factors and models may assist front-line clinicians in rapid identification of high-risk patients, early management of modifiable factors, appropriate triaging and optimising the use of limited healthcare resources. We aim to systematically assess the clinical, laboratory and imaging predictors as well as prediction models for severe or critical illness and mortality in patients with COVID-19.Methods and analysisAll peer-reviewed and preprint primary articles with a longitudinal design that focused on prognostic factors or models for critical illness and mortality related to COVID-19 will be eligible for inclusion. A systematic search of 11 databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang Data, SinoMed, bioRxiv, Arxiv and MedRxiv will be conducted. Study selection will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data extraction will be performed using the modified version of the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies checklist and quality will be evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Quality In Prognosis Studies tool. The association between prognostic factors and outcomes of interest will be synthesised and a meta-analysis will be conducted with three or more studies reporting a particular factor in a consistent manner.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was not required for this systematic review. We will disseminate our findings through publication in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD 42020178798.

Interventions improving health professionals’ practice for addressing patients’ weight management behaviours: systematic review of reviews

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bahareh Yazdizadeh ◽  
Ruth Walker ◽  
Helen Skouteris ◽  
Ellinor K Olander ◽  
Briony Hill
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
System Level ◽  
Training Interventions ◽  
Cochrane Database ◽  
Physical Activity Advice ◽  
Diet And Physical Activity

Abstract Health professionals require education and training to implement obesity management guidelines and ultimately impact on the health outcomes experienced by their patients. Therefore, a systematic review of systematic reviews that evaluated interventions designed to change the practice of health professionals when addressing diet and physical activity with their patients was conducted. MEDLINE Complete; Cochrane database of systematic reviews; PsycINFO; CINAHL Complete; Global Health; Embase; INFORMIT: Health Subset; Health System Evidence and RX for change were searched in March 2019, with no date or language limits. Identified references underwent screening, full-text analyses and data extraction in duplicate. The search identified 15 230 references. Five systematic reviews that provided a narrative syntheses of a combined 38 studies were included. Health professional participants generally reported being satisfied with the training interventions. Heterogeneity between and within included reviews, non-controlled designs of individual studies and low quality of evidence at an individual study level and review level made it difficult to draw firm conclusions regarding what interventions are most effective in changing health professionals’ knowledge, skills, self-efficacy, attitudes and practice. However, similar gaps in the literature were identified across included reviews. Key areas that could be addressed in future interventions including organization and system-level barriers to providing advice, health professionals’ attitudes and motivation and weight stigma have been highlighted. Health professionals and patients could be more involved in the planning and development of interventions that work towards improving diet and physical activity advice and support provided in healthcare.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document