JBI evidence synthesis最新文献

Objective: The aim of this systematic review will be to establish the prevalence and types of prescribing errors made by non-medical prescribers in health care.

Introduction: Prescribing errors are common, but the existing literature mostly focuses on medical prescribers. In many countries, legislation allows non-medical health care professionals to prescribe. However, there has been no systematic review of non-medical prescribing errors.

Eligibility criteria: This review will include quantitative studies of all designs investigating the prevalence of prescribing errors related to any disease, medication, or patient group, made by non-medical prescribers in all health care settings globally.

Methods: This systematic review will include a Study Within a Review. We will be using the JBI methodology for systematic reviews, particularly the guidelines for prevalence estimate reviews. An information specialist will conduct standard database searches using PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection. Two researchers will perform a parallel search using artificial intelligence software. Studies found through standard database searches and those found using artificial intelligence will be included if the 2 researchers independently decide that they meet the eligibility criteria after full-text screening. A comparison of the standard database search and artificial intelligence search will be reported in a separate Study Within a Review. Two researchers will independently conduct the critical appraisals and data extraction. A meta-analysis will be conducted, if possible. Otherwise, a narrative synthesis will be used.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42024616617.

Objective: The objective of this review is to report, characterize, and map the strategies used to implement vancomycin area under the curve/minimum inhibitory concentration (AUC/MIC) therapeutic drug monitoring and/or vancomycin model-informed precision dosing (MIPD) in the hospital setting. Barriers to and facilitators of implementation will also be included.

Introduction: Implementation of both vancomycin AUC/MIC-based therapeutic drug monitoring and vancomycin MIPD will continue to remain challenging until health care providers have the necessary suite of implementation tools available at their disposal to overcome many of the contextual barriers they currently face. To expediate the delays to implementation, a scoping review would be a useful preliminary step to collate, summarize, and present the relevant and published literature on this topic.

Eligibility criteria: The proposed scoping review will consider studies describing methods or strategies that include health care workers involved in the implementation of vancomycin AUC/MIC-based therapeutic drug monitoring and/or vancomycin MIPD for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections. Studies that examine barriers and facilitators to implementation will also be included.

Methods: This review will be conducted using JBI methodology and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. The search strategy will include 3 databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and Scopus. MedNar and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses will be included for gray literature. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts, full-text documents, and conduct data extraction. Data from included studies will be extracted using a standardized template, and findings will be summarized narratively and accompanied by tables and figures.

Review registration: OSF https://osf.io/e4jd2.

Objective: This review will assess the effectiveness of hospital-based developmental care interventions for improving preterm infants' neurodevelopmental outcomes during the first 2 years at corrected age.

Introduction: Preterm infants exhibit physical and physiological immaturity, along with exposure to an unfavorable extrauterine environment, both of which significantly increase the risk of developmental impairments. Developmental care encompasses a broad range of interventions to optimize neurodevelopmental outcomes. However, the effectiveness of these interventions for improving preterm infants' neurodevelopmental outcomes during the first 2 years at corrected age remains unclear.

Eligibility criteria: This review will examine primary experimental and quasi-experimental studies of hospital-based developmental care interventions and their impact on preterm infants' neurodevelopmental outcomes during the first 2 years at corrected age. The interventions will include environmental adjustments, sensory modification, proper positioning and handling, parental involvement, and other specialized practices, without being limited to the use of standardized tests for assessing cognitive, behavioral, and motor development of preterm infants. The review will include studies comparing these developmental care interventions with various control groups, including standard care or alternative interventions not classified as developmental care.

Methods: This review will follow the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of effectiveness. The search strategy will aim to locate both published and unpublished primary experimental studies, without publication date or language restrictions. Six databases will be searched, including PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science Core Collection. Sources of unpublished studies and gray literature will include ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, OATD, and WHO ICTRP. Two independent reviewers will perform study selection, critical appraisal, and data extraction, with the results presented through narrative synthesis. Where feasible, a meta-analysis will be conducted, and the findings will be evaluated using the GRADE approach.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42024619912.

Objective: This scoping review aims to identify and map how the global literature describes Afrocentric approaches to primary health care provision for Black populations in both clinical and community settings to support culturally responsive care.

Introduction: Most Black populations have roots in Africa, and there are specific sociocultural characteristics unique to African contexts. For Black populations, an Afrocentric approach to health is valuable because it can challenge anti-Black racism and promote health equity. Therefore, the consideration or acknowledgment of these unique aspects is vital for Black populations.

Eligibility criteria: Global literature on Afrocentric approaches to primary health care provision with Black populations will be included. To provide context for this review, we are using our evolving definition of Afrocentric approaches to primary health care provision as follows: culturally meaningful patient engagement processes, clinical practices, and procedures that are grounded in the values, worldviews, and lived experiences of Black peoples of African descent. We will include approaches used for all Black populations.

Methods: This review will be conducted using the JBI scoping review methodology. We will search 6 academic electronic databases and include qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods study designs, with no date limitations. The grey literature search will include opinion, policy, and practice documents from specific health organization websites. Two reviewers will independently complete the title and abstract screening, followed by full-text review and data extraction. Articles published in English will be included, with other languages included if English translations are available. English translations will be requested from journal authors.

Review registration: OSF https://osf.io/e2vxq.

Objective: This proposed scoping review aims to provide an overview of climate-related intervention studies that measure both climate action and psychological health as outcomes, regardless of whether the intervention primarily seeks to promote climate action, psychological health, or both.

Introduction: The interplay between climate change, human behavior, and psychological health is an emerging priority in climate psychology. Despite numerous interventions designed to encourage climate action, few have examined the psychological effects of these interventions. Conversely, interventions focused on psychological coping often overlook their effect on climate action. Bridging these gaps is essential for developing strategies that simultaneously support psychological health and long-term climate engagement.

Eligibility criteria: This review will include climate change-related intervention studies involving participants of any age or demographic background. Eligible studies must include interventions to promote climate action/psychological health. Specifically, climate action interventions must measure psychological health, while interventions that focus on improving psychological health must measure climate action.

Methods: A systematic search will be conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Cochrane Library), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), ERIC (EBSCOhost), and CINAHL (EBSCOhost). In line with JBI scoping review methodology, 2 independent reviewers will screen the literature and extract data on participants' characteristics, intervention descriptions, theoretical basis, study design, and outcomes related to climate action and psychological health. Findings will be presented in tabular and narrative formats, highlighting evidence gaps and suggesting directions for future research.

Review registration: OSF osf.io/h85cg.

Objective: The objective of this systematic review will be to synthesize the experiences and perceptions of patients and mental health professionals regarding clinical futility in psychiatric care. Specifically, the review will aim to clarify which practices are considered futile, as well as the ethical, relational, and contextual factors shaping these judgments.

Introduction: Although extensively discussed in general medicine, futility in psychiatric care-often termed psychiatric or clinical futility-remains underexplored and controversial. In psychiatry, considerations of futility involve complex ethical tensions related to chronicity, treatment resistance, autonomy, and shifting therapeutic goals.

Eligibility criteria: We will include qualitative studies that explore perceptions, experiences, or ethical reasoning related to psychiatric futility. Eligible studies must focus on individuals with severe mental illness and/or mental health professionals involved in clinical decision-making in mental health care.

Methods: This review will follow the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of qualitative evidence. The review will be reported in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. The search strategy will be applied across 6 databases: PubMed, Embase (Ovid), Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), and CINAHL (EBSCOhost). No language or date restrictions will be applied. The findings will be synthesized using meta-aggregation, and confidence in the synthesized results will be assessed using the ConQual approach.

Conclusion: By examining how futility is conceptualized and experienced in psychiatric care, this review will support ethically sensitive decision-making in contexts of chronic mental illness and contribute to the development of care guidelines that integrate patient values, professional judgment, and therapeutic limitations.

Review registration: CRD42025643549.

Objective: The objective of this systematic review will be to synthesize the evidence on the effectiveness of community-based, peer-led interventions compared with usual care in controlling hypertension in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Introduction: Hypertension is a critical global health issue, particularly in LMICs, where it contributes to a significant health and economic burden. Effective management strategies, including community-based, peer-led interventions, show promise; however, their effectiveness in these settings remains uncertain.

Eligibility criteria: The review will focus on community-based, peer-led interventions for adults with hypertension in LMICs. It will include peer-led interventions such as health education and behavioral change programs, and compare them with usual care. The review will assess outcomes such as changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure and hypertension control rates. Both experimental and quasi-experimental studies published in English from database inception until April 2025 will be included.

Methods: The review will follow the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of effectiveness. An initial comprehensive search strategy will be developed in MEDLINE (Ovid). This strategy will then be adapted for additional databases, including CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global (ProQuest), and Google Scholar. Two reviewers will independently screen records against the eligibility criteria, conduct critical appraisal, and extract data, focusing on participants, methods, interventions, and outcomes. Data synthesis will include statistical meta-analysis, while the certainty of findings will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The results will be presented narratively, summarizing weighted mean differences in post-intervention blood pressure (mmHg) and 95% CIs. Meta-analyses will be conducted where appropriate, with assessments of heterogeneity and subgroup analyses.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42024575369.

Objective: The objective of this review will be to identify and map key components of transitional care programs for adult patients with stroke transitioning from the hospital (ie, acute care hospitals, acute rehabilitation facilities, skilled nursing facilities) to the community (ie, home environments, senior living, assisted living without specialized nursing care).

Introduction: Stroke survivors often experience impairments and are vulnerable to secondary comorbidities. These are compounded by inadequately addressed medical issues at discharge, gaps in health literacy, discharge care coordination challenges, and socioeconomic disparities. Transitional care management has emerged to support stroke survivors during their recovery phase. However, despite the plethora of transitional care programs and evidence indicating positive outcomes from various interventions, a gap remains in mapping and clarifying the key components of transitional care programs.

Eligibility criteria: This scoping review will consider quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods study designs for inclusion. In addition, systematic reviews, text and opinion papers, and other relevant gray literature will be included. Studies will include patients aged 18 years or older, from any cultural or geographical context, transitioning from initial hospitalization after acute stroke to community settings. Children and those transitioning to long-term care will be excluded.

Methods: This review will follow the JBI methodology for scoping reviews and will be reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Several databases, including PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), and the Cochrane Library, will be searched for articles published in English since 2000. Two independent reviewers will extract data using a pre-designed tool, and findings will be presented graphically along with a narrative summary.

Review registration: OSF https://osf.io/8cxgj.