Jorien Laermans, Hans Scheers, Philippe Vandekerckhove, Emmy De Buck
<div> <section> <h3> Background</h3> <p>Loneliness and social isolation are currently among the most challenging social issues. Given their detrimental impact on physical and mental health, identifying feasible and sustainable interventions to alleviate them is highly important. Friendly visiting, a befriending intervention whereby older persons are matched with someone who visits them on a regular basis, seems promising. However, it is unclear if face-to-face (F2F) friendly visiting by a volunteer (FVV) is effective at reducing loneliness or social isolation, or both.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Objectives</h3> <p>To assess the effect of F2F FVV on feelings of loneliness, social isolation (primary outcomes) and wellbeing (i.e., life satisfaction, depressive symptom experiencing and mental health; secondary outcomes) in older adults.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Search Methods</h3> <p>We searched six electronic databases up until 11 August 2021. We also consulted 15 other resources, including grey literature sources and websites of organizations devoted to loneliness and ageing, between 25 October and 29 November 2021.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Selection Criteria</h3> <p>We included experimental and observational studies that quantitatively measured the effect of F2F FVV, compared to no friendly visiting, on at least one of following outcomes in older adults (≥60 years of age): loneliness, social isolation or wellbeing.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3> <p>Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction and synthesis, risk of bias and GRADE assessment. If outcomes were measured multiple times, we extracted data for one short-term (≤1 month after the intervention had ended), one intermediate-term (>1 and ≤6 months), and one long-term time point (>6 months). Data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs were presented and synthesized separately. Synthesis was done using vote counting based on the direction of effect.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Main Results</h3> <p>Nine RCTs and four non-RCTs, conducted primarily in the United States and involving a total of 470 older adults (mean or median ages: 72–83 years), were included. All studies were limited in size (20–88 participants each). Programmes lasted 6–12 weeks and mostly involved weekly visits by undergraduate students
{"title":"Friendly visiting by a volunteer for reducing loneliness or social isolation in older adults: A systematic review","authors":"Jorien Laermans, Hans Scheers, Philippe Vandekerckhove, Emmy De Buck","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1359","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1359","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Loneliness and social isolation are currently among the most challenging social issues. Given their detrimental impact on physical and mental health, identifying feasible and sustainable interventions to alleviate them is highly important. Friendly visiting, a befriending intervention whereby older persons are matched with someone who visits them on a regular basis, seems promising. However, it is unclear if face-to-face (F2F) friendly visiting by a volunteer (FVV) is effective at reducing loneliness or social isolation, or both.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To assess the effect of F2F FVV on feelings of loneliness, social isolation (primary outcomes) and wellbeing (i.e., life satisfaction, depressive symptom experiencing and mental health; secondary outcomes) in older adults.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Search Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We searched six electronic databases up until 11 August 2021. We also consulted 15 other resources, including grey literature sources and websites of organizations devoted to loneliness and ageing, between 25 October and 29 November 2021.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Selection Criteria</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We included experimental and observational studies that quantitatively measured the effect of F2F FVV, compared to no friendly visiting, on at least one of following outcomes in older adults (≥60 years of age): loneliness, social isolation or wellbeing.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction and synthesis, risk of bias and GRADE assessment. If outcomes were measured multiple times, we extracted data for one short-term (≤1 month after the intervention had ended), one intermediate-term (>1 and ≤6 months), and one long-term time point (>6 months). Data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs were presented and synthesized separately. Synthesis was done using vote counting based on the direction of effect.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Main Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Nine RCTs and four non-RCTs, conducted primarily in the United States and involving a total of 470 older adults (mean or median ages: 72–83 years), were included. All studies were limited in size (20–88 participants each). Programmes lasted 6–12 weeks and mostly involved weekly visits by undergraduate students","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10688573/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138463219","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Omar Dewidar, Jessica John, Aqeel Baqar, Mohamad Tarek Madani, Ammar Saad, Alison Riddle, Erika Ota, Jacqueline K. Kung'u, Mandana Arabi, Manoj Kumar Raut, Seth S. Klobodu, Sarah Rowe, Jennifer Hatchard, Jennifer Busch-Hallen, Chowdhury Jalal, Sara Wuehler, Vivian Welch
<div> <section> <h3> Background</h3> <p>Nutritional counseling, which includes two-way interactive education, has been hypothesized to improve the health and nutritional status of pregnant women, but little is known about the impact such practice of care might have on maternal and infant health and behavioral outcomes of pregnant women living in low income, low-middle income, and upper-middle-income countries (LMIC)s.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Objectives</h3> <p>We conducted a systematic review to appraise the effectiveness and impact on health equity of two-way nutritional counseling practices in LMICs on maternal and infant behavioral, nutritional, and health outcomes.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Search Methods</h3> <p>We conducted electronic searches for relevant studies on Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsychInfo, and the Cochrane CENTRAL for randomized and non-randomized trials on the effectiveness of two-way interactive nutritional counseling among pregnant women from the date of database inception up to June 22, 2021. In addition, we searched references of included studies in systematic reviews, gray literature resources, and unpublished studies or reports that satisfied our eligibility criteria using a focused Google search.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Selection Criteria</h3> <p>We included randomized and non-randomized controlled studies (NRS), controlled before and after, and interrupted time series that assessed the effectiveness of two-way interactive nutrition counseling targeting pregnant women in LMICs.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3> <p>Data extraction and risk of bias were conducted in duplicate. The risk of bias (ROB) for randomized trials (RCT) was assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews, and ROB for NRS was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). RCT and NRS were meta-analyzed separately.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Main Results</h3> <p>Our search identified 6418 records and 52 studies met our inclusion criteria, but only 28 were used in the quantitative analysis. Twenty-eight studies were conducted in Asia, the most in Iran. Eight studies were conducted in Africa. Two-way interactive nutritional counseling during pregnancy may improve dietary caloric intake (mean difference [MD]: 81.65 calories, 95% confidence interval [CI], 15.37–147.93, three RCTs; <i>I</i
{"title":"Effectiveness of nutrition counseling for pregnant women in low- and middle-income countries to improve maternal and infant behavioral, nutritional, and health outcomes: A systematic review","authors":"Omar Dewidar, Jessica John, Aqeel Baqar, Mohamad Tarek Madani, Ammar Saad, Alison Riddle, Erika Ota, Jacqueline K. Kung'u, Mandana Arabi, Manoj Kumar Raut, Seth S. Klobodu, Sarah Rowe, Jennifer Hatchard, Jennifer Busch-Hallen, Chowdhury Jalal, Sara Wuehler, Vivian Welch","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1361","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1361","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Nutritional counseling, which includes two-way interactive education, has been hypothesized to improve the health and nutritional status of pregnant women, but little is known about the impact such practice of care might have on maternal and infant health and behavioral outcomes of pregnant women living in low income, low-middle income, and upper-middle-income countries (LMIC)s.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We conducted a systematic review to appraise the effectiveness and impact on health equity of two-way nutritional counseling practices in LMICs on maternal and infant behavioral, nutritional, and health outcomes.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Search Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We conducted electronic searches for relevant studies on Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsychInfo, and the Cochrane CENTRAL for randomized and non-randomized trials on the effectiveness of two-way interactive nutritional counseling among pregnant women from the date of database inception up to June 22, 2021. In addition, we searched references of included studies in systematic reviews, gray literature resources, and unpublished studies or reports that satisfied our eligibility criteria using a focused Google search.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Selection Criteria</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We included randomized and non-randomized controlled studies (NRS), controlled before and after, and interrupted time series that assessed the effectiveness of two-way interactive nutrition counseling targeting pregnant women in LMICs.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Data extraction and risk of bias were conducted in duplicate. The risk of bias (ROB) for randomized trials (RCT) was assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews, and ROB for NRS was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). RCT and NRS were meta-analyzed separately.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Main Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Our search identified 6418 records and 52 studies met our inclusion criteria, but only 28 were used in the quantitative analysis. Twenty-eight studies were conducted in Asia, the most in Iran. Eight studies were conducted in Africa. Two-way interactive nutritional counseling during pregnancy may improve dietary caloric intake (mean difference [MD]: 81.65 calories, 95% confidence interval [CI], 15.37–147.93, three RCTs; <i>I</i","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10687348/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138463218","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Enrica Donolato, Enrico Toffalini, Kristin Rogde, Anders Nordahl-Hansen, Arne Lervåg, Courtenay Norbury, Monica Melby-Lervåg
<div> <section> <h3> Background</h3> <p>Young people who fail to develop language as expected face significant challenges in all aspects of life. Unfortunately, language disorders are common, either as a distinct condition (e.g., Developmental Language Disorder) or as a part of another neurodevelopmental condition (e.g., autism). Finding ways to attenuate language problems through intervention has the potential to yield great benefits not only for the individual but also for society as a whole.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Objectives</h3> <p>This meta-analytic review examined the effect of oral language interventions for children with neurodevelopmental disorders.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Search Methods</h3> <p>The last electronic search was conducted in April 2022.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Selection Criteria</h3> <p>Intervention studies had to target language skills for children from 2 to 18 years of age with Developmental Language Disorder, autism, intellectual disability, Down syndrome, Fragile X syndrome, and Williams syndrome in randomised controlled trials or quasi-experimental designs. Control groups had to include business-as-usual, waiting list, passive or active conditions. However, we excluded studies in which the active control group received a different type, delivery, or dosage of another language intervention. Eligible interventions implemented explicit and structured activities (i.e., explicit instruction of vocabulary, narrative structure or grammatical rules) and/or implicit and broad activities (i.e., shared book reading, general language stimulation). The intervention studies had to assess language skills in receptive and/or expressive modalities.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3> <p>The search provided 8195 records after deduplication. Records were screened by title and abstract, leading to full-text examinations of 448 records. We performed Correlated and Hierarchical Effects models and ran a retrospective power analysis via simulation. Publication bias was assessed via <i>p</i>-curve and precision-effect estimate.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Main Results</h3> <p>We examined 38 studies, with 46 group comparisons and 108 effects comparing pre-/post-tests and eight studies, with 12 group comparisons and 21 effects at follow-up. The results showed a mean effect size of <i>d</i> = 0.27 at
{"title":"Oral language interventions can improve language outcomes in children with neurodevelopmental disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Enrica Donolato, Enrico Toffalini, Kristin Rogde, Anders Nordahl-Hansen, Arne Lervåg, Courtenay Norbury, Monica Melby-Lervåg","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1368","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1368","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Young people who fail to develop language as expected face significant challenges in all aspects of life. Unfortunately, language disorders are common, either as a distinct condition (e.g., Developmental Language Disorder) or as a part of another neurodevelopmental condition (e.g., autism). Finding ways to attenuate language problems through intervention has the potential to yield great benefits not only for the individual but also for society as a whole.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This meta-analytic review examined the effect of oral language interventions for children with neurodevelopmental disorders.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Search Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The last electronic search was conducted in April 2022.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Selection Criteria</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Intervention studies had to target language skills for children from 2 to 18 years of age with Developmental Language Disorder, autism, intellectual disability, Down syndrome, Fragile X syndrome, and Williams syndrome in randomised controlled trials or quasi-experimental designs. Control groups had to include business-as-usual, waiting list, passive or active conditions. However, we excluded studies in which the active control group received a different type, delivery, or dosage of another language intervention. Eligible interventions implemented explicit and structured activities (i.e., explicit instruction of vocabulary, narrative structure or grammatical rules) and/or implicit and broad activities (i.e., shared book reading, general language stimulation). The intervention studies had to assess language skills in receptive and/or expressive modalities.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The search provided 8195 records after deduplication. Records were screened by title and abstract, leading to full-text examinations of 448 records. We performed Correlated and Hierarchical Effects models and ran a retrospective power analysis via simulation. Publication bias was assessed via <i>p</i>-curve and precision-effect estimate.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Main Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We examined 38 studies, with 46 group comparisons and 108 effects comparing pre-/post-tests and eight studies, with 12 group comparisons and 21 effects at follow-up. The results showed a mean effect size of <i>d</i> = 0.27 at","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1368","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138439781","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Vivian Welch, Elizabeth T. Ghogomu, Victoria I. Barbeau, Sierra Dowling, Rebecca Doyle, Ella Beveridge, Elisabeth Boulton, Payaam Desai, Jimmy Huang, Nour Elmestekawy, Tarannum Hussain, Arpana Wadhwani, Sabrina Boutin, Niobe Haitas, Dylan Kneale, Douglas M. Salzwedel, Roger Simard, Paul Hébert, Christopher Mikton
<div> <section> <h3> Background</h3> <p>Social isolation and loneliness are more common in older adults and are associated with a serious impact on their well-being, mental health, physical health, and longevity. They are a public health concern highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, hence the need for digital technology tools to enable remotely delivered interventions to alleviate the impact of social isolation and loneliness during the COVID-19 restrictions.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Objectives</h3> <p>To map available evidence on the effects of digital interventions to mitigate social isolation and/or loneliness in older adults in all settings except hospital settings.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Search Methods</h3> <p>We searched the following databases from inception to May 16, 2021, with no language restrictions. Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo via Ovid, CINAHL via EBSCO, Web of Science via Clarivate, ProQuest (all databases), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS) via ProQuest, EBSCO (all databases except CINAHL), Global Index Medicus, and Epistemonikos.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Selection Criteria</h3> <p>Titles and abstracts and full text of potentially eligible articles were independently screened in duplicate following the eligibility criteria.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3> <p>We developed and pilot tested a data extraction code set in Eppi-Reviewer and data were individually extracted and coded based on an intervention-outcome framework which was also used to define the dimensions of the evidence and gap map.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Main Results</h3> <p>We included 200 articles (103 primary studies and 97 systematic reviews) that assessed the effects of digital interventions to reduce social isolation and/or loneliness in older adults. Most of the systematic reviews (72%) were classified as critically low quality, only 2% as high quality and 25% were published since the COVID-19 pandemic. The evidence is unevenly distributed with clusters predominantly in high-income countries and none in low-income countries. The most common interventions identified are digital interventions to enhance social interactions with family and friends and the community via videoconferencing and telephone calls. Digital interventions to enhance social support, particularly soci
社会孤立和孤独在老年人中更为常见，并对他们的福祉、心理健康、身体健康和寿命产生严重影响。这是COVID-19大流行限制措施所突出的一个公共卫生问题，因此需要数字技术工具来实现远程提供干预措施，以减轻COVID-19限制期间社会隔离和孤独的影响。目的对除医院外所有环境中数字干预措施对减轻老年人社会隔离和/或孤独感的影响的现有证据进行分析。我们检索了以下数据库，从成立到2021年5月16日，没有语言限制。Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo通过Ovid, CINAHL通过EBSCO, Web of Science通过Clarivate, ProQuest(所有数据库)，International Bibliography of Social Sciences (IBSS)通过ProQuest, EBSCO(除CINAHL外的所有数据库)，Global Index Medicus和Epistemonikos。根据入选标准，对潜在入选文章的标题、摘要和全文进行独立筛选，一式两份。我们在Eppi-Reviewer中开发并试点测试了一套数据提取代码，并根据干预-结果框架对数据进行了单独提取和编码，该框架还用于定义证据和差距图的维度。我们纳入了200篇文章(103项初步研究和97项系统综述)，评估了数字干预对减少老年人社会隔离和/或孤独感的影响。大多数系统评价(72%)被列为极低质量，只有2%为高质量，25%是在COVID-19大流行之后发表的。证据分布不均，主要集中在高收入国家，而低收入国家没有。确定的最常见的干预措施是通过视频会议和电话加强与家人、朋友和社区的社会互动的数字干预措施。加强社会支持的数字干预措施，特别是社交辅助机器人和虚拟宠物也很常见。大多数干预措施的重点是减少孤独和抑郁，提高老年人的生活质量。在社区一级的成果和过程指标方面发现了主要差距。没有纳入的研究或综述评估可负担性或数字鸿沟，尽管在三项主要研究和三项综述中讨论了可及性的价值和数字鸿沟造成的障碍。只有两项研究和六篇综述报告了不良反应。没有研究或综述纳入LGBTQIA2S+群体的参与者，只有一项研究将参与者限制在80岁及以上。很少有人描述如何招募高危人群或进行任何公平分析，以评估在PROGRESS-Plus类别中经历不平等的人群的影响差异。大流行期间对人们施加的限制使人们关注到社会隔离和孤独，尤其是老年人。该证据和差距图显示了数字干预措施在减少老年人社会孤立或孤独感方面的有效性的现有证据。虽然证据相对较多且较新，但分布不均，需要更多高质量的研究。这张地图可以指导研究人员和资助者考虑将主要差距领域作为进一步研究的优先事项。
{"title":"Digital interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness in older adults: An evidence and gap map","authors":"Vivian Welch, Elizabeth T. Ghogomu, Victoria I. Barbeau, Sierra Dowling, Rebecca Doyle, Ella Beveridge, Elisabeth Boulton, Payaam Desai, Jimmy Huang, Nour Elmestekawy, Tarannum Hussain, Arpana Wadhwani, Sabrina Boutin, Niobe Haitas, Dylan Kneale, Douglas M. Salzwedel, Roger Simard, Paul Hébert, Christopher Mikton","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1369","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1369","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Social isolation and loneliness are more common in older adults and are associated with a serious impact on their well-being, mental health, physical health, and longevity. They are a public health concern highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, hence the need for digital technology tools to enable remotely delivered interventions to alleviate the impact of social isolation and loneliness during the COVID-19 restrictions.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To map available evidence on the effects of digital interventions to mitigate social isolation and/or loneliness in older adults in all settings except hospital settings.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Search Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We searched the following databases from inception to May 16, 2021, with no language restrictions. Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo via Ovid, CINAHL via EBSCO, Web of Science via Clarivate, ProQuest (all databases), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS) via ProQuest, EBSCO (all databases except CINAHL), Global Index Medicus, and Epistemonikos.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Selection Criteria</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Titles and abstracts and full text of potentially eligible articles were independently screened in duplicate following the eligibility criteria.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We developed and pilot tested a data extraction code set in Eppi-Reviewer and data were individually extracted and coded based on an intervention-outcome framework which was also used to define the dimensions of the evidence and gap map.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Main Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We included 200 articles (103 primary studies and 97 systematic reviews) that assessed the effects of digital interventions to reduce social isolation and/or loneliness in older adults. Most of the systematic reviews (72%) were classified as critically low quality, only 2% as high quality and 25% were published since the COVID-19 pandemic. The evidence is unevenly distributed with clusters predominantly in high-income countries and none in low-income countries. The most common interventions identified are digital interventions to enhance social interactions with family and friends and the community via videoconferencing and telephone calls. Digital interventions to enhance social support, particularly soci","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1369","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138449532","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Michelle Sydes, Lorelei Hine, Angela Higginson, James McEwan, Laura Dugan, Lorraine Mazerolle
<div> <section> <h3> Background</h3> <p>Criminal justice agencies are well positioned to help prevent the radicalisation of individuals and groups, stop those radicalised from engaging in violence, and reduce the likelihood of terrorist attacks. This Evidence and Gap Map (EGM) presents the existing evidence and gaps in the evaluation research.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Objectives</h3> <p>To identify the existing evidence that considers the effectiveness of criminal justice interventions in preventing radicalisation, violent extremism and terrorism.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Search Methods</h3> <p>We conducted a comprehensive search of the academic and grey literature to locate relevant studies for the EGM. Our search locations included the Global Policing Database (GPD), eight electronic platforms encompassing over 20 academic databases, five trial registries and over 30 government and non-government websites. The systematic search was carried out between 8 June 2022 and 1 August 2022.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Selection Criteria</h3> <p>We captured criminal justice interventions published between January 2002 and December 2021 that aimed to prevent radicalisation, violent extremism, and/or terrorism. Criminal justice agencies were broadly defined to include police, courts, and corrections (both custodial and community). Eligible populations included criminal justice practitioners, places, communities or family members, victims, or individuals/groups who are radicalised or at risk of becoming radicalised. Our map includes systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials, and strong quasi-experimental studies. We placed no limits on study outcomes, language, or geographic location.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3> <p>Our screening approach differed slightly for the different sources, but all documents were assessed in the systematic review software program DistillerSR on the same final eligibility criteria. Once included, we extracted information from studies using a standardised form that allowed us to collect key data for our EGM. Eligible systematic reviews were assessed for risk of bias using the AMSTAR 2 critical appraisal tool.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Main Results</h3> <p>The systematic search identified 63,763 unique records. After screening, there were 70 studies eligible for the EGM (from 71
{"title":"Criminal justice interventions for preventing radicalisation, violent extremism and terrorism: An evidence and gap map","authors":"Michelle Sydes, Lorelei Hine, Angela Higginson, James McEwan, Laura Dugan, Lorraine Mazerolle","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1366","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1366","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Criminal justice agencies are well positioned to help prevent the radicalisation of individuals and groups, stop those radicalised from engaging in violence, and reduce the likelihood of terrorist attacks. This Evidence and Gap Map (EGM) presents the existing evidence and gaps in the evaluation research.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To identify the existing evidence that considers the effectiveness of criminal justice interventions in preventing radicalisation, violent extremism and terrorism.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Search Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We conducted a comprehensive search of the academic and grey literature to locate relevant studies for the EGM. Our search locations included the Global Policing Database (GPD), eight electronic platforms encompassing over 20 academic databases, five trial registries and over 30 government and non-government websites. The systematic search was carried out between 8 June 2022 and 1 August 2022.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Selection Criteria</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We captured criminal justice interventions published between January 2002 and December 2021 that aimed to prevent radicalisation, violent extremism, and/or terrorism. Criminal justice agencies were broadly defined to include police, courts, and corrections (both custodial and community). Eligible populations included criminal justice practitioners, places, communities or family members, victims, or individuals/groups who are radicalised or at risk of becoming radicalised. Our map includes systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials, and strong quasi-experimental studies. We placed no limits on study outcomes, language, or geographic location.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Our screening approach differed slightly for the different sources, but all documents were assessed in the systematic review software program DistillerSR on the same final eligibility criteria. Once included, we extracted information from studies using a standardised form that allowed us to collect key data for our EGM. Eligible systematic reviews were assessed for risk of bias using the AMSTAR 2 critical appraisal tool.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Main Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The systematic search identified 63,763 unique records. After screening, there were 70 studies eligible for the EGM (from 71 ","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1366","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"109169251","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Benjamin W. Fisher, Anthony Petrosino, Hannah Persson, Sarah Guckenburg, Trevor Fronius, Ivan Benitez, Kevin Earl
<div> <section> <h3> Background</h3> <p>School-based law enforcement (SBLE) has become a common intervention. Although SBLE is meant to make schools safer, critics suggest it may not accomplish this purpose, and may have unintended negative consequences such as increasing students’ exclusionary discipline or contact with the criminal justice system. There may also be secondary effects related to perceptions of the school or student learning.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Objectives</h3> <p>The purpose of this review is to synthesize the literature evaluating the use of SBLE, including outcomes related to (a) crime and behavior problems; (b) perceptions of safety; and (c) learning.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Methods</h3> <p>We conducted a systematic literature search to identify studies that examined outcomes associated with SBLE use. Eligible studies used experimental or quasi-experimental designs; included samples of students, teachers/staff, schools, or school districts; reported on a policing strategy focused on crime prevention or school safety that did not involve officers teaching a curriculum; included a measure that reflects crime and behavior problems, perceptions of safety, or learning; and were in a primary or secondary school. Following a multi-stage screening process to identify studies eligible for inclusion, we estimated a series of meta-analytic models with robust variance estimation to calculate weighted mean effect sizes for each of three main categories of outcomes and commonly occurring subsets of these categories. We examined heterogeneity in these estimates across features of the primary studies’ design.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Results</h3> <p>The search and screening process yielded 1002 effect sizes from 32 reports. There were no true experiments, and the quasi-experiments ranged from strictly correlational to permitting stronger causal inferences. SBLE use was associated with greater crime and behavior problems in studies that used schools as the unit of analysis. Within this category, SBLE use was associated with increased exclusionary discipline among studies that used both schools (<i>g</i> = 0.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.02, 0.27]) and students (<i>g</i> = 0.003, 95% CI [0.002, 0.003]) as the unit of analysis. SBLE use was not associated with any measures of crime or violence in schools. SBLE use was associated with greater feelings of safety among studies that used schools as the unit of analysis (<i>g</i> = 0.18, 95% CI [0.13, 0.24]), although this estimate was based on only seven effect sizes from tw
{"title":"School-based law enforcement strategies to reduce crime, increase perceptions of safety, and improve learning outcomes in primary and secondary schools: A systematic review","authors":"Benjamin W. Fisher, Anthony Petrosino, Hannah Persson, Sarah Guckenburg, Trevor Fronius, Ivan Benitez, Kevin Earl","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1360","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1360","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>School-based law enforcement (SBLE) has become a common intervention. Although SBLE is meant to make schools safer, critics suggest it may not accomplish this purpose, and may have unintended negative consequences such as increasing students’ exclusionary discipline or contact with the criminal justice system. There may also be secondary effects related to perceptions of the school or student learning.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The purpose of this review is to synthesize the literature evaluating the use of SBLE, including outcomes related to (a) crime and behavior problems; (b) perceptions of safety; and (c) learning.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We conducted a systematic literature search to identify studies that examined outcomes associated with SBLE use. Eligible studies used experimental or quasi-experimental designs; included samples of students, teachers/staff, schools, or school districts; reported on a policing strategy focused on crime prevention or school safety that did not involve officers teaching a curriculum; included a measure that reflects crime and behavior problems, perceptions of safety, or learning; and were in a primary or secondary school. Following a multi-stage screening process to identify studies eligible for inclusion, we estimated a series of meta-analytic models with robust variance estimation to calculate weighted mean effect sizes for each of three main categories of outcomes and commonly occurring subsets of these categories. We examined heterogeneity in these estimates across features of the primary studies’ design.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The search and screening process yielded 1002 effect sizes from 32 reports. There were no true experiments, and the quasi-experiments ranged from strictly correlational to permitting stronger causal inferences. SBLE use was associated with greater crime and behavior problems in studies that used schools as the unit of analysis. Within this category, SBLE use was associated with increased exclusionary discipline among studies that used both schools (<i>g</i> = 0.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.02, 0.27]) and students (<i>g</i> = 0.003, 95% CI [0.002, 0.003]) as the unit of analysis. SBLE use was not associated with any measures of crime or violence in schools. SBLE use was associated with greater feelings of safety among studies that used schools as the unit of analysis (<i>g</i> = 0.18, 95% CI [0.13, 0.24]), although this estimate was based on only seven effect sizes from tw","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1360","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135342929","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Eric L. Sevigny, Jared Greathouse, Danye N. Medhin
Abstract Background Globally, cannabis laws and regulations are rapidly changing. Countries are increasingly permitting access to cannabis under various decriminalization, medicalization, and legalization laws. With strong economic, public health, and social justice incentives driving these domestic cannabis policy reforms, liberalization trends are bound to continue. However, despite a large and growing body of interdisciplinary research addressing the policy‐relevant health, safety, and socioeconomic consequences of cannabis liberalization, there is a lack of robust primary and systematic research that comprehensively investigates the consequences of these reforms. Objectives This evidence and gap map (EGM) summarizes the empirical evidence on cannabis liberalization policies. Primary objectives were to develop a conceptual framework linking cannabis liberalization policies to relevant outcomes, descriptively summarize the empirical evidence, and identify areas of evidence concentration and gaps. Search Methods We comprehensively searched for eligible English‐language empirical studies published across 23 academic databases and 11 gray literature sources through August 2020. Additions to the pool of potentially eligible studies from supplemental sources were made through November 2020. Selection Criteria The conceptual framework for this EGM draws upon a legal epidemiological perspective highlighting the causal effects of law and policy on population‐level outcomes. Eligible interventions include policies that create or expand access to a legal or decriminalized supply of cannabis: comprehensive medical cannabis laws (MCLs), limited medical cannabidiol laws (CBDLs), recreational cannabis laws (RCLs), industrial hemp laws (IHLs), and decriminalization of cultivations laws (DCLs). Eligible outcomes include intermediate responses (i.e., attitudes/behaviors and markets/environments) and longer‐term consequences (health, safety, and socioeconomic outcomes) of these laws. Data Collection and Analysis Both dual screening and dual data extraction were performed with third person deconfliction. Primary studies were appraised using the Maryland Scientific Methods Scale and systematic reviews were assessed using AMSTAR 2. Main Results The EGM includes 447 studies, comprising 438 primary studies and nine systematic reviews. Most research derives from the United States, with little research from other countries. By far, most cannabis liberalization research focuses on the effects of MCLs and RCLs. Studies targeting other laws—including CBDLs, IHLs, and DCLs—are relatively rare. Of the 113 distinct outcomes we documented, cannabis use was the single most frequently investigated. More than half these outcomes were addressed by three or fewer studies, highlighting substantial evidence gaps in the literature. The systematic evidence base is relatively small, comprising just seven completed reviews on cannabis use (3), opioid‐related harms (3), and alcohol‐relat
{"title":"Health, safety, and socioeconomic impacts of cannabis liberalization laws: An evidence and gap map","authors":"Eric L. Sevigny, Jared Greathouse, Danye N. Medhin","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1362","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1362","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background Globally, cannabis laws and regulations are rapidly changing. Countries are increasingly permitting access to cannabis under various decriminalization, medicalization, and legalization laws. With strong economic, public health, and social justice incentives driving these domestic cannabis policy reforms, liberalization trends are bound to continue. However, despite a large and growing body of interdisciplinary research addressing the policy‐relevant health, safety, and socioeconomic consequences of cannabis liberalization, there is a lack of robust primary and systematic research that comprehensively investigates the consequences of these reforms. Objectives This evidence and gap map (EGM) summarizes the empirical evidence on cannabis liberalization policies. Primary objectives were to develop a conceptual framework linking cannabis liberalization policies to relevant outcomes, descriptively summarize the empirical evidence, and identify areas of evidence concentration and gaps. Search Methods We comprehensively searched for eligible English‐language empirical studies published across 23 academic databases and 11 gray literature sources through August 2020. Additions to the pool of potentially eligible studies from supplemental sources were made through November 2020. Selection Criteria The conceptual framework for this EGM draws upon a legal epidemiological perspective highlighting the causal effects of law and policy on population‐level outcomes. Eligible interventions include policies that create or expand access to a legal or decriminalized supply of cannabis: comprehensive medical cannabis laws (MCLs), limited medical cannabidiol laws (CBDLs), recreational cannabis laws (RCLs), industrial hemp laws (IHLs), and decriminalization of cultivations laws (DCLs). Eligible outcomes include intermediate responses (i.e., attitudes/behaviors and markets/environments) and longer‐term consequences (health, safety, and socioeconomic outcomes) of these laws. Data Collection and Analysis Both dual screening and dual data extraction were performed with third person deconfliction. Primary studies were appraised using the Maryland Scientific Methods Scale and systematic reviews were assessed using AMSTAR 2. Main Results The EGM includes 447 studies, comprising 438 primary studies and nine systematic reviews. Most research derives from the United States, with little research from other countries. By far, most cannabis liberalization research focuses on the effects of MCLs and RCLs. Studies targeting other laws—including CBDLs, IHLs, and DCLs—are relatively rare. Of the 113 distinct outcomes we documented, cannabis use was the single most frequently investigated. More than half these outcomes were addressed by three or fewer studies, highlighting substantial evidence gaps in the literature. The systematic evidence base is relatively small, comprising just seven completed reviews on cannabis use (3), opioid‐related harms (3), and alcohol‐relat","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10616541/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71427626","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Suchi Kapoor Malhotra, Marcella Vigneri, Nina Ashley O. Dela Cruz, Heather MacDonald, Howard White
This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The review will address the following research questions: (1) What are the effects of economic development interventions on the economic outcomes of people in humanitarian settings? What factors explain any observed variations in effect such as setting, programme design features or duration? (2) What are the effects of economic development interventions on the food security, nutrition, the psychosocial and mental health, and the physical health outcomes of populations in humanitarian settings? (3) What are the success factors and barriers that affect the implementation and effectiveness of economic development interventions on populations affected by humanitarian crisis?
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Effectiveness of economic development interventions in humanitarian settings in low- and middle-income countries: A mixed-method systematic review","authors":"Suchi Kapoor Malhotra, Marcella Vigneri, Nina Ashley O. Dela Cruz, Heather MacDonald, Howard White","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1357","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1357","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The review will address the following research questions: (1) What are the effects of economic development interventions on the economic outcomes of people in humanitarian settings? What factors explain any observed variations in effect such as setting, programme design features or duration? (2) What are the effects of economic development interventions on the food security, nutrition, the psychosocial and mental health, and the physical health outcomes of populations in humanitarian settings? (3) What are the success factors and barriers that affect the implementation and effectiveness of economic development interventions on populations affected by humanitarian crisis?</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1357","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49692727","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The primary objectives of this review is to answer the following research questions using formal research studies: What is the extent and quality of MFP intervention research? What are the effects on financial outcomes of financial services embedded within healthcare settings? What are the effects on health-related outcomes of financial services embedded within healthcare settings?
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Medical-financial partnerships for improving financial and health outcomes for lower-income Americans: A systematic review","authors":"Julie Birkenmaier, Brandy Maynard, Hannah Shanks, Harly Blumhagen","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1364","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1364","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The primary objectives of this review is to answer the following research questions using formal research studies: What is the extent and quality of MFP intervention research? What are the effects on financial outcomes of financial services embedded within healthcare settings? What are the effects on health-related outcomes of financial services embedded within healthcare settings?</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1364","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41215034","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>Mohd Mydin, F. H., Mikton, C., Choo, W. Y., Shanmugam, R. H., Murray, A., Yon, Y., Mohd Mydin, R., Hairi, N. N., Mohd Hairi, F., Beaulieu, M., & Phelan, A. (2023). PROTOCOL: Psychometric properties of instruments for measuring elder abuse and neglect in community and institutional settings: A systematic review. <i>Campbell Systematic Reviews</i>, <b>19</b>, e1342. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1342</p><p>The <b>Search Methods</b> in the <b>Abstract</b>, and content in section <b>3.2 Search methods for identification of studies</b> have been corrected. The corrected sections are shown below:</p><p><b>Abstract</b></p><p><b>Search Methods:</b> Searches will be conducted in the following online databases: AgeLine via EBSCOhost, ASSIA via ProQuest, CINAHL via EBSCOhost, EMBASE, LILACS, Proquest Dissertation & Theses Global, PsycINFO via EBSCOhost, PubMed, SciELO, Scopus, Sociological Abstract via ProQuest, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and WHO Global Index Medicus. Relevant studies will also be identified by searching the grey literature from several resources such as Google Scholar, Campbell Collaboration, OpenAIRE, and GRAFT. We will contact experts who have conducted similar work or are currently conducting ongoing studies. Inquiries will also be sent to the relevant authors if any important data is missing, incomplete or unclear.</p><p><b>3.2 | Search methods for identification of studies</b></p><p>An information specialist (RH) will design a primary search strategy that consists of a combination of search terms using the medical subject heading (MeSH) and free text terms that consist of ‘elder abuse’ ‘elder mistreatment’, ‘elder maltreatment’, ‘elder neglect’ AND ‘psychometric’ OR ‘outcome assessment’ OR reproducible OR reliability OR validity OR ‘screening tool’ OR ‘screening assessment’ OR assessment OR ‘assessment tool’ OR screening OR ‘appraisal tool’. The search strategy will be developed, revised by content experts, and piloted in several rounds to improve its sensitivity and specificity. The final strategy will be completed in PubMed and replicated in other databases. The final search strategy is available in Supporting Information: Appendix 3.</p><p>Our sources of information will include electronic databases, trial registries, and grey literature. An electronic search will be performed searching the title, abstract, and keywords through AgeLine via EBSCOhost, ASSIA via ProQuest, CINAHL via EBSCOhost, EMBASE, LILACS, Proquest Dissertation & Theses Global, PsycINFO via EBSCOhost, PubMed, SciELO, Scopus, Sociological Abstract via ProQuest, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Korean Citation Index (KCI), and WHO Index Medicus.</p><p>We will consider only articles that are published or in the press. We will not limit the date of acceptance or publication.</p><p>Searching other resources: Relevant studies will also be identified by searching the grey literature from several resources, such as Googl
Mohd Mydin, F. H.， Mikton, C.， Choo, W. Y.， Shanmugam, R. H.， Murray, A.， Yon, Y.， Mohd Mydin, R.， Hairi, n.n.， Mohd Hairi, F.， Beaulieu, M.， &;Phelan, A.(2023)。方案:用于测量社区和机构环境中老年人虐待和忽视的工具的心理测量特性:系统综述。中国生物医学工程学报，2009,33(2):444 - 444。https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1342The摘要中的检索方法和3.2节中的内容已被更正。摘要检索方法:检索将在以下在线数据库中进行:通过EBSCOhost的AgeLine，通过ProQuest的ASSIA，通过EBSCOhost的CINAHL, EMBASE, LILACS, ProQuest Dissertation &论文全球，PsycINFO通过EBSCOhost, PubMed, SciELO, Scopus，社会学文摘通过ProQuest，中国知网(CNKI)和WHO全球索引Medicus。相关研究也将通过从谷歌Scholar、Campbell Collaboration、OpenAIRE和GRAFT等资源中搜索灰色文献来确定。我们将联系进行过类似工作或目前正在进行研究的专家。如果有任何重要数据缺失、不完整或不清楚，也将向相关作者发送查询。3.2 |研究识别的搜索方法信息专家(RH)将设计一个主要搜索策略，该策略由使用医学主题标题(MeSH)的搜索词组合和由“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”、“虐待老年人”和“虐待老年人”组成的自由文本搜索词组成。“老年人忽视”、“心理测量”、“结果评估”、可重复性、信度、效度、“筛选工具”、“筛选评估”、评估、“评估工具”、筛选或“评估工具”。搜索策略将由内容专家制定、修订，并进行几轮试点，以提高其敏感性和特异性。最终的策略将在PubMed中完成，并在其他数据库中复制。最后的搜索策略可在辅助信息:附录3中找到。我们的信息来源将包括电子数据库、试验登记和灰色文献。电子检索将通过EBSCOhost通过AgeLine搜索标题、摘要和关键词，通过ProQuest通过ASSIA，通过EBSCOhost通过CINAHL, EMBASE, LILACS, ProQuest Dissertation &论文全球，PsycINFO通过EBSCOhost, PubMed, SciELO, Scopus，社会学文摘通过ProQuest，中国国家知识基础设施(CNKI)，韩国引文索引(KCI)，世界卫生组织索引Medicus。我们将只考虑已发表或出版的文章。我们不会限制接受或出版的日期。搜索其他资源:相关研究也将通过搜索来自几个资源的灰色文献来确定，如谷歌Scholar(前200个结果)、Campbell Collaboration、OpenAIRE和GRAFT。直接搜索整个期刊内容将在发表老年人虐待实证研究的著名学术期刊上进行，如《老年人虐待和忽视杂志》、《人际暴力杂志》、《成人保护杂志》和《创伤、虐待和暴力杂志》。引用和参考文献列表:通过搜索可能未被识别的潜在研究将通过搜索相关文章或评论的参考文献来识别。前向引文检索将用于识别这些相关文章或综述中包含的被引用研究。联系专家:我们将联系从事过类似工作或正在进行研究的专家。我们为这些错误道歉。
{"title":"Correction to ‘PROTOCOL: Psychometric properties of instruments for measuring elder abuse and neglect in community and institutional settings: A systematic review’","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1365","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1365","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Mohd Mydin, F. H., Mikton, C., Choo, W. Y., Shanmugam, R. H., Murray, A., Yon, Y., Mohd Mydin, R., Hairi, N. N., Mohd Hairi, F., Beaulieu, M., & Phelan, A. (2023). PROTOCOL: Psychometric properties of instruments for measuring elder abuse and neglect in community and institutional settings: A systematic review. <i>Campbell Systematic Reviews</i>, <b>19</b>, e1342. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1342</p><p>The <b>Search Methods</b> in the <b>Abstract</b>, and content in section <b>3.2 Search methods for identification of studies</b> have been corrected. The corrected sections are shown below:</p><p><b>Abstract</b></p><p><b>Search Methods:</b> Searches will be conducted in the following online databases: AgeLine via EBSCOhost, ASSIA via ProQuest, CINAHL via EBSCOhost, EMBASE, LILACS, Proquest Dissertation & Theses Global, PsycINFO via EBSCOhost, PubMed, SciELO, Scopus, Sociological Abstract via ProQuest, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and WHO Global Index Medicus. Relevant studies will also be identified by searching the grey literature from several resources such as Google Scholar, Campbell Collaboration, OpenAIRE, and GRAFT. We will contact experts who have conducted similar work or are currently conducting ongoing studies. Inquiries will also be sent to the relevant authors if any important data is missing, incomplete or unclear.</p><p><b>3.2 | Search methods for identification of studies</b></p><p>An information specialist (RH) will design a primary search strategy that consists of a combination of search terms using the medical subject heading (MeSH) and free text terms that consist of ‘elder abuse’ ‘elder mistreatment’, ‘elder maltreatment’, ‘elder neglect’ AND ‘psychometric’ OR ‘outcome assessment’ OR reproducible OR reliability OR validity OR ‘screening tool’ OR ‘screening assessment’ OR assessment OR ‘assessment tool’ OR screening OR ‘appraisal tool’. The search strategy will be developed, revised by content experts, and piloted in several rounds to improve its sensitivity and specificity. The final strategy will be completed in PubMed and replicated in other databases. The final search strategy is available in Supporting Information: Appendix 3.</p><p>Our sources of information will include electronic databases, trial registries, and grey literature. An electronic search will be performed searching the title, abstract, and keywords through AgeLine via EBSCOhost, ASSIA via ProQuest, CINAHL via EBSCOhost, EMBASE, LILACS, Proquest Dissertation & Theses Global, PsycINFO via EBSCOhost, PubMed, SciELO, Scopus, Sociological Abstract via ProQuest, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Korean Citation Index (KCI), and WHO Index Medicus.</p><p>We will consider only articles that are published or in the press. We will not limit the date of acceptance or publication.</p><p>Searching other resources: Relevant studies will also be identified by searching the grey literature from several resources, such as Googl","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1365","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41215033","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：