What do we know about evidence-informed priority setting processes to set population-level health-research agendas: an overview of reviews

Background This overview aimed to synthesize existing systematic reviews to produce a draft framework of evidence-informed health priority setting that supports countries in identifying appropriate steps and methods when developing and implementing national research agendas. Main body We searched Ovid MEDLINE® and the WHO Institutional Repository for Information Sharing from 2010 to 2020 for critical or systematic reviews that evaluated research priority setting exercises. We adapted the AMSTAR checklist to assess the quality of included reviews and used adapted frameworks for data extraction and analysis. The search resulted in 2395 titles, of which 31 were included. Populations included in the reviews typically involved patients, families and carers, researchers, clinicians, policymakers and research funders. The topics covered in the reviews varied from specific diseases or conditions, approaches for healthcare practice or research priority setting methods itself. All the included systematic reviews were of low or critically low quality. The studies were thematically grouped based on their main focus: identifying and engaging with stakeholders; methods; context; and health area. Conclusion Our overview of reviews has reconfirmed aspects of existing frameworks, but has also identified new concepts for countries to consider while developing their national research agendas. We propose a preliminary framework for consideration that highlights four key phases: (1) preparatory, (2) priority setting, (3) follow-up phase and (4) sustainability phase, which have thirteen sub-domains to consider.

Technological and Digital Interventions for Mental Health and Wellbeing: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

Background: Research increasingly shows how selective and targeted use of technology within care and welfare can have several advantages including improved quality of care and active user involvement.Purpose: The current overview of reviews aims to summarize the research on the effectiveness of technology for mental health and wellbeing. The goal is to highlight and structure the diverse combinations of technologies and interventions used so far, rather than to summarize the effectiveness of singular approaches.Methods: The current overview includes reviews published in the past five years with a focus on effectiveness of digital and technological interventions targeting mental health and wellbeing.Results: A total of 246 reviews could be included. All reviews examined the effectiveness of digital and technological interventions in the context of care and welfare. A combination of two taxonomies was created through qualitative analysis, based on the retrieved interventions and technologies in the reviews. Review classification shows a predominance of reviews on psychotherapeutic interventions using computers and smartphones. It is furthermore shown that when smartphone applications as stand-alone technology are researched, the primary focus is on self-help, and that extended reality is the most researched emerging technology to date.Conclusion: This overview of reviews shows that a wide range of interventions and technologies, with varying focus and target populations, have been studied in the field of care and wellbeing. The current overview of reviews is a first step to add structure to this rapidly changing field and may guide both researchers and clinicians in further exploring the evidence-base of particular approaches.

Comments about the appraisal of systematic reviews in restorative dentistry

Adequate adoption of evidence-based practice is deeply rooted in accessing methodological quality and completeness of systematic reviews and meta-analyses reporting. Nonetheless, this assumption might be flawed if the methodological quality assessment has not been properly conducted. Taking the former statement into consideration, this correspondence article encourages the improvement of future tertiary manuscripts, especially in the field of restorative dentistry. Thus, this article addresses an overview of reviews in restorative dentistry by Sarkis-Onofre et al. in the May 2019 issue of the Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry as an example of evaluating tertiary evidence for increasing the awareness of reviewers, authors, and readers.

Methodological issues in economic evaluations of disease prevention and health promotion: an overview of systematic and scoping reviews

Background We aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of methodological challenges in economic evaluations of disease prevention and health promotion (DPHP)-measures. Methods We conducted an overview of reviews searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Database of Promoting Health Effectiveness Reviews, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and Database of Promoting Health Effectiveness Reviews (DOPHER) (from their inception to October 2021). We included both systematic and scoping reviews of economic evaluations in DPHP addressing following methodological aspects: (i) attribution of effects, (ii) outcomes, (iii) inter-sectoral (accruing to non-health sectors of society) costs and consequences and (iv) equity. Data were extracted according to the associated sub-criteria of the four methodological aspects including study design economic evaluation (e.g. model-based), type/scope of the outcomes (e.g. outcomes beyond health), perspective, cost categories related to non-health sectors of society, and consideration of equity (method of inclusion). Two reviewers independently screened all citations, full-text articles, and extracted data. A narrative synthesis without a meta-analysis or other statistical synthesis methods was conducted. Results The reviewing process resulted in ten systematic and one scoping review summarizing 494 health economic evaluations. A lifelong time horizon was adopted in about 23% of DPHP evaluations, while 64% of trial-based evaluations had a time horizon up to 2 years. Preference-based outcomes (36%) and non-health outcomes (8%) were only applied in a minority of studies. Although the inclusion of inter-sectoral costs (i.e. costs accruing to non-health sectors of society) has increased in recent years, these were often neglected (between 6 and 23% depending on the cost category). Consideration to equity was barely given in economic evaluations, and only addressed in six of the eleven reviews. Conclusions Economic evaluations of DPHP measures give only little attention to the specific methodological challenges related to this area. For future economic DPHP evaluations a tool with structured guidance should be developed. This overview of reviews was not registered and a published protocol does not exist.

Previously Unknown Reviews of the "Thesaurus of the Chuvash Language" by N.I. Ashmarin

The article provides an overview of reviews of the «Dictionary of the Chuvash language» by N.I. Ashmarin, published in foreign scientific journals. The thesaurus became available to a wide circle of Western linguists after its release in 1968 in the form of a photolithographic edition with a foreword by G. Durfer at the Indiana University in the USA. The research material was reviewed by J. Benzing, G. Dörfer, B. Scherner, M.J. Dresden, K.G. Menges and W. Brands. Many of these documents are kept in the scientific archive of the Chuvash State Institute of the Humanities. The work is written in a scientific vein. The purpose of this work is to introduce into the scientific use of Russian Chuvash studies reviews of N.I. Ashmarin. The thesaurus of the Chuvash language of the outstanding scientist received positive reviews from many foreign colleagues with a worldwide reputation. This work for them became the best source of information about the Chuvash language. For the development of Ashmarin studies, it is important to publish documents, including reviews, one way or another related to the scientist. In this regard, reviews are important documents that contribute to an objective assessment of the results of the scientific activity of the researcher.

The impact of heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) design features on the transmission of viruses, including SARS-CoV-2: an overview of reviews

Objective: Given possible airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2, an overview of reviews was conducted to understand what is already known from the scientific literature about how virus transmission may be affected by heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) design features in the built environment. Methods: Ovid MEDLINE and Compendex were searched from inception to January 2021. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts and full text of potentially relevant reviews, using a priori inclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria were systematic reviews examining effects of HVAC design features on virus transmission. Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality using AMSTAR2. Results: Searching identified 361 citations, 45 were potentially relevant, and 7 were included. Reviews were published between 2007 and 2021, and included 47 virus studies. Two earlier reviews (2007, 2016) of 21 studies found sufficient evidence that mechanical ventilation (airflow patterns, ventilation rates) plays a role in airborne transmission; however, both found insufficient evidence to quantify minimum mechanical ventilation requirements. One review (2017) of 9 studies examining humidity and indoor air quality found that influenza virus survival was lowest between 40% and 80% relative humidity; authors noted that ventilation rates were a confounding variable. Two reviews (2021) examined mitigation strategies for coronavirus transmission, finding droplet transmission decreased with increasing temperature and relative humidity. One review (2020) identified 14 studies examining coronavirus transmission in air-conditioning systems, finding HVAC systems played a role in virus spread during previous coronavirus outbreaks. One review (2020) examined virus transmission interventions on public ground transportation, finding ventilation and filtration to be effective. Discussion: Seven reviews synthesizing 47 studies demonstrate a role of HVAC in mitigating airborne virus transmission. Ventilation, humidity, temperature, and filtration can play a role in viability and transmission of viruses, including coronaviruses. Recommendations for minimum standards were not possible due to few studies investigating a given HVAC parameter.