JBI evidence synthesis最新文献

Objective: This review will synthesize studies on costs, the impact of these costs, and the cost-effectiveness of treatments for rheumatic heart disease (RHD) in low- and middle-income countries.

Introduction: RHD incurs high costs owing to its clinical complexity, surgical treatments, and prolonged hospital stays. Thus, the disease has a substantial economic impact on the health system, patients, and their families. No systematic review on economic evidence of treatments for RHD has been published to date.

Inclusion criteria: This review will consider all cost and cost-effectiveness studies on RHD treatments for children and young adults (5─30 years) residing in low- and middle-income countries.

Methods: The review will follow the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of economic evaluation evidence. The search strategy will locate published and unpublished studies in English. Systematic searches will be conducted in MEDLINE (PubMed), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Scopus, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), National Health Service Economic Evaluation Databases, Pediatric Economic Database Evaluation, and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry. Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts, followed by a full-text review based on the inclusion criteria. Data will be extracted using a modified JBI data extraction form for economic evaluations. JBI's Dominance Ranking Matrix for economic evaluations will be used to summarize and compare the results of cost and cost-effectiveness studies. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach will be used to assess the certainty of economic evidence for outcomes related to resource use.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42023425850.

Objective: This umbrella review will investigate intervention combinations that are provided as multimodal prehabilitation and their effect on health-related quality of life, fatigue, and adherence in the adult cancer population.

Introduction: Cancer and treatment-related long-term and late effects are a significant source of impairment worldwide. Multimodal prehabilitation has been the subject of intense research in recent years due to its potential to improve cancer treatment and surgical outcomes. Prehabilitation has been provided in different combinations of exercise, nutrition, and psychological support, although evidence of effectiveness varies in the literature.

Inclusion criteria: The review will consider quantitative and mixed methods (segregated approach) systematic reviews investigating the effectiveness of multimodal prehabilitation compared with any other or no intervention for adults with cancer (≥18 years). Systematic reviews focusing solely on unimodal prehabilitation or rehabilitation during or after cancer treatment will be excluded.

Methods: This review will follow the JBI methodology for umbrella reviews. The following databases will be searched from 2001 onwards: MEDLINE, Emcare, PsycINFO, and AMED (Ovid); CINAHL (EBSCOhost); PEDro; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; and Epistemonikos. Backchaining and forward citation tracking will also be performed. Organizational websites will be searched for relevant gray literature. Two reviewers will perform title/abstract and full-text screening against the inclusion criteria, and disagreements will be resolved via discussion or a third reviewer. Relevant population, intervention, and outcome data will be extracted from included full-text documents, and the quality of reports will be determined using the JBI checklist for systematic reviews. The results will be presented in tabular and narrative format.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42024511601.

Objective: The objective of this qualitative systematic review will be to understand the experiences of mental health practitioners after clients' suicide.

Introduction: Mental health practitioners inevitably encounter client suicide during their careers, which can significantly affect their personal lives and professional outcomes. A deeper understanding of mental health practitioners' experiences in the aftermath of clients' suicide is necessary to provide effective support and assist with adaptation to this situation.

Inclusion criteria: This systematic review will consider qualitative studies that explore the experiences of mental health practitioners, including psychotherapists, psychiatrists, psychological counselors, clinical psychologists, psychiatric mental health nurse practitioners, and social workers following clients' suicide. Experiences may include emotional responses, coping strategies, changes in social relationships, and reflections on practice.

Methods: This review will follow the JBI methodology for qualitative systematic reviews. The databases to be searched will include PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Embase, PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), SocINDEX (EBSCOhost), Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, Bibliographia Medica Čechoslovaca, and Bibliographia Medica Slovaca. Gray literature sources will include Google Scholar, and ProQuest. Studies in English, Czech, Slovak, and Chinese will be assessed for inclusion regardless of publication date. Studies that are initially selected will be assessed for methodological quality using the JBI critical appraisal tool for qualitative studies. Then, findings with illustrations will be extracted for subsequent meta-aggregation and ConQual assessment. All the above steps will be conducted by 2 independent reviewers.

Systematic review registration number: PROSPERO CRD42023410523.

Objective: The objective of this scoping review is to identify and map methods used to incorporate patient preferences into medical algorithms and models as well report on their quantification, balancing, and evaluation in the literature. It will focus on computational methods used for incorporating patient preferences into algorithms and models at an individual level as well as the types of medical algorithms and models where these methods have been applied.

Introduction: Medical algorithms and models are increasingly being used to support clinical and shared decision-making; however, their effectiveness, accuracy, acceptance, and comprehension may be limited if patients' preferences are not considered. To address this issue, it is important to explore methods integrating patient preferences.

Inclusion criteria: This review will investigate patient preferences and their integration into medical algorithms and models for individual-level clinical decision-making. The scoping review will include diverse sources, such as peer-reviewed articles, clinical practice guidelines, gray literature, government reports, guidelines, and expert opinions for a comprehensive investigation of the subject.

Methods: This scoping review will follow JBI methodology. A comprehensive search will be conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, the Cochrane Library, OpenGrey, the National Technical Reports Library, and the first 20 pages of Google Scholar. The search strategy will include keywords related to patient preferences, medical algorithms and models, decision-making, and software tools and frameworks. Data extraction and analysis will be guided by the JBI framework, which includes an explorative and qualitative analysis.

Review registration: Open Science Framework https://osf.io/qg3b5.

Objective: This review aims to synthesize qualitative literature exploring the experiences of undergraduate nursing students and newly graduated nurses who are employed for less than 1 year in clinical settings after graduation. It will focus on those who had paid employment and health-related work experience during their undergraduate studies, examining the influence of these experiences on the transition to practice.

Introduction: Nursing professionals undergo a transformative journey, starting from envisioning themselves as nurses, to developing professional identity and competence. However, the initial transition to nursing practice often poses challenges for undergraduates and newly graduated nurses. To ease this transition, gaining additional clinical experience through paid employment or health-related work during undergraduate studies can be beneficial.

Inclusion criteria: This review will include qualitative studies on the experiences of undergraduate nursing students and newly graduated nurses in paid employment models and health-related work. No restrictions on the publication date or country will be applied; however, only English-language publications will be included.

Methods: The JBI methodology for qualitative systematic reviews will be employed. Searches will be conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare (Ovid); CINAHL Complete (EBSCOhost); and ERIC (ProQuest), along with gray literature in ProQuest Dissertations and Theses and Google Scholar. Study selection, quality assessment, and data extraction will be conducted as per the JBI methodology. Findings will be synthesized using meta-aggregation, and a ConQual Summary of Findings will be created.

Review registration number: PROSPERO CRD42024520724.

Cohort studies are a robust analytical observational study design that explore the difference between two different cohorts on an outcome, differentiated by their exposure status. Despite being observational in nature, they are often included in systematic reviews of effectiveness, particularly when randomized controlled trials are limited or not feasible. Like all studies included in a systematic review, cohort studies must undergo a critical appraisal process to assess the extent to which a study has considered potential bias in its design, conduct, or analysis. Critical appraisal tools facilitate this evaluation. This paper introduces the revised critical appraisal tool for cohort studies, completed by the JBI Effectiveness Methodology Group (EMG), who are currently revising the suite of JBI critical appraisal tools for quantitative study designs. The revised tool responds to updates in methodological guidance from the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group and reporting guidance from PRISMA 2020, providing a robust framework for evaluating risk of bias in a cohort study. Transparent and rigorous assessment using this tool will assist reviewers in understanding the validity and relevance of the results and conclusions drawn from a systematic review that includes cohort studies. This may contribute to better evidence-based decision-making in health care. This paper discusses the key changes made to the tool, justifications for these changes, and provides practical guidance on how this tool should be interpreted and applied by systematic reviewers.

Objective: This systematic review aims to determine the global pooled prevalence of overweight and obesity among health care workers in the 6 World Health Organization (WHO) regions.

Introduction: The escalating prevalence of overweight and obesity among health care workers significantly affects both individual health and the quality of health care services. Understanding this global prevalence is crucial to be able to implement informed interventions, policies, and for the overall optimization of health care delivery.

Inclusion criteria: Systematic reviews with prevalence data for overweight and obesity among health care workers in both private and public health care facilities will be considered for inclusion. Transparent documentation of anthropometric measurements and adherence to established overweight and obesity criteria by the WHO, Asia Pacific standards, or Asian criteria are required to be eligible for inclusion. The review will focus on observational study designs, including cross-sectional, survey, case-control, and cohort studies.

Methods: MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, and Web of Science will be searched for records with predefined keywords, including MeSH terms. Records found through hand-searching and reference lists will be added. Two researchers will independently screen studies, resolving any discrepancies with a third researcher. Standardized critical appraisal and data extraction forms will be used. If suitable, pooled prevalence for overweight and obesity based on the 6 WHO regions will be calculated using the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model. Statistical analysis will be performed and publication bias will be assessed through funnel plot analysis and Egger's test.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42023452330.

Objective: The objective of this systematic review is to provide an overview of economic evaluation studies of interventions for neglected tropical diseases in low- and/or middle-income countries.

Introduction: The majority of people most susceptible to neglected tropical diseases reside in low- and middle-income countries and suffer significant economic impact due to these diseases. The World Health Organization suggests utilizing a systematic and cross-cutting approach with multiple interventions to lessen the neglected tropical disease burden.

Inclusion criteria: Studies will be eligible for inclusion if they include economic evaluations of interventions for neglected tropical diseases and are conducted in low- and/or middle-income country settings.

Methods: A preliminary search of MEDLINE (PubMed) was undertaken using MeSH terms, such as neglected tropical disease, economic evaluation, therapeutics, low- and/or middle-income countries . Two reviewers will screen titles and abstracts independently, followed by a full-text review against the inclusion criteria. Disagreements will be resolved by discussion or with a third reviewer. To assess methodological quality, the JBI checklist for economic evaluations will be used. For economic evaluations, data will be extracted using the standardized JBI data extraction form. The Dominance Ranking Matrix will be used to summarize and compare the results of different types of economic evaluations. Cost per quality adjusted life year gained and cost per disability adjusted life year averted will be measures for economic evaluation. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach will be used to assess the certainty of economic evidence, such as resource use and costs.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42017070386.

Objective: The proposed systematic review will evaluate the evidence on the effectiveness and safety of enhanced post-operative care (EPC) units on patient and health service outcomes in adult patients following non-cardiac, non-neurological surgery.

Introduction: The increase in surgical procedures globally has placed a significant economic and societal burden on health care systems. Recognizing this challenge, EPC units have emerged as a model of care, bridging the gap between traditional, ward-level care and intensive care. EPC offers benefits such as higher staff-to-patient ratios, close patient monitoring (eg, invasive monitoring), and access to critical interventions (eg, vasopressor support). However, there is a lack of well-established guidelines and empirical evidence regarding the safety and effectiveness of EPC units for adult patients following surgery.

Inclusion criteria: This review will include studies involving adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing any elective or emergency non-cardiac, non-neurological surgery, who have been admitted to an EPC unit. Experimental, quasi-experimental, and observational study designs will be eligible.

Methods: This review will follow the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of effectiveness. The search strategy will identify published and unpublished studies from the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and Scopus, as well as gray literature sources, from 2010 to the present. Two independent reviewers will screen studies, extract data, and critically appraise selected studies using standardized JBI assessment tools. Where feasible, a statistical meta-analysis will be performed to combine study findings. The certainty of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42023455269.