首页 > 最新文献

Campbell Systematic Reviews最新文献

英文 中文
Protocol: Proactive resilience programmes for improving resilience and psychological adaptation in employees in high-risk occupations: A systematic review 协议:提高高危职业员工抗压能力和心理适应能力的前瞻性抗压计划:系统综述
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-11-22 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.70007
Trine Filges, Anja Bondebjerg Mølgaard, Geir Smedslund, Malene W. Kildemoes, Elizabeth Bengtsen

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: What are the effects of proactive resilience programmes offered to employees in high-risk occupations on resilience and psychological adaptation?

这是坎贝尔系统综述的协议。目标如下为从事高风险职业的员工提供的主动抗压计划对抗压能力和心理适应能力有哪些影响?
{"title":"Protocol: Proactive resilience programmes for improving resilience and psychological adaptation in employees in high-risk occupations: A systematic review","authors":"Trine Filges,&nbsp;Anja Bondebjerg Mølgaard,&nbsp;Geir Smedslund,&nbsp;Malene W. Kildemoes,&nbsp;Elizabeth Bengtsen","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70007","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: What are the effects of proactive resilience programmes offered to employees in high-risk occupations on resilience and psychological adaptation?</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70007","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142708315","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}
引用次数: 0
SHOW ME the evidence: Features of an approach to reliably deliver research evidence to those who need it 向我展示证据:向需要者可靠提供研究证据的方法的特点。
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-11-14 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.70010
John N. Lavis, Jeremy M. Grimshaw, Ruth Stewart, Julian Elliott, Will Moy, Joerg J. Meerpohl
<p>The world is poised for a step-change improvement in how we use evidence to address societal challenges.</p><p>Given the speed at which plans are being made to support this once-in-a-generation transformation, the Implementation Council of the Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges developed a working version of the features of an approach to reliably getting research evidence to those who need it and achieved consensus among leaders from the Implementation Council, as well as the Alliance for Living Evidence (Alive) Council and Evidence Synthesis International (ESI).</p><p>The 100+ contributing authors from across the ‘evidence synthesis and support’ world want to ensure that our future plans are firmly rooted in an agreed-upon summary of all we have learned together over these past four or so years, and to signal a mutual accountability among many of the key players involved in providing evidence support that we will each do our part in delivering on the promise that motivates these plans.</p><p>Given that much of the momentum for transformation is currently focused on living evidence syntheses and the infrastructure needed to support them, we give this form of evidence disproportionate focus here.</p><p>Actions speak louder than words. If we are to deliver on the promise of a step-change improvement in how we use evidence to address societal challenges, then each of us needs to do our part to put in place the features of an approach to reliably getting research evidence to those who need it. Funding can enable it. Coordination can facilitate it. Reporting can celebrate it (and shame a go-it-alone ethos). Evaluation of our approaches can support continuous improvement. But only our actions can make it happen.</p><p>You may already be doing great work. Please keep it up.</p><p>If you want to embrace a new approach and don't know where you can best fit in, check out the Global Evidence Commission's work in formalizing and strengthening national (and subnational) evidence support systems, enhancing and leveraging the global evidence architecture, and putting evidence at the centre of everyday life. Or approach one of the Implementation Council members who you see doing exemplary work in your part of the world, in your type of role, in your sector, with your form of evidence, or with an innovation like AI-powered living evidence synthesis or storytelling that draws on both research evidence and Indigenous ways of knowing.</p><p>JL and JG are co-leads of the Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges. All authors are members of its Implementation Council. JL is council chair, RS is director, JE is treasurer and founder of the host entity, and WM is council member at the Alliance for Living Evidence (Alive). JG is cochair and RS and WM are members of the executive committee of Evidence Synthesis International. All authors are affiliated with its partner organizations. RS is a Fiduciary Officer for the South
考虑到为支持这一千载难逢的变革而制定计划的速度,"应对社会挑战证据全球委员会 "的执行理事会制定了一个工作版本,其特点是将研究证据可靠地提供给需要者,并在执行理事会、活证据联盟(Alive)理事会和国际证据合成组织(ESI)的领导者之间达成了共识。来自 "证据合成与支持 "领域的 100 多位撰稿人希望确保我们的未来计划牢牢扎根于对我们在过去四年多时间里所学到的所有知识的一致总结中,并表明参与提供证据支持的许多关键参与者之间的相互责任,即我们将各尽其责,实现推动这些计划的承诺。鉴于目前转型的动力主要集中在有生命力的证据综述和支持这些综述所需的基础设施上,我们在此对这种形式的证据给予了过多的关注。如果我们要兑现承诺,在如何利用证据应对社会挑战方面实现质的飞跃,那么我们每个人都需要尽自己的一份力量,为需要者提供可靠的研究证据。提供资金可以做到这一点。协调可以促进它。报告可以为之喝彩(并使 "单打独斗 "的风气蒙羞)。对我们的方法进行评估有助于不断改进。但是,只有我们的行动才能实现这一点。如果您想采用一种新方法,但不知道自己最适合哪种方法,请查看全球证据委员会在正式确定和加强国家(及国家以下)证据支持系统、加强和利用全球证据架构以及将证据置于日常生活中心等方面的工作。您也可以联系执行委员会的某位成员,您认为他们在您所在的地区、在您所担任的角色类型、在您所在的部门、在您所采用的证据形式、或在人工智能驱动的活证据综合或故事讲述等创新方面,利用研究证据和土著的认知方式,开展了堪称典范的工作。所有作者都是该委员会执行理事会的成员。JL 是理事会主席,RS 是主任,JE 是财务主管和主办实体的创始人,WM 是活证据联盟 (Alive) 的理事会成员。JG 是国际证据合成组织的联合主席,RS 和 WM 是执行委员会成员。所有作者均隶属于其合作组织。RS 是南非证据中心的信托官员。JG受雇于渥太华医院研究所。这篇社论是根据作者的提议委托撰写的,并经过了同行评审。
{"title":"SHOW ME the evidence: Features of an approach to reliably deliver research evidence to those who need it","authors":"John N. Lavis,&nbsp;Jeremy M. Grimshaw,&nbsp;Ruth Stewart,&nbsp;Julian Elliott,&nbsp;Will Moy,&nbsp;Joerg J. Meerpohl","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70010","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.70010","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;The world is poised for a step-change improvement in how we use evidence to address societal challenges.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Given the speed at which plans are being made to support this once-in-a-generation transformation, the Implementation Council of the Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges developed a working version of the features of an approach to reliably getting research evidence to those who need it and achieved consensus among leaders from the Implementation Council, as well as the Alliance for Living Evidence (Alive) Council and Evidence Synthesis International (ESI).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The 100+ contributing authors from across the ‘evidence synthesis and support’ world want to ensure that our future plans are firmly rooted in an agreed-upon summary of all we have learned together over these past four or so years, and to signal a mutual accountability among many of the key players involved in providing evidence support that we will each do our part in delivering on the promise that motivates these plans.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Given that much of the momentum for transformation is currently focused on living evidence syntheses and the infrastructure needed to support them, we give this form of evidence disproportionate focus here.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Actions speak louder than words. If we are to deliver on the promise of a step-change improvement in how we use evidence to address societal challenges, then each of us needs to do our part to put in place the features of an approach to reliably getting research evidence to those who need it. Funding can enable it. Coordination can facilitate it. Reporting can celebrate it (and shame a go-it-alone ethos). Evaluation of our approaches can support continuous improvement. But only our actions can make it happen.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;You may already be doing great work. Please keep it up.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you want to embrace a new approach and don't know where you can best fit in, check out the Global Evidence Commission's work in formalizing and strengthening national (and subnational) evidence support systems, enhancing and leveraging the global evidence architecture, and putting evidence at the centre of everyday life. Or approach one of the Implementation Council members who you see doing exemplary work in your part of the world, in your type of role, in your sector, with your form of evidence, or with an innovation like AI-powered living evidence synthesis or storytelling that draws on both research evidence and Indigenous ways of knowing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;JL and JG are co-leads of the Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges. All authors are members of its Implementation Council. JL is council chair, RS is director, JE is treasurer and founder of the host entity, and WM is council member at the Alliance for Living Evidence (Alive). JG is cochair and RS and WM are members of the executive committee of Evidence Synthesis International. All authors are affiliated with its partner organizations. RS is a Fiduciary Officer for the South ","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11562649/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142629905","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}
引用次数: 0
PROTOCOL: Effectiveness of social accountability interventions in low- and middle-income countries: An evidence and gap map 方案:中低收入国家社会问责干预措施的有效性:证据与差距图。
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-11-05 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1430
Mirza Hassan, Howard White, Iffat Zahan, Ashrita Saran, Shamael Ahmed, Semab Rahman, Shabnaz Zubaid

This is the protocol for an evidence and gap map, which aims to map the existing evidence on the effectiveness of social accountability interventions in low- and middle-income countries. This map will help users identify the size and quality of the evidence base, guide strategic program development, and highlight gaps for future research. The map will cover studies published after 2000, including systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, non-experimental designs, and before-after designs.

这是一份证据与差距图的规程,旨在绘制有关中低收入国家社会问责干预措施有效性的现有证据图。该地图将帮助用户确定证据库的规模和质量,指导战略计划的制定,并突出未来研究的差距。该地图将涵盖 2000 年之后发表的研究,包括系统综述、随机对照试验、非实验设计和前后设计。
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Effectiveness of social accountability interventions in low- and middle-income countries: An evidence and gap map","authors":"Mirza Hassan,&nbsp;Howard White,&nbsp;Iffat Zahan,&nbsp;Ashrita Saran,&nbsp;Shamael Ahmed,&nbsp;Semab Rahman,&nbsp;Shabnaz Zubaid","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1430","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1430","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for an evidence and gap map, which aims to map the existing evidence on the effectiveness of social accountability interventions in low- and middle-income countries. This map will help users identify the size and quality of the evidence base, guide strategic program development, and highlight gaps for future research. The map will cover studies published after 2000, including systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, non-experimental designs, and before-after designs.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11538311/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142591840","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}
引用次数: 0
New search guidance for Campbell systematic reviews 坎贝尔系统性综述的新检索指南
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-11-04 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.70005
Heather MacDonald, Sarah Young
<p>Searching for studies in systematic reviews is a critical step that lays the foundation for the remaining stages of the review and synthesis. Searching in the social sciences and other disciplines covered by the Campbell Collaboration comes with added complexities and challenges related to finding and organizing evidence across a rich diversity of sources. To assist Campbell authors and information specialists supporting Campbell reviews in this process, we recently published new guidance (MacDonald et al., <span>2024</span>) based on the previous guidance document originally published in 2010 and updated in 2017. The guide was revised to reflect current Campbell Collaboration areas of practice and recommendations in the recently updated Methodological Expectations of Campbell Collaboration Intervention Reviews (MECCIR) (Dewidar et al., <span>2024</span>), capture evolving practice and strategies for searching, and update links and descriptions of individual bibliographic and other resources. It includes helpful templates, lists, and checklists to assist authors in meeting the expectations for conduct and reporting of Campbell systematic review searches. Here, we provide an overview and highlight some of the key changes and new additions.</p><p>The new guidance includes several new sections. The <i>Section 1.0 About this Guide</i> describes who this guide is for: both review authors and information specialists. Also new is the section <i>2.0 Working with an Information Specialist</i> which explains the role of the information specialist in the systematic review process. Searching for and retrieving information is a key component of systematic reviews and information specialists, as experts in search, can play a supporting or collaborative role in the production of these reviews.</p><p>In the section on <i>4.0 Sources to Search</i>, the list of sources has been placed in an Appendix which can be found on the Open Science Framework (OSF). The list can now be updated frequently so that accurate and up-to-date information is available to researchers. As well in this edition preprint repositories have been added to the list of potential sources of studies.</p><p><i>5.0 Planning the Search</i> has a new section on using seed articles, or benchmarking studies, to help in the construction and validation of the search strategy. Using a seed article set can help identify search terms and ensure the search strategy finds relevant studies. Also new to the <i>5.3 Search updates</i> subsection, is the practice of checking for retracted studies. While the guidance on how to deal with retracted studies is still under debate (Faggion, <span>2019</span>), checking for retractions, corrections, errata and other areas of concern related to included studies should be a routine step in any review.</p><p>The author team updated the <i>6.0 Designing Search Strategies</i> section with a new subsection on identifying search terms (both controlled vocabulary and keyword
在系统综述中搜索研究是一个关键步骤,它为综述和合成的其余阶段奠定了基础。在社会科学和坎贝尔协作项目所涵盖的其他学科中进行检索时,会遇到更多的复杂性和挑战,这些挑战与在丰富多样的来源中查找和组织证据有关。为了帮助坎贝尔作者和支持坎贝尔综述的信息专家完成这一过程,我们在最初于2010年发布并于2017年更新的指导文件的基础上,最近发布了新的指南(MacDonald et al.对指南进行了修订,以反映坎贝尔合作组织当前的实践领域和最近更新的《坎贝尔合作组织干预综述的方法学期望》(MECCIR)(Dewidar et al.它包括有用的模板、清单和核对表,以帮助作者满足对坎贝尔系统综述检索行为和报告的期望。新指南包括几个新章节。新指南包括几个新章节。第 1.0 节 "关于本指南 "介绍了本指南的对象:综述作者和信息专家。同样新增的还有 2.0 与信息专家合作部分,该部分解释了信息专家在系统综述过程中的作用。搜索和检索信息是系统性综述的关键组成部分,而信息专家作为搜索方面的专家,可以在这些综述的撰写过程中发挥支持或合作作用。在 4.0 搜索来源部分,来源列表被放在了附录中,可以在开放科学框架 (OSF) 中找到。现在,该列表可以经常更新,以便为研究人员提供准确的最新信息。在本版中,预印本库也被添加到了潜在研究来源列表中。5.0 规划检索新增了一节内容,介绍如何使用种子文章或基准研究来帮助构建和验证检索策略。使用种子文章集有助于确定检索词,确保检索策略能找到相关研究。5.3 搜索更新分节还新增了检查撤回研究报告的做法。虽然关于如何处理撤稿研究的指导意见仍在讨论之中(Faggion,2019 年),但检查撤稿、更正、勘误以及与收录研究相关的其他关注领域应该是任何综述的例行步骤。作者团队更新了 6.0 设计检索策略部分,新增了一个关于确定检索词(控制词汇和关键词)以及如何使用文本挖掘来选择检索词的小节。还新增了关于掠夺性出版物的讨论,为决定如何处理潜在的掠夺性出版物提供指导。6.5.7 小节 "跨数据库调整检索策略 "是本版指南新增的另一个小节,并附有实例。6.6 小节以前称为 "补充策略",现已更新并更名为 "补充检索技术",以与 Hirt 等人的 TARCiS 声明(2023 年)保持一致。新增了关于检索同行评议的第 6.8 小节检索策略同行评议。检索策略的同行评议在标准的同行评议过程中进行。然而,检索策略非常复杂,轻微的错别字或语法错误可能会对检索结果产生重大影响,进而影响评审结果。因此,我们建议在稿件提交前对检索尤其是检索策略进行同行评审,以增加检查点。我们还增加了第 6.9 节 "何时停止检索"。在检索社会科学研究成果时,尤其是当被收录的研究设计多种多样,而且很多研究成果都可 能在灰色文献中找到时,确定何时 "够了 "是一项特别具有挑战性的工作。本节讨论了这一挑战,并就检索和检索策略制定时的停止规则提供了一些考虑因素。本版指南新增了关于 8.0 选择研究的一节,与 Cochrane 手册类似。虽然严格来说,选择研究并不是综述检索步骤的一部分,但在筛选阶段有一些重要的信息管理注意事项,作为图书馆员和信息专家,作者团队认为解决这些问题会有所帮助。9.0 记录和报告检索部分已经更新,纳入了最近发布的 MECCIR 标准(Dewidar 等人,2024 年)和 PRISMA-S 报告指南(Rethlefsen 等人,2021 年)。
{"title":"New search guidance for Campbell systematic reviews","authors":"Heather MacDonald,&nbsp;Sarah Young","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70005","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;Searching for studies in systematic reviews is a critical step that lays the foundation for the remaining stages of the review and synthesis. Searching in the social sciences and other disciplines covered by the Campbell Collaboration comes with added complexities and challenges related to finding and organizing evidence across a rich diversity of sources. To assist Campbell authors and information specialists supporting Campbell reviews in this process, we recently published new guidance (MacDonald et al., &lt;span&gt;2024&lt;/span&gt;) based on the previous guidance document originally published in 2010 and updated in 2017. The guide was revised to reflect current Campbell Collaboration areas of practice and recommendations in the recently updated Methodological Expectations of Campbell Collaboration Intervention Reviews (MECCIR) (Dewidar et al., &lt;span&gt;2024&lt;/span&gt;), capture evolving practice and strategies for searching, and update links and descriptions of individual bibliographic and other resources. It includes helpful templates, lists, and checklists to assist authors in meeting the expectations for conduct and reporting of Campbell systematic review searches. Here, we provide an overview and highlight some of the key changes and new additions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The new guidance includes several new sections. The &lt;i&gt;Section 1.0 About this Guide&lt;/i&gt; describes who this guide is for: both review authors and information specialists. Also new is the section &lt;i&gt;2.0 Working with an Information Specialist&lt;/i&gt; which explains the role of the information specialist in the systematic review process. Searching for and retrieving information is a key component of systematic reviews and information specialists, as experts in search, can play a supporting or collaborative role in the production of these reviews.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In the section on &lt;i&gt;4.0 Sources to Search&lt;/i&gt;, the list of sources has been placed in an Appendix which can be found on the Open Science Framework (OSF). The list can now be updated frequently so that accurate and up-to-date information is available to researchers. As well in this edition preprint repositories have been added to the list of potential sources of studies.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;5.0 Planning the Search&lt;/i&gt; has a new section on using seed articles, or benchmarking studies, to help in the construction and validation of the search strategy. Using a seed article set can help identify search terms and ensure the search strategy finds relevant studies. Also new to the &lt;i&gt;5.3 Search updates&lt;/i&gt; subsection, is the practice of checking for retracted studies. While the guidance on how to deal with retracted studies is still under debate (Faggion, &lt;span&gt;2019&lt;/span&gt;), checking for retractions, corrections, errata and other areas of concern related to included studies should be a routine step in any review.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The author team updated the &lt;i&gt;6.0 Designing Search Strategies&lt;/i&gt; section with a new subsection on identifying search terms (both controlled vocabulary and keyword","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70005","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142579673","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}
引用次数: 0
PROTOCOL: Is the CEO/employee pay ratio related to firm performance in publicly traded companies? 方案:在上市公司中,首席执行官/员工薪酬比例与公司业绩是否相关?
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-11-04 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.70003
Denise M. Rousseau, Cédric Velghe, Ryan Splenda, Byeong Jo Kim, Jangbum Lee

One goal of this systematic review is to assess whether the pay ratio, that is, the relative difference between the compensation a firm's CEO receives and that of its nonmanagerial employees, is related to subsequent firm performance. A second goal is to identify factors influencing this relationship across publicly traded firms, including the pay ratio's perceived fairness by employees, the firm's business strategy, and related factors.

本系统性综述的目标之一是评估薪酬比率(即公司首席执行官与非管理人员员工的薪酬之间的相对差异)是否与随后的公司业绩相关。第二个目标是找出影响上市公司之间这种关系的因素,包括薪酬比例在员工心目中的公平性、公司的业务战略以及相关因素。
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Is the CEO/employee pay ratio related to firm performance in publicly traded companies?","authors":"Denise M. Rousseau,&nbsp;Cédric Velghe,&nbsp;Ryan Splenda,&nbsp;Byeong Jo Kim,&nbsp;Jangbum Lee","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70003","url":null,"abstract":"<p>One goal of this systematic review is to assess whether the pay ratio, that is, the relative difference between the compensation a firm's CEO receives and that of its nonmanagerial employees, is related to subsequent firm performance. A second goal is to identify factors influencing this relationship across publicly traded firms, including the pay ratio's perceived fairness by employees, the firm's business strategy, and related factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70003","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142579672","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}
引用次数: 0
PROTOCOL: Risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse and interventions against child sexual abuse: An umbrella review 方案:儿童性虐待的风险和保护因素以及针对儿童性虐待的干预措施:总体审查
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-11-04 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.70000
Izabela Zych, Inmaculada Marín-López

This is the protocol for a Campbell Collaboration systematic review. Our objective is to conduct an umbrella review to synthesize published and unpublished systematic reviews focused on risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse and effectiveness of interventions against child sexual abuse perpetration and victimization. Specific research questions are: (i) what are the risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse victimization, and what are their relative strength and/or magnitude for predicting child sexual abuse victimization? (ii) what are the risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse perpetration, and what are their relative strength and/or magnitude for predicting child sexual abuse perpetration? (iii) are interventions aimed at reducing and/or preventing child sexual abuse effective? (iv) what are the moderators that increase or decrease effectiveness of the interventions? Efforts to decrease child sexual abuse need to be based on research, but more accessible evidence regarding the breadth of risk and protective factors and effectiveness of interventions to reduce child sexual abuse needs to be provided to policymakers. This will be the first umbrella review that comprehensively synthesizes findings of the previous systematic reviews that focus on risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse and interventions to prevent or reduce child sexual abuse. The results will be able to inform enhanced prevention policy and programs, and regulatory measures for specific contexts of child sexual abuse.

这是坎贝尔协作组织系统综述的协议。我们的目标是对已发表和未发表的系统综述进行总括性综述,综述的重点是儿童性虐待的风险和保护因素,以及针对儿童性虐待犯罪和受害的干预措施的有效性。具体的研究问题是(i) 儿童性虐待受害的风险和保护因素有哪些?(ii) 儿童遭受性虐待的风险因素和保护因素有哪些?(iii) 旨在减少和/或预防儿童性虐待的干预措施是否有效?(iv) 增加或减少干预措施有效性的调节因素是什么?减少儿童性虐待的努力需要以研究为基础,但需要向政策制定者提供更多有关风险和保护因素的广泛性以及减少儿童性虐待干预措施有效性的证据。这将是第一份全面综合以往系统性综述结果的总综述,其重点是儿童性虐待的风险和保护因素以及预防或减少儿童性虐待的干预措施。研究结果将有助于强化预防政策和计划,以及针对儿童性虐待具体情况的监管措施。
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse and interventions against child sexual abuse: An umbrella review","authors":"Izabela Zych,&nbsp;Inmaculada Marín-López","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70000","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70000","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell Collaboration systematic review. Our objective is to conduct an umbrella review to synthesize published and unpublished systematic reviews focused on risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse and effectiveness of interventions against child sexual abuse perpetration and victimization. Specific research questions are: (i) what are the risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse victimization, and what are their relative strength and/or magnitude for predicting child sexual abuse victimization? (ii) what are the risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse perpetration, and what are their relative strength and/or magnitude for predicting child sexual abuse perpetration? (iii) are interventions aimed at reducing and/or preventing child sexual abuse effective? (iv) what are the moderators that increase or decrease effectiveness of the interventions? Efforts to decrease child sexual abuse need to be based on research, but more accessible evidence regarding the breadth of risk and protective factors and effectiveness of interventions to reduce child sexual abuse needs to be provided to policymakers. This will be the first umbrella review that comprehensively synthesizes findings of the previous systematic reviews that focus on risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse and interventions to prevent or reduce child sexual abuse. The results will be able to inform enhanced prevention policy and programs, and regulatory measures for specific contexts of child sexual abuse.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70000","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142579671","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}
引用次数: 0
PROTOCOL: The association between adverse childhood experiences and employment outcomes: Protocol for a systematic review 方案:童年不良经历与就业结果之间的关联:系统性审查协议
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-10-31 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.70002
Amarech Obse, Evdoxia Gkaintatzi, Paul McCrone

There is growing evidence of a link between adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and health and economic outcomes. Previous systematic reviews synthesised evidence of the relationships between ACEs and various health and some economic outcomes such as healthcare costs and educational attainment. The primary aim of this systematic review is to synthesise the evidence on the relationship between ACEs and employment outcomes. MEDLINE, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection (APA PsycInfo), ECONLIT, Sociological Abstracts, Social Science Research Network (SSRN) and Scopus will be searched using a predefined search strategy. Cross-sectional, cohort, or longitudinal studies published between 2000 and 2024 will be included. ACEs include abuse, neglect, household dysfunction, bullying, foster care, and racism that occur during childhood or adolescence. Employment outcomes include employment status, occupation, and income. Risk of bias of individual studies will be assessed using appropriate NHLBI-NHI quality assessment tools for each type of study. Proportions or means will be used to analyse and compare outcomes. If data allows, we will conduct meta-analysis. Sub-group analyses (e.g., by gender, age group, type and number of ACEs, and intersections of identities of study subjects will be conducted. Further analysis will be conducted to assess the mediators of the effect of ACEs on employment outcomes. By sythesising evidence of the association between ACEs and economic wellbeing later in life, this review will add evidence to the broader literature on poverty. The results of this synthesis will inform policies on child welfare and employment. Results of the review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

越来越多的证据表明,童年的不良经历(ACEs)与健康和经济结果之间存在联系。以往的系统性综述综合了 ACE 与各种健康结果和一些经济结果(如医疗成本和教育程度)之间关系的证据。本系统综述的主要目的是综合 ACE 与就业结果之间关系的证据。我们将采用预先确定的检索策略对 MEDLINE、《心理学与行为科学文集》(APA PsycInfo)、《经济学文摘》(ECONLIT)、《社会学文摘》(Sociological Abstracts)、《社会科学研究网络》(SSRN)和 Scopus 进行检索。将纳入 2000 年至 2024 年间发表的横断面、队列或纵向研究。ACE包括发生在儿童或青少年时期的虐待、忽视、家庭功能失调、欺凌、寄养和种族主义。就业结果包括就业状况、职业和收入。将使用 NHLBI-NHI 质量评估工具对各类研究的偏倚风险进行评估。将使用比例或平均值来分析和比较结果。如果数据允许,我们将进行荟萃分析。我们将进行分组分析(例如,按性别、年龄组、ACE 的类型和数量以及研究对象身份的交叉性)。还将进行进一步分析,以评估 ACE 对就业结果影响的中介因素。通过综合 ACE 与日后经济福祉之间关系的证据,本综述将为更广泛的贫困问题文献提供更多证据。综述结果将为儿童福利和就业政策提供参考。审查结果将发表在同行评审期刊上。
{"title":"PROTOCOL: The association between adverse childhood experiences and employment outcomes: Protocol for a systematic review","authors":"Amarech Obse,&nbsp;Evdoxia Gkaintatzi,&nbsp;Paul McCrone","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70002","url":null,"abstract":"<p>There is growing evidence of a link between adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and health and economic outcomes. Previous systematic reviews synthesised evidence of the relationships between ACEs and various health and some economic outcomes such as healthcare costs and educational attainment. The primary aim of this systematic review is to synthesise the evidence on the relationship between ACEs and employment outcomes. MEDLINE, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection (APA PsycInfo), ECONLIT, Sociological Abstracts, Social Science Research Network (SSRN) and Scopus will be searched using a predefined search strategy. Cross-sectional, cohort, or longitudinal studies published between 2000 and 2024 will be included. ACEs include abuse, neglect, household dysfunction, bullying, foster care, and racism that occur during childhood or adolescence. Employment outcomes include employment status, occupation, and income. Risk of bias of individual studies will be assessed using appropriate NHLBI-NHI quality assessment tools for each type of study. Proportions or means will be used to analyse and compare outcomes. If data allows, we will conduct meta-analysis. Sub-group analyses (e.g., by gender, age group, type and number of ACEs, and intersections of identities of study subjects will be conducted. Further analysis will be conducted to assess the mediators of the effect of ACEs on employment outcomes. By sythesising evidence of the association between ACEs and economic wellbeing later in life, this review will add evidence to the broader literature on poverty. The results of this synthesis will inform policies on child welfare and employment. Results of the review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70002","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142563012","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}
引用次数: 0
PROTOCOL: Employee work motivation, effort, and performance under a merit pay system: A systematic review 方案:绩效工资制度下的员工工作动机、努力程度和绩效:系统综述。
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-10-30 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.70001
Cédric Velghe, Anders McIlquham-Schmidt, Pinar Celik, Martin Storme, Stan De Spiegelaere

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: One goal of this systematic review is to identify whether merit pay predicts employee work motivation, effort, and performance; a second goal is to determine whether the association between merit pay and subsequent employee work motivation, effort, and performance is stronger depending on the actual relationship between the performance ratings and merit increases received, as well as on the perceived relationship by employees between their performance and their pay; a third goal is to identify whether the association between merit pay and subsequent employee motivation depends on what type of motivation is measured (i.e., intrinsic vs. extrinsic/general work motivation).

这是坎贝尔系统综述的协议。目标如下:本系统综述的目标之一是确定绩效工资是否能预测员工的工作动机、努力程度和绩效;目标之二是确定绩效工资与员工随后的工作动机、努力程度和绩效之间的关联是否更强,这取决于绩效评级与绩效加薪之间的实际关系,以及员工认为的绩效与工资之间的关系;目标之三是确定绩效工资与员工随后的工作动机之间的关联是否取决于所衡量的动机类型(即内在动机与外在动机/一般工作动机)。
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Employee work motivation, effort, and performance under a merit pay system: A systematic review","authors":"Cédric Velghe,&nbsp;Anders McIlquham-Schmidt,&nbsp;Pinar Celik,&nbsp;Martin Storme,&nbsp;Stan De Spiegelaere","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70001","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.70001","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: One goal of this systematic review is to identify whether merit pay predicts employee work motivation, effort, and performance; a second goal is to determine whether the association between merit pay and subsequent employee work motivation, effort, and performance is stronger depending on the actual relationship between the performance ratings and merit increases received, as well as on the perceived relationship by employees between their performance and their pay; a third goal is to identify whether the association between merit pay and subsequent employee motivation depends on what type of motivation is measured (i.e., intrinsic vs. extrinsic/general work motivation).</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11522831/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142548097","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}
引用次数: 0
The FRIENDS preventive programme for reducing anxiety symptoms in children and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis 减少儿童和青少年焦虑症状的 FRIENDS 预防计划:系统回顾和荟萃分析
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-10-18 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1443
Trine Filges, Geir Smedslund, Tine Eriksen, Kirsten Birkefoss, Malene Wallach Kildemoes
<div> <section> <h3> Background</h3> <p>Anxiety and stress responses are often considered normative experiences, and children and adolescents may benefit from anxiety prevention programmes. One such programme is FRIENDS which is based on a firm theoretical model which addresses cognitive, physiological and behavioural processes. FRIENDS is manualised and can, thus, easily be integrated into school curriculums.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Objectives</h3> <p>What are the effects of the FRIENDS preventive programme on anxiety symptoms in children and adolescents? Do the effects differ between participant age groups, participant socio-economic status, type of prevention, type of provider, country of implementation and/or implementation issues in relation to the booster sessions and parent sessions?</p> </section> <section> <h3> Search Methods</h3> <p>The database searches were carried out in September 2023, and other sources were searched in October 2023. We searched to identify both published and unpublished literature. A date restriction from 1998 and onwards was applied.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Selection Criteria</h3> <p>The intervention was three age-appropriate preventive anxiety programmes: Fun FRIENDS, FRIENDS for Life, and My FRIENDS Youth. Primary outcome was anxiety symptoms and secondary outcome was self-esteem. Studies that used a control group were eligible, whereas qualitative approaches were not.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3> <p>The number of potentially relevant studies was 2865. Forty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-eight studies were used in the data synthesis. Four studies had a critical risk of bias. Six studies did not report data that enabled calculation of effect sizes and standard errors. Two studies had partial overlap of data to other studies used, and two were written in Persian. Meta-analyses were conducted on each outcome separately. All analyses were inverse variance weighted using random effects statistical models.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Main Results</h3> <p>Studies came from 15 different countries. Intervention start varied from 2001 to 2016. The average number of participants analysed was 240, and the average number of controls was 212. Twenty-five comparisons reported on anxiety symptoms post-intervention. The weighted average standardised mean difference
背景 焦虑和压力反应通常被认为是正常的经历,儿童和青少年可能会从焦虑预防计划中受益。FRIENDS 就是这样一个计划,它以一个坚实的理论模型为基础,涉及认知、生理和行为过程。FRIENDS 已被手册化,因此很容易纳入学校课程。 目标 FRIENDS 预防计划对儿童和青少年的焦虑症状有何影响?不同年龄组的参与者、参与者的社会经济地位、预防类型、提供者类型、实施国家和/或与强化课程和家长课程相关的实施问题之间的效果是否存在差异? 检索方法 数据库检索于 2023 年 9 月进行,其他来源的检索于 2023 年 10 月进行。我们检索了已发表和未发表的文献。日期限制为 1998 年及以后。 选择标准 干预措施是三个适合不同年龄段的预防焦虑计划:有趣的 FRIENDS》、《FRIENDS 生活》和《我的 FRIENDS 青春》。主要结果为焦虑症状,次要结果为自尊。采用对照组的研究符合条件,而采用定性方法的研究不符合条件。 数据收集与分析 潜在相关研究的数量为 2865 项。有 42 项研究符合纳入标准。28 项研究用于数据综合。四项研究存在严重的偏倚风险。六项研究未报告可用于计算效应大小和标准误差的数据。有两项研究的数据与其他研究有部分重叠,还有两项研究是用波斯语撰写的。对每种结果分别进行了 Meta 分析。所有分析均采用随机效应统计模型进行反方差加权。 主要结果 研究来自 15 个不同的国家。干预开始时间从 2001 年到 2016 年不等。接受分析的参与者平均人数为 240 人,对照组平均人数为 212 人。25项比较报告了干预后的焦虑症状。加权平均标准化平均差异(SMD)为 0.13(95% CI 0.04 至 0.22)。存在一定的异质性。12项比较报告了随访12个月后的焦虑症状。加权平均 SMD 为 0.31(95% CI 0.13 至 0.49)。存在大量异质性。五项比较报告了干预后的自尊情况,加权平均SMD为0.20(95% CI -0.20至0.61),存在大量异质性。在随访中,我们发现有证据表明,由心理健康服务提供者实施的项目似乎比教师实施的项目效果更好。超过 12 个月的随访结果尚无定论。 作者的结论 我们的研究结果表明,根据儿童和青少年自己的报告,FRIENDS 干预疗法可以减轻儿童和青少年的焦虑症状。大多数试验采用了等待名单设计,这意味着只有少数研究报告了 FRIENDS 干预的长期效果。我们的研究结果表明,FRIENDS 干预疗法可能会在干预 12 个月后增加焦虑症状的缓解程度。这强调了今后的研究需要采用可进行长期跟踪的设计。我们对自尊的影响尚不确定。证据的总体确定性从低到极低不等。需要进行更严格的研究。
{"title":"The FRIENDS preventive programme for reducing anxiety symptoms in children and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Trine Filges,&nbsp;Geir Smedslund,&nbsp;Tine Eriksen,&nbsp;Kirsten Birkefoss,&nbsp;Malene Wallach Kildemoes","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1443","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1443","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Background&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Anxiety and stress responses are often considered normative experiences, and children and adolescents may benefit from anxiety prevention programmes. One such programme is FRIENDS which is based on a firm theoretical model which addresses cognitive, physiological and behavioural processes. FRIENDS is manualised and can, thus, easily be integrated into school curriculums.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Objectives&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;What are the effects of the FRIENDS preventive programme on anxiety symptoms in children and adolescents? Do the effects differ between participant age groups, participant socio-economic status, type of prevention, type of provider, country of implementation and/or implementation issues in relation to the booster sessions and parent sessions?&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Search Methods&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;The database searches were carried out in September 2023, and other sources were searched in October 2023. We searched to identify both published and unpublished literature. A date restriction from 1998 and onwards was applied.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Selection Criteria&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;The intervention was three age-appropriate preventive anxiety programmes: Fun FRIENDS, FRIENDS for Life, and My FRIENDS Youth. Primary outcome was anxiety symptoms and secondary outcome was self-esteem. Studies that used a control group were eligible, whereas qualitative approaches were not.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Data Collection and Analysis&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;The number of potentially relevant studies was 2865. Forty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-eight studies were used in the data synthesis. Four studies had a critical risk of bias. Six studies did not report data that enabled calculation of effect sizes and standard errors. Two studies had partial overlap of data to other studies used, and two were written in Persian. Meta-analyses were conducted on each outcome separately. All analyses were inverse variance weighted using random effects statistical models.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Main Results&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Studies came from 15 different countries. Intervention start varied from 2001 to 2016. The average number of participants analysed was 240, and the average number of controls was 212. Twenty-five comparisons reported on anxiety symptoms post-intervention. The weighted average standardised mean difference ","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1443","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142451276","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}
引用次数: 0
Protocol: Assessing the impact of interest-holder engagement on guideline development: A systematic review 协议:评估利益相关者参与对指南制定的影响:系统回顾
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-10-15 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1444
Lyubov Lytvyn, Jennifer Petkovic, Joanne Khabsa, Olivia Magwood, Pauline Campbell, Ian D. Graham, Kevin Pottie, Julia Bidonde, Heather Limburg, Danielle Pollock, Elie A. Akl, Thomas W. Concannon, Peter Tugwell

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The objective of this review is to identify and synthesize empirical research on the impacts of interest-holder engagement on the guideline development process and content. Our research questions are as follows: (1) What are the empirical examples of impact on the process in health guideline development across any of the 18 steps of the GIN-McMaster checklist? (2) What are the empirical examples of impact on the content in health guideline development across any of the 18 steps of the GIN-McMaster checklist?

这是坎贝尔系统综述的协议。目标如下。本综述的目的是确定并综合有关利益相关者参与对指南制定过程和内容的影响的实证研究。我们的研究问题如下(1) 在 GIN-McMaster 核对表的 18 个步骤中,有哪些实证案例说明了对健康指南制定过程的影响?(2)在 GIN-McMaster 核对表的 18 个步骤中,有哪些实证案例说明了对健康指南制定内容的影响?
{"title":"Protocol: Assessing the impact of interest-holder engagement on guideline development: A systematic review","authors":"Lyubov Lytvyn,&nbsp;Jennifer Petkovic,&nbsp;Joanne Khabsa,&nbsp;Olivia Magwood,&nbsp;Pauline Campbell,&nbsp;Ian D. Graham,&nbsp;Kevin Pottie,&nbsp;Julia Bidonde,&nbsp;Heather Limburg,&nbsp;Danielle Pollock,&nbsp;Elie A. Akl,&nbsp;Thomas W. Concannon,&nbsp;Peter Tugwell","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1444","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1444","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The objective of this review is to identify and synthesize empirical research on the impacts of interest-holder engagement on the guideline development process and content. Our research questions are as follows: (1) What are the empirical examples of impact on the process in health guideline development across any of the 18 steps of the GIN-McMaster checklist? (2) What are the empirical examples of impact on the content in health guideline development across any of the 18 steps of the GIN-McMaster checklist?</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1444","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142439039","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}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Campbell Systematic Reviews
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1