scholarly journals Best practices in ranking communicable disease threats: a literature review, 2015

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (17) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleanor Charlotte O’Brien ◽  
Rachel Taft ◽  
Katie Geary ◽  
Massimo Ciotti ◽  
Jonathan E Suk
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Narrative Analysis ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Communicable Disease ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Disease Outbreaks ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Risk Ranking ◽  
Practice Framework

The threat of serious, cross-border communicable disease outbreaks in Europe poses a significant challenge to public health and emergency preparedness because the relative likelihood of these threats and the pathogens involved are constantly shifting in response to a range of changing disease drivers. To inform strategic planning by enabling effective resource allocation to manage the consequences of communicable disease outbreaks, it is useful to be able to rank and prioritise pathogens. This paper reports on a literature review which identifies and evaluates the range of methods used for risk ranking. Searches were performed across biomedical and grey literature databases, supplemented by reference harvesting and citation tracking. Studies were selected using transparent inclusion criteria and underwent quality appraisal using a bespoke checklist based on the AGREE II criteria. Seventeen studies were included in the review, covering five methodologies. A narrative analysis of the selected studies suggests that no single methodology was superior. However, many of the methods shared common components, around which a ‘best-practice’ framework was formulated. This approach is intended to help inform decision makers’ choice of an appropriate risk-ranking study design.

scholarly journals Scanning the horizon: a systematic literature review of methodologies

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. e026764 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Hines ◽  
Li Hiu Yu ◽  
Richard H Guy ◽  
Angela Brand ◽  
Marisa Papaluca-Amati
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Horizon Scanning ◽  
Literature Searches ◽  
Rapid Emergence ◽  
Biomedical Fields

ObjectivesSociety is confronted with the rapid emergence of innovation in science and technology. To manage this, horizon scanning is being adopted globally to identify, assess and prioritise innovations and trends at an early stage of their development. This enables decision-makers to be better informed and to prepare for change. The aim of this paper is to systematically identify and evaluate horizon scanning methodologies employed in the healthcare and biomedical fields.MethodsA systematic literature review was performed using PubMed and Embase and was supplemented with grey literature searches (2008–2018). The principal methodologies used in horizon scanning were extracted.ResultsApproximately 100 articles were summarised in a literature map. The search revealed many examples of horizon scanning across disciplines. Challenges, such as the need to refine prioritisation criteria, manage uncertainty inherent in the findings and improve the dissemination of identified issues, have been highlighted.ConclusionHorizon scanning, when performed appropriately, is a flexible and potentially reliable tool, with a wide variety of methods. Horizon scanning can inform and influence decision-making, through identifying opportunities and challenges, from an organisational to an international level. Further research to identify the most effective methodologies available would add depth to this landscape and enable the evolution of best practice to most efficiently anticipate novel developments and innovations.

scholarly journals 196 A Structured Literature Review of Diagnostic Processes and Pathways for People Living with Younger Onset Dementia

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. iii1-iii16
Author(s):  
Caroline Kilty ◽  
Suzanne Cahill ◽  
Siobhan Cahill ◽  
Tony Foley ◽  
Bernadette Rock ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Geriatric Medicine ◽  
Signs And Symptoms ◽  
Care Services ◽  
Primary Care Services ◽  
Scientific Papers ◽  
Memory Clinics ◽  
Structured Literature Review

Abstract Background Currently, 1 in 10 people diagnosed with dementia in Ireland are aged under 65, this is termed “Younger Onset Dementia” (YOD). Though small in numbers these figures (4000 people) are increasing, and important differences exist between people diagnosed with (PwYOD) and those diagnosed with later onset dementia (LOD). As dementia is normally associated with advancing age, clinicians are not always on the alert for its diagnosis in younger people. Diagnosing YOD can be especially challenging since presentation may be atypical and there is a lack of clinical ownership in this area. Methods A structured literature review was conducted to identify optimum models of diagnostic processes and pathways for PwYOD. Two research questions were addressed: (i) what models for the diagnosis of PwYOD exist nationally and internationally, and what evidence supports these and (ii) what are the differences between diagnostic processes and pathways for PwYOD compared with PwLOD. A systematic search strategy was devised to identify all relevant scientific papers. Key databases were used, supplemented by grey literature searches. A narrative synthesis approach was undertaken to assess the literature identified. Results Pathways and processes to the diagnosis of YOD are unclear and complex and compared with LOD, diagnosis takes more time. PwYOD are more likely to have multiple referrals to different specialists, have their memory and cognitive complaints misattributed to other factors such as depression and experience longer delays in obtaining a diagnosis. Conclusion Few evidence-based best-practice models or guidelines for the diagnosis of YOD exist internationally. Increased awareness of the signs and symptoms of YOD among all healthcare professionals is necessary. There is a need for improved linkages to be developed between Geriatric Medicine, Neurology, Psychiatry, and Primary Care services and in certain instances for suspected cases of YOD to be referred to neurology-led memory clinics.

EVIDENCE INFORMED DECISION MAKING: THE USE OF “COLLOQUIAL EVIDENCE” AT NICE

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 138-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tarang Sharma ◽  
Moni Choudhury ◽  
Bindweep Kaur ◽  
Bhash Naidoo ◽  
Sarah Garner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Best Practice ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Informed Decision Making ◽  
Quality Check ◽  
Guidance Development ◽  
Made In

Objectives: Colloquial evidence (CE) has been described as the informal evidence that helps provide context to other forms of evidence in guidance development. Despite challenges around quality, and the potential biases, the use of CE is becoming increasingly important in assessments where scientific literature is sparse and to also capture the experience of all stakeholders in discussions, including that of experts and patients. We aimed to ascertain how CE was being used at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE).Methods: Relevant data corresponding to the use of CE was extracted from all NICE technical and process manuals by two reviewers and quality assured and analyzed by a third reviewer. This was considered in light of the results of a focused literature review and a combined checklist for quality assessment was developed.Results: At NICE, CE is utilised across all guidance producing programmes and at all stages of development. CE could range from information from experts and patient/carers, grey literature (including evidence from websites and policy reports) and testimony from stakeholders through consultation. Six tools for critical appraisal of CE were available from the literature and a combined best practice checklist has been proposed.Conclusions: As decisions often need to be made in areas where there is a lack of published scientific evidence, CE is employed. Therefore to ensure its appropriateness the development of a validated CE data quality check-list to assist decision makers is essential and further research in this area is a priority.

scholarly journals From Bitcoin to Central Bank Digital Currencies: Making Sense of the Digital Money Revolution

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 165
Author(s):  
Paulo Rupino Cunha ◽  
Paulo Melo ◽  
Helder Sebastião
Keyword(s):  
Central Bank ◽  
Practical Implication ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Central Banks ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Making Sense ◽  
Extensive Search ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Digital Money ◽  
Open Issues

We analyze the path from cryptocurrencies to official Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), to shed some light on the ultimate dematerialization of money. To that end, we made an extensive search that resulted in a review of more than 100 academic and grey literature references, including official positions from central banks. We present and discuss the characteristics of the different CBDC variants being considered—namely, wholesale, retail, and, for the latter, the account-based, and token-based—as well as ongoing pilots, scenarios of interoperability, and open issues. Our contribution enables decision-makers and society at large to understand the potential advantages and risks of introducing CBDCs, and how these vary according to many technical and economic design choices. The practical implication is that a debate becomes possible about the trade-offs that the stakeholders are willing to accept.

Processes, challenges and recommendations of grey literature review: An experience report

2021 ◽  
pp. 106607
Author(s):  
He Zhang ◽  
Runfeng Mao ◽  
Huang Huang ◽  
Qiming Dai ◽  
Xin Zhou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Experience Report

scholarly journals Lockdowns, lives and livelihoods: the impact of COVID-19 and public health responses to conflict affected populations - a remote qualitative study in Baidoa and Mogadishu, Somalia

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dorien H. Braam ◽  
Sharath Srinivasan ◽  
Luke Church ◽  
Zakaria Sheikh ◽  
Freya L. Jephcott ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Narrative Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Or Education ◽  
Public Health Response ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Authorities in Somalia responded with drastic measures after the first confirmed COVID-19 case in mid-March 2020, closing borders, schools, limiting travel and prohibiting most group functions. However, the impact of the pandemic in Somalia thereafter remained unclear. This study employs a novel remote qualitative research method in a conflict-affected setting to look at how some of the most at-risk internally displaced and host populations were impacted by COVID-19, what determined their responses, and how this affected their health and socio-economic vulnerability. Methods We conducted a remote qualitative study, using Katikati, a 1-to-1 conversation management and analysis platform using short message service (SMS) developed by Lark Systems with Africa’s Voices Foundation (AVF), for semi-structured interviews over three months with participants in Mogadishu and Baidoa. We recruited a gender balanced cohort across age groups, and used an analytical framework on the social determinants of health for a narrative analysis on major themes discussed, triangulating data with existing peer-reviewed and grey literature. Results The remote research approach demonstrated efficacy in sustaining trusted and meaningful conversations for gathering qualitative data from hard-to-reach conflict-affected communities. The major themes discussed by the 35 participants included health, livelihoods and education. Two participants contracted the disease, while others reported family or community members affected by COVID-19. Almost all participants faced a loss of income and/or education, primarily as a result of the strict public health measures. Some of those who were heavily affected economically but did not directly experienced disease, denied the pandemic. Religion played an important role in participants’ beliefs in protection against and salvation from the disease. As lockdowns were lifted in August 2020, many believed the pandemic to be over. Conclusions While the official COVID-19 burden has remained relatively low in Somalia, the impact to people’s daily lives, income and livelihoods due to public health responses, has been significant. Participants describe those ‘secondary’ outcomes as the main impact of the pandemic, serving as a stark reminder of the need to broaden the public health response beyond disease prevention to include social and economic interventions to decrease people’s vulnerability to future shocks.

scholarly journals Cooperation & Liaison between Universities & Editors (CLUE): recommendations on best practice

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Wager ◽  
◽  
Sabine Kleinert
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
List Type ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
Academic Journals ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Published Research

Abstract Background Inaccurate, false or incomplete research publications may mislead readers including researchers and decision-makers. It is therefore important that such problems are identified and rectified promptly. This usually involves collaboration between the research institutions and academic journals involved, but these interactions can be problematic. Methods These recommendations were developed following discussions at World Conferences on Research Integrity in 2013 and 2017, and at a specially convened 3-day workshop in 2016 involving participants from 7 countries with expertise in publication ethics and research integrity. The recommendations aim to address issues surrounding cooperation and liaison between institutions (e.g. universities) and journals about possible and actual problems with the integrity of reported research arising before and after publication. Results The main recommendations are that research institutions should: develop mechanisms for assessing the integrity of reported research (if concerns are raised) that are distinct from processes to determine whether individual researchers have committed misconduct; release relevant sections of reports of research integrity or misconduct investigations to all journals that have published research that was investigated; take responsibility for research performed under their auspices regardless of whether the researcher still works at that institution or how long ago the work was done; work with funders to ensure essential research data is retained for at least 10 years. Journals should: respond to institutions about research integrity cases in a timely manner; have criteria for determining whether, and what type of, information and evidence relating to the integrity of research reports should be passed on to institutions; pass on research integrity concerns to institutions, regardless of whether they intend to accept the work for publication; retain peer review records for at least 10 years to enable the investigation of peer review manipulation or other inappropriate behaviour by authors or reviewers. Conclusions Various difficulties can prevent effective cooperation between academic journals and research institutions about research integrity concerns and hinder the correction of the research record if problems are discovered. While the issues and their solutions may vary across different settings, we encourage research institutions, journals and funders to consider how they might improve future collaboration and cooperation on research integrity cases.

scholarly journals Adding value to the use of Health Impact Assessment and social return on investment technologies

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
L Green ◽  
K Ashton ◽  
M Dyakova ◽  
L Parry-Williams
Keyword(s):  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Return On Investment ◽  
Health Impact Assessment ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Health Impact ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Social Return On Investment ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Health Impact Assessment (HIA) and Social Return on Investment (SROI) are beneficial public health methodologies that assess potential effects on health including social, economic and environmental factors and have synergies in their approaches. This paper explores how HIA and SROI can complement each other to capture and account for the impact and social value of an assessed intervention or policy. A scoping review of academic and grey literature was undertaken to identify case studies published between January 1996 and April 2019 where HIA and SROI methods have been used to complement each other. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with nine international experts from a range of regulatory/legislative contexts to gain a better understanding of past experiences and expertise of both HIA and SROI. A thematic analysis was undertaken on the data collected. The review identified two published reports which outline when HIA and SROI have both been used to assess the same intervention. Interview results suggest that both methods have strengths as standalone processes i.e. HIAs are well-structured in their approach, assessing health in its broadest context and SROI can add value by monetizing social value as well as capturing social/environmental impact. Similarities of the two methods were identified i.e. a strong emphasis on stakeholder engagement and common shared principles. When questioned how the two methods could complement each other in practice, the results indicate the benefits of using HIA to explore initial impact, and as a platform on which to build SROI to monetarize social value. HIA and SROI methodologies have cross-over. The research suggests potential benefits when used in tandem or combining the methods to assess impact and account for health and social value. Innovative work is now being carried out in Wales to understand the implications of this in practice and to understand how the results of the two methods could be used by decision-makers. Key messages HIA and SROI methods can be used in tandem to capture both the health impact and social value of policies and proposed interventions. HIA and SROI when used together can provide valuable information to inform decision makers around the health impact and social value of proposed policies and interventions.

Best Practice for Concomitant CABG/CEA: A Case Study/Literature Review

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 98-99
Author(s):  
Colleen Taylor ◽  
M. Eileen Walsh
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Best Practice
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document