JBI evidence synthesis最新文献

Objective: This review aims to summarize the empirical evidence related to safety-netting communication in musculoskeletal health care practice.

Introduction: Safety-netting involves sharing information with patients to help them identify the need to seek further help from a health care professional if their condition persists or worsens. There is limited guidance for how safety-netting should be delivered to patients with musculoskeletal conditions, which could result in variability in practice and suboptimal patient health outcomes. Understanding the current evidence base will inform further research into developing practice guidance to improve patient care.

Eligibility criteria: Research articles and PhD theses that describe the practice of health care professionals sharing safety-netting advice to adults with musculoskeletal conditions will be eligible for inclusion. Articles focused on care delivered by students will be excluded.

Methods: A systematic literature search will be conducted across 4 electronic databases (MEDLINE, AMED, Web of Science, and CINAHL), Google Scholar, PEDro, PhD theses databases, and reference lists of the included studies. The search will be limited to English-language articles published within the previous 10 years. A minimum of 2 reviewers will independently screen the titles and abstracts of the retrieved citations for eligibility. Two reviewers will then assess the full texts of potentially relevant articles for inclusion. Data will be extrated by 2 reviewers independently using an adapted version of the JBI data extraction tool. Data will be analyzed descriptively, and the findings will be reported in a narrative summary with corresponding tables and graphs.

Review registration: OSF https://osf.io/63w5u.

Objective: The objective of this scoping review will be to chart the evidence in relation to the provision of care by nurse practitioners in virtual health care clinics.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic prompted health care systems, providers, and patients to rapidly shift to virtual care settings. Four years later, virtual care continues to be a focal point of health care delivery with the ensuing spread of both hybrid models (ie, a blend of in-person and virtual care) and virtual clinics (ie, virtual-only service delivery platforms with built-in electronic medical records). Nurse practitioners are identified globally as essential components of the effective and sustainable delivery of health care models. However, while both virtual care and nurse practitioners are recognized as critical cornerstones of health care innovation, there is a gap in what is known about care provision by nurse practitioners in virtual clinics.

Eligibility criteria: Articles exploring care provided by nurse practitioners in virtual health care clinics will be included. Eligible articles will focus on characteristics of nurse practitioners and their provision of virtual care, as well as the barriers and facilitators of care provision. Clinic settings will include those that offer longitudinal and/or episodic care.

Methods: This review will follow the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. The search strategy will aim to locate published and unpublished studies, with no date restrictions. Databases to be searched will include MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Embase (Ovid), Scopus, and PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), as well as ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global for gray literature. Data will be extracted and organized using a tool informed by the PEPPA conceptual framework and reported in narrative format, accompanied by a tabular summary.

Review registration: OSF https://osf.io/uf6qg.

Introduction: Clinicians often prepare patients for a treatment by suggesting that their pain levels are likely to reduce or increase during or shortly after the treatment, thereby potentially creating expectations about pain. Several randomized controlled trials have investigated the short-term effects of preparatory suggestions on pain in adults undergoing nonpharmacological treatments, but their findings are inconsistent.

Objective: We will conduct a systematic review to explore whether positive and negative preparatory suggestions reduce and increase pain, respectively, in adults during and shortly after nonpharmacological treatments compared to no or neutral preparatory suggestions, and if so, to what extent.

Eligibility criteria: The review will include randomized controlled trials in which the participants are adults undergoing a nonpharmacological treatment. The intervention group must receive positive or negative preparatory suggestions, while the comparator group must receive no or neutral preparatory suggestions. The outcomes must be within the category of pain and assessed numerically during or shortly after the treatment.

Methods: The review will be conducted in line with the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of effectiveness. Studies were identified by searching in Embase (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), Cochrane CENTRAL, and Google Scholar. Two reviewers will independently screen the identified studies, extract data, and evaluate the methodological quality and certainty in the findings. In addition, a narrative synthesis and meta-analyses will be performed. Effect sizes for continuous and binary outcomes will be computed as standardized mean differences and relative risks, respectively. A restricted maximum likelihood mixed effects model will be applied in the meta-analyses.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42024587230.

Objective: This scoping review will describe dementia coaching programs, models, and practices for unpaid caregivers of community-dwelling persons living with dementia.

Introduction: Unpaid caregivers of community-dwelling individuals with dementia often experience significant physical and emotional stress due to the complex nature of caregiving, yet many lack access to support tailored to their needs. Dementia coaching has emerged as a potential solution offering personalized guidance to help caregivers set goals, build coping strategies, and manage care responsibilities. However, wide variation in how dementia coaching is defined and delivered has created uncertainty around its implementation. A scoping review is needed to map the current landscape; identify existing programs, models, and practices; and highlight gaps in the literature to inform future service development.

Eligibility criteria: This scoping review will include qualitative studies, quantitative studies, mixed methods studies, guidelines, policies, opinion papers, and gray literature on dementia coaching for unpaid caregivers of community-dwelling individuals with dementia, with no restrictions on language or publication date.

Methods: This review will follow the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. Published literature will be located using MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL with Full-Text (EBSCOhost), APA PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), ERIC (EBSCOhost), Abstracts in Social Gerontology (EBSCOhost), and Scopus. References of included studies will be hand-searched and gray literature identified via ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (ProQuest), Google Scholar, Google, and relevant dementia- and caregiver-related websites. Two reviewers will independently screen and extract data, with a third resolving any discrepancies. Findings will be presented through narrative summaries, tables, charts, and publications.

Review registration: OSF https://osf.io/u6vj8.

Objective: This review aims to investigate which environmental approaches to cognitive rehabilitation are effective in improving cognitive and related functional outcomes for adults with traumatic brain injury (TBI), and to identify the components of these approaches.

Introduction: Individuals with cognitive impairments after sustaining TBI often have limited self-awareness and capacity for goal-directed behavior. Therefore, they are less likely to benefit from cognitive rehabilitation approaches requiring active and self-directed engagement. These individuals may benefit from environmental approaches, which involve manipulating the environment (eg, modifying physical, social, or task-related aspects of an individual's surroundings) to support cognitive function, activity, and participation. However, the evidence base underpinning this is poorly understood, highlighting the need for research synthesis.

Eligibility criteria: This review will consider studies that include participants aged 18 years or older with a TBI and evaluate an environmental intervention. We will include randomized controlled trials written in English, irrespective of publication date or status. Outcomes of interest will include cognitive and related functional outcomes (eg, impairment, activity, participation).

Methods: This review will follow the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of effectiveness. Information sources will include the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). Two reviewers will independently select studies and extract data. Methodological quality will be appraised using the JBI Critical Appraisal Tool for Randomized Controlled Trials. We will use the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of evidence. Studies will be pooled with statistical meta-analysis where possible, accompanied by narrative synthesis.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42024592708.

Objective: The aim of this scoping review is to identify the currently available mHealth interventions for palliative care and factors influencing their use in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).

Introduction: Although palliative care is essential for improving quality of life, its use in SSA remains low. mHealth interventions could enhance and promote palliative care in the region. Integration of mHealth into palliative care has been observed across Europe and the USA to support pain management and improve communication between health professionals and patients; however, there is little evidence on its use in low- and middle-income countries.

Eligibility criteria: Eligible studies will involve key stakeholders in palliative care, such as patients with life-limiting illnesses (eg, cancer), health professionals, community volunteer workers, and community leaders. Studies reporting evidence on mHealth (an interaction with a mobile device) in the design, implementation, or evaluation of palliative care services in any country in SSA will be considered.

Methods: The review will follow JBI methodology for scoping review and will be reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). The following sources will be searched for published and unpublished literature: CINAHL(EBSCOhost), PubMed (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, as well as Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. Study screening and selection will be conducted independently by 2 reviewers. Data will be extracted using a modified JBI data charting form, and will be presented in tabular format and narrative summary.

Review registration: OSF https://osf.io/gbqcn/overview.

Objective: The aim of this review was to synthesize women's experiences of maternity waiting homes (MWHs) in sub-Saharan Africa.

Introduction: Globally, most maternal deaths occur in low-resource settings, with three-fourths of them occurring in sub-Saharan Africa. MWHs have been promoted as an approach to improving maternal health outcomes in these settings; however, utilization rates are low, and evidence is lacking on women's experiences of MWHs in sub-Saharan Africa.

Eligibility criteria: This review considered studies conducted in sub-Saharan Africa. Qualitative studies conducted in English between January 2000 and July 2025 were considered for inclusion if they exclusively used qualitative research methods including, but not limited to, phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, action research, or feminist research.

Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, HINARI, Google Scholar, and MedNar databases were searched in July 2025. We used the standardized JBI tool to critically appraise the eligible studies. The meta-aggregative approach was used to synthesis the findings, and the ConQual approach was used to assess confidence in the findings.

Results: Ten studies were included for data extraction and synthesis. The review method yielded a total of 78 findings with original quotes. These findings were grouped into 13 categories based on similarity in meaning and subjected to in-depth analysis. The review generated 5 synthesized findings: i) Positive perceptions and attitudes motivate women to use MWH; ii) Fear of complications, high-risk pregnancies, and lack of awareness affect women's decision to use MWH; iii) Family support motivates the use of MWH, whereas women's lack of autonomy and household chores affect their decisions to use MWH; iv) Health facility-level factors such as lack of basic amenities and respectful care affect access to MWH; and v) Geographic barriers such as long distance and poor road conditions impede women's access to MWH.

Conclusions: Positive perceptions and attitudes motivated women to use MWHs; however, lack of autonomy, household chores, lack of awareness, lack of basic facilities, and geographic barriers affected women's decisions to use MWH. The findings from this review can be used to inform policies, practices, and research to improve women's access to maternal health services, including MWH, in sub-Saharan Africa.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42022306003.

Objective: The objective of the review is to synthesize qualitative evidence on the views, experiences, and perspectives of service users and their informal carers, health care providers, managers, and decision-makers regarding factors influencing the de-implementation of seclusion and restraint in inpatient mental health settings.

Introduction: Seclusion and restraint, frequently used in mental health settings, are low-value health care interventions associated with numerous negative consequences and lack of therapeutic benefits. Conceptualizing the reduction, substitution, and elimination of these low-value interventions under the lens of de-implementation offers an innovative and promising approach.

Eligibility criteria: Qualitative studies exploring the views, experiences, and perspectives of adult mental health service users, their informal carers, health care providers, managers, and decision-makers regarding the de-implementation of seclusion and restraint will be considered for inclusion. Studies conducted in inpatient general mental health settings, excluding subspecialties, will be considered.

Methods: This review will follow the JBI methodology for qualitative reviews. The databases to be searched are CINAHL Complete (EBSCOhost), Cochrane Library, Embase (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), and Web of Science. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment will be conducted independently by 2 authors. Following a meta-aggregation approach, the data synthesis will be guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Model of Prevention of Seclusion and Restraint Use in Mental Health. Methodological quality will be assessed using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research, and confidence in the findings will be assessed using ConQual.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42024586670.