scholarly journals Methodological review: A systematic narrative review of screening tools for conducting systematic reviews in educational research

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qiyang Zhang ◽  
Amanda Jean Neitzel
Keyword(s):  
Educational Research ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Narrative Review ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Tool Selection ◽  
Methodological Review ◽  
Feature Score ◽  
Screening Software

In recent years, the increasing influence of evidence-based research and the rapid development of artificial intelligence have enabled the launch of many new reference screening software tools. Due to a dearth of research comparing different screening tools in educational research, researchers often choose the most convenient rather than the most suitable screening tool. This review aims to provide assistance for screening tool selection through a systematic narrative review and feature analysis of these tools’ functions and privacy policies. The current adoption rate of transparent tool reporting is low: by screening 191 studies published in the Review of Educational Research since 2015, we found that only eight (4.19%) studies reported screening tools. To locate available screening tools in the market, we consulted various sources and found 24 tools. Through citation search, we identified eight screening tools used by educational reviewers and ranked them in descending order of feature score: EPPI-Reviewer (tie), DistillerSR (tie), Covidence, Rayyan, Abstrackr, ASReview, RevMan, and Excel. For practitioners’ convenience, we concluded the paper with a decision tree to assist educational systematic reviewers in identifying suitable tools. This paper represents the first effort to provide educational researchers with guidance on how to navigate screening tools. Our results encourage researchers to report their tool usage in publications and select tools based on suitability instead of convenience.

scholarly journals Healthcare Provider Perspectives on Bipolar I Disorder Screening and the Rapid Mood Screener (RMS), a Pragmatic, New Tool

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-183
Author(s):  
Michael E. Thase ◽  
Stephen M. Stahl ◽  
Roger S. McIntyre ◽  
Tina Matthews-Hayes ◽  
Mehul Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
Bipolar I Disorder ◽  
Provider Perspectives ◽  
Patient Reported

AbstractIntroductionAlthough mania is the hallmark symptom of bipolar I disorder (BD-I), most patients initially present for treatment with depressive symptoms. Misdiagnosis of BD-I as major depressive disorder (MDD) is common, potentially resulting in poor outcomes and inappropriate antidepressant monotherapy treatment. Screening patients with depressive symptoms is a practical strategy to help healthcare providers (HCPs) identify when additional assessment for BD-I is warranted. The new 6-item Rapid Mood Screener (RMS) is a pragmatic patient-reported BD-I screening tool that relies on easily understood terminology to screen for manic symptoms and other BD-I features in <2 minutes. The RMS was validated in an observational study in patients with clinically confirmed BD-I (n=67) or MDD (n=72). When 4 or more items were endorsed (“yes”), the sensitivity of the RMS for identifying patients with BP-I was 0.88 and specificity was 0.80; positive and negative predictive values were 0.80 and 0.88, respectively. To more thoroughly understand screening tool use among HCPs, a 10-minute survey was conducted.MethodsA nationwide sample of HCPs (N=200) was selected using multiple HCP panels; HCPs were asked to describe their opinions/current use of screening tools, assess the RMS, and evaluate the RMS versus the widely recognized Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ). Results were reported by grouped specialties (primary care physicians, general nurse practitioners [NPs]/physician assistants [PAs], psychiatrists, and psychiatric NPs/PAs). Included HCPs were in practice <30 years, spent at least 75% of their time in clinical practice, saw at least 10 patients with depression per month, and diagnosed MDD or BD in at least 1 patient per month. Findings were reported using descriptive statistics; statistical significance was reported at the 95% confidence interval.ResultsAmong HCPs, 82% used a tool to screen for MDD, while 32% used a tool for BD. Screening tool attributes considered to be of the greatest value included sensitivity (68%), easy to answer questions (66%), specificity (65%), confidence in results (64%), and practicality (62%). Of HCPs familiar with screening tools, 70% thought the RMS was at least somewhat better than other screening tools. Most HCPs were aware of the MDQ (85%), but only 29% reported current use. Most HCPs (81%) preferred the RMS to the MDQ, and the RMS significantly outperformed the MDQ across valued attributes; 76% reported that they were likely to use the RMS to screen new patients with depressive symptoms. A total of 84% said the RMS would have a positive impact on their practice, with 46% saying they would screen more patients for bipolar disorder.DiscussionThe RMS was viewed positively by HCPs who participated in a brief survey. A large percentage of respondents preferred the RMS over the MDQ and indicated that they would use it in their practice. Collectively, responses indicated that the RMS is likely to have a positive impact on screening behavior.FundingAbbVie Inc.

scholarly journals A Review of Evidence-Based Recommendations for Pericoronitis Management and a Systematic Review of Antibiotic Prescribing for Pericoronitis among Dentists: Inappropriate Pericoronitis Treatment Is a Critical Factor of Antibiotic Overuse in Dentistry

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (13) ◽  
pp. 6796
Author(s):  
Jan Schmidt ◽  
Martina Kunderova ◽  
Nela Pilbauerova ◽  
Martin Kapitan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Local Therapy ◽  
Critical Factor ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Narrative Review ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Antibiotic Overuse ◽  
Clinically Significant

This work provides a narrative review covering evidence-based recommendations for pericoronitis management (Part A) and a systematic review of antibiotic prescribing for pericoronitis from January 2000 to May 2021 (Part B). Part A presents the most recent, clinically significant, and evidence-based guidance for pericoronitis diagnosis and proper treatment recommending the local therapy over antibiotic prescribing, which should be reserved for severe conditions. The systematic review includes publications analyzing sets of patients treated for pericoronitis and questionnaires that identified dentists' therapeutic approaches to pericoronitis. Questionnaires among dentists revealed that almost 75% of them prescribed antibiotics for pericoronitis, and pericoronitis was among the top 4 in the frequency of antibiotic use within the surveyed diagnoses and situations. Studies involving patients showed that antibiotics were prescribed to more than half of the patients with pericoronitis, and pericoronitis was among the top 2 in the frequency of antibiotic use within the monitored diagnoses and situations. The most prescribed antibiotics for pericoronitis were amoxicillin and metronidazole. The systematic review results show abundant and unnecessary use of antibiotics for pericoronitis and are in strong contrast to evidence-based recommendations summarized in the narrative review. Adherence of dental professionals to the recommendations presented in this work can help rapidly reduce the duration of pericoronitis, prevent its complications, and reduce the use of antibiotics and thus reduce its impact on patients' quality of life, healthcare costs, and antimicrobial resistance development.

Radiotherapy-Specific Chronic Pain Syndromes in the Cancer Population: An Evidence-Based Narrative Review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jay Karri ◽  
Laura Lachman ◽  
Alex Hanania ◽  
Anuj Marathe ◽  
Mani Singh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Narrative Review ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Pain Syndromes ◽  
Chronic Pain Syndromes

scholarly journals COVID-19: Before the Fall, An Evidence-Based Narrative Review of Treatment Options

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Rebold ◽  
Dana Holger ◽  
Sara Alosaimy ◽  
Taylor Morrisette ◽  
Michael Rybak
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Options ◽  
Narrative Review ◽  
Evidence Based

scholarly journals The effective screening tools for detecting hearing loss in elderly population: HHIE-ST Versus TSQ

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nichtima Chayaopas ◽  
Pornthep Kasemsiri ◽  
Panida Thanawirattananit ◽  
Patorn Piromchai ◽  
Kwanchanok Yimtae
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Effective Screening ◽  
Hearing Disability ◽  
Test Study ◽  
Combined Test ◽  
Single Question

Abstract Background Globally increasing number of elders is concerned. Hearing loss process in older adults cannot be avoided. An effective screening tool for hearing loss is essential for proper diagnosis and rehabilitation, which can improve QOL in older adults. Methods This prospective-diagnostic test study evaluates the diagnostic value of Thai version of the Hearing Handicap Inventory for Elderly Screening (HHIE-ST) and the Thai Single Question (TSQ) surveys in screening hearing disability in 1109 Thai participants aged 60 years and older in communities in four provinces in Thailand. The HHIE-ST consisted of 10 selected questions from the validated HHIE-Thai version. A TSQ survey was developed to have the same meaning as an English Single Question survey. The participants answered both questionnaires, and a standard audiometry test assessed with air conduction from 250 to 8000 Hz was included as a gold standard. Results The prevalence of hearing disability was 38.34%. The HHIE-ST achieved a sensitivity of 88.96% (95% CI 85.77–91.64) and specificity of 52.19% (95% CI 48.24–56.13) for diagnosis hearing disability in Thai older adults, whereas the TSQ yielded a sensitivity of 88.73% and a specificity of 55.93%. A combined test including the HHIE-ST and TSQ achieved better performance with sensitivity of 85.29% and specificity of 60.13%. Conclusions Either the HHIE-ST or the TSQ is a sensitive and useful tool for screening hearing disability in Thai older adults. Using the HHIE-ST together with the TSQ resulted in a better screening tool for detecting moderate hearing loss older adults who will benefit and recommended for hearing rehabilitation. Trial registration The study is registered with the following number in the Thai Clinical Trials Registry: TCTR20151015003. Date of registration October 14, 2015.

scholarly journals Comprehensive physiotherapy management in covid-19 – a narrative review

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 38030 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deivendran Kalirathinam ◽  
Raj Guruchandran ◽  
Prabhakar Subramani
Keyword(s):  
Narrative Review ◽  
World Health ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Global Pandemic ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Novel Coronavirus ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
The Uk

The 2019 novel coronavirus officially named as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic by the World Health Organization, has spread to more than 180 countries. The ongoing global pandemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus, which causes COVID-19, spread to the United Kingdom (UK) in January 2020. Transmission within the UK was confirmed in February, leading to an epidemic with a rapid increase in cases in March. As on April 25- 2020, there have been 148,377 confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the UK and 20,319 people with confirmed infection have died. Survival of critically ill patients is frequently associated with significant functional impairment and reduced health-related quality of life. Early physiotherapy and community rehabilitation of COVID-19 patients has recently been identified as an essential therapeutic tool and has become a crucial evidence-based component in the management of these patients. This comprehensive narrative review aims to describe recent progress in the application of physiotherapy management in COVID 19 patients. Assessment and evidence- based treatment of these patients should include prevention, reduction of adverse consequences in immobilization, and long-term impairment sequelae. A variety of techniques and modalities of early physiotherapy in intensive care unit are suggested by clinical research. They should be applied according to the stage of the disease, comorbidities, and patient’s level of cooperation.

scholarly journals Predicting Polysomnography Parameters from Anthropometric Features and Breathing Sounds Recorded during Wakefulness

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 905
Author(s):  
Ahmed Elwali ◽  
Zahra Moussavi
Keyword(s):  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Random Forest Classifier ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Apnea Hypopnea Index ◽  
Bilinear Model ◽  
Arousal Index ◽  
Obstructive Sleep ◽  
Anthropometric Features

Background: The apnea/hypopnea index (AHI) is the primary outcome of a polysomnography assessment (PSG) for determining obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) severity. However, other OSA severity parameters (i.e., total arousal index, mean oxygen saturation (SpO2%), etc.) are crucial for a full diagnosis of OSA and deciding on a treatment option. PSG assessments and home sleep tests measure these parameters, but there is no screening tool to estimate or predict the OSA severity parameters other than the AHI. In this study, we investigated whether a combination of breathing sounds recorded during wakefulness and anthropometric features could be predictive of PSG parameters. Methods: Anthropometric information and five tracheal breathing sound cycles were recorded during wakefulness from 145 individuals referred to an overnight PSG study. The dataset was divided into training, validation, and blind testing datasets. Spectral and bispectral features of the sounds were evaluated to run correlation and classification analyses with the PSG parameters collected from the PSG sleep reports. Results: Many sound and anthropometric features had significant correlations (up to 0.56) with PSG parameters. Using combinations of sound and anthropometric features in a bilinear model for each PSG parameter resulted in correlation coefficients up to 0.84. Using the evaluated models for classification with a two-class random-forest classifier resulted in a blind testing classification accuracy up to 88.8% for predicting the key PSG parameters such as arousal index. Conclusions: These results add new value to the current OSA screening tools and provide a new promising possibility for predicting PSG parameters using only a few seconds of breathing sounds recorded during wakefulness without conducting an overnight PSG study.

scholarly journals Psoriatic arthritis screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Rheumatology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 692-707 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Iragorri ◽  
Glen Hazlewood ◽  
Braden Manns ◽  
Vishva Danthurebandara ◽  
Eldon Spackman
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Screening Questionnaire ◽  
Psa Screening ◽  
Early Psoriatic Arthritis

Abstract Objective To systematically review the accuracy and characteristics of different questionnaire-based PsA screening tools. Methods A systematic review of MEDLINE, Excerpta Medical Database, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science was conducted to identify studies that evaluated the accuracy of self-administered PsA screening tools for patients with psoriasis. A bivariate meta-analysis was used to pool screening tool-specific accuracy estimates (sensitivity and specificity). Heterogeneity of the diagnostic odds ratio was evaluated through meta-regression. All full-text records were assessed for risk of bias with the QUADAS 2 tool. Results A total of 2280 references were identified and 130 records were assessed for full-text review, of which 42 were included for synthesis. Of these, 27 were included in quantitative syntheses. Of the records, 37% had an overall low risk of bias. Fourteen different screening tools and 104 separate accuracy estimates were identified. Pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates were calculated for the Psoriatic Arthritis Screening and Evaluation (cut-off = 44), Psoriatic Arthritis Screening and Evaluation (47), Toronto Psoriatic Arthritis Screening (8), Psoriasis Epidemiology Screening Tool (3) and Early Psoriatic Arthritis Screening Questionnaire (3). The Early Psoriatic Arthritis Screening Questionnaire reported the highest sensitivity and specificity (0.85 each). The I2 for the diagnostic odds ratios varied between 76 and 90.1%. Meta-regressions were conducted, in which the age, risk of bias for patient selection and the screening tool accounted for some of the observed heterogeneity. Conclusions Questionnaire-based tools have moderate accuracy to identify PsA among psoriasis patients. The Early Psoriatic Arthritis Screening Questionnaire appears to have slightly better accuracy compared with the Toronto Psoriatic Arthritis Screening, Psoriasis Epidemiology Screening Tool and Psoriatic Arthritis Screening and Evaluation. An economic evaluation could model the uncertainty and estimate the cost-effectiveness of PsA screening programs that use different tools.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document