首页 > 最新文献

Campbell Systematic Reviews最新文献

英文 中文
Psychosocial, pharmacological, and legal interventions for improving the psychosocial outcomes of children with substance misusing parents: A systematic review 为改善父母滥用药物的儿童的社会心理状况而采取的心理、药物和法律干预措施：系统回顾
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Pub Date : 2024-08-21 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1413
Elizabeth Eggins, David B. Wilson, Joseph Betts, Sara Roetman, Ned Chandler-Mather, Bronwyn Theroux, Sharon Dawe

Background

Parental substance misuse is a pervasive risk factor for a range of detrimental outcomes for children across the life course. While a variety of interventions have been developed for this population, the existing evidence-base requires consolidation and consideration of the comparative effectiveness of different interventions to facilitate evidence-informed decisions between different intervention approaches.

Objectives

This review aimed to use network meta-analysis to synthesise the comparative effectiveness of psychosocial, legal, and pharmacological interventions for improving outcomes for children with substance misusing parents. Network meta-analysis was not possible; however, we synthesised the effects of a broad range of interventions on child psychosocial outcomes. Another aim was to examine potential moderators of the effects, yet this was also not possible due to data limitations. A secondary objective was to qualitatively synthesise economic, treatment completion, and treatment acceptability information for included studies.

Search Methods

Searches were performed in November 2020 and again in April 2021. Encompassing multiple disciplines, we searched 34 databases, 58 grey literature repositories, and 10 trial registers. Supplementary hand searches were conducted on 11 journals, along with harvesting the references of all included studies and existing reviews, and forward citation searching each report of all included studies. Study authors were contacted to obtain missing data.

Selection Criteria

Eligible studies included randomised and quasi-experimental evaluations of psychosocial, pharmacological, and/or legal interventions using either a placebo, no treatment, waitlist control, treatment-as-usual, or alternative treatment as a comparison condition. Study participants needed to be comprised of families with children under the age of 18 with one or more currently substance-misusing parents (or caregivers). Studies were required to evaluate the eligible intervention using a child-focused psychosocial outcome. If reported in eligible studies, the following secondary outcomes were also synthesised in the review: cost-effectiveness, treatment completion, length of time in treatment and acceptability of treatment (e.g., participant perspectives of the intervention). There were no restrictions placed on publication status or geographic location, however only research written in English was

只有 5 项基于 3 项研究的单一效应估计值显示了负面影响，包括：接受干预的儿童相对于接受常规治疗或未接受治疗的儿童而言，抑郁症状和躯体化症状（家长报告）、绝望情绪（儿童报告）、教育成就困难（家长报告）和经证实的儿童保护报告均较高。九项荟萃分析和 36 项单一研究的效果估计表明，社会心理、药物和/或法律干预措施对一系列特定的儿童福利、发育和情绪/行为结果具有积极影响。不同领域和不同研究的偏倚风险各不相同，这进一步降低了研究结果的可信度。根据所纳入研究的子集，治疗完成情况往往各不相同，但对父母滥用药物的儿童进行干预可以实现成本效益。 作者的结论 尽管有大量的评估证据，但由于结果不一、数据缺失等原因，无法通过分析来正式研究心理、法律和药物干预对改善父母滥用药物的儿童的治疗效果的比较效果。大量未报告（缺失）的数据意味着，由于研究单一且样本量较小，许多效果估计值的可信度不足。综述结果表明，针对受父母药物滥用影响的家庭的干预措施，如果能全面解决多个领域的问题，如父母的福祉/心理健康、养育子女、子女的福祉和/或影响家庭福祉的其他因素（如住房），则可能有效。
{"title":"Psychosocial, pharmacological, and legal interventions for improving the psychosocial outcomes of children with substance misusing parents: A systematic review","authors":"Elizabeth Eggins,&nbsp;David B. Wilson,&nbsp;Joseph Betts,&nbsp;Sara Roetman,&nbsp;Ned Chandler-Mather,&nbsp;Bronwyn Theroux,&nbsp;Sharon Dawe","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1413","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1413","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Parental substance misuse is a pervasive risk factor for a range of detrimental outcomes for children across the life course. While a variety of interventions have been developed for this population, the existing evidence-base requires consolidation and consideration of the comparative effectiveness of different interventions to facilitate evidence-informed decisions between different intervention approaches.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This review aimed to use network meta-analysis to synthesise the comparative effectiveness of psychosocial, legal, and pharmacological interventions for improving outcomes for children with substance misusing parents. Network meta-analysis was not possible; however, we synthesised the effects of a broad range of interventions on child psychosocial outcomes. Another aim was to examine potential moderators of the effects, yet this was also not possible due to data limitations. A secondary objective was to qualitatively synthesise economic, treatment completion, and treatment acceptability information for included studies.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Search Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Searches were performed in November 2020 and again in April 2021. Encompassing multiple disciplines, we searched 34 databases, 58 grey literature repositories, and 10 trial registers. Supplementary hand searches were conducted on 11 journals, along with harvesting the references of all included studies and existing reviews, and forward citation searching each report of all included studies. Study authors were contacted to obtain missing data.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Selection Criteria</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Eligible studies included randomised and quasi-experimental evaluations of psychosocial, pharmacological, and/or legal interventions using either a placebo, no treatment, waitlist control, treatment-as-usual, or alternative treatment as a comparison condition. Study participants needed to be comprised of families with children under the age of 18 with one or more currently substance-misusing parents (or caregivers). Studies were required to evaluate the eligible intervention using a child-focused psychosocial outcome. If reported in eligible studies, the following secondary outcomes were also synthesised in the review: cost-effectiveness, treatment completion, length of time in treatment and acceptability of treatment (e.g., participant perspectives of the intervention). There were no restrictions placed on publication status or geographic location, however only research written in English was ","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1413","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142013608","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
Searching and reporting in Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews: A systematic assessment of current methods 坎贝尔协作组织系统综述的搜索和报告：对当前方法的系统评估。
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Pub Date : 2024-08-21 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1432
Sarah Young, Heather MacDonald, Diana Louden, Ursula M. Ellis, Zahra Premji, Morwenna Rogers, Alison Bethel, David Pickup

The search methods used in systematic reviews provide the foundation for establishing the body of literature from which conclusions are drawn and recommendations made. Searches should aim to be comprehensive and reporting of search methods should be transparent and reproducible. Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews strive to adhere to the best methodological guidance available for this type of searching. The current work aims to provide an assessment of the conduct and reporting of searches in Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews. Our objectives were to examine how searches are currently conducted in Campbell systematic reviews, how search strategies, search methods and search reporting adhere to the Methodological Expectations of Campbell Collaboration Intervention Reviews (MECCIR) and PRISMA standards, and identify emerging or novel methods used in searching in Campbell systematic reviews. We also investigated the role of information specialists in Campbell systematic reviews. We handsearched the Campbell Systematic Reviews journal tables of contents from January 2017 to March 2024. We included all systematic reviews published since 2017. We excluded other types of evidence synthesis (e.g., evidence and gap maps), updates to systematic reviews when search methods were not changed from the original pre-2017 review, and systematic reviews that did not conduct their own original searches. We developed a data extraction form in part based on the conduct and reporting items in MECCIR and PRISMA. In addition, we extracted information about the general quality of searches based on the use of Boolean operators, keywords, database syntax and subject headings. Data extraction included information about reporting of sources searched, some aspects of search quality, the use and reporting of supplementary search methods, reporting of the search strategy, the involvement of information specialists, date of the most recent search, and citation of the Campbell search methods guidance. Items were rated as fully, partially or not conducted or reported. We cross-walked our data extraction items to the 2019 MECCIR standards and 2020 PRISMA guidelines and provide descriptive analyses of the conduct and reporting of searches in Campbell systematic reviews, indicating level of adherence to standards where applicable. We included 111 Campbell systematic reviews across all coordinating groups published since 2017 up to the search date. Almost all (98%) included reviews searched at least two relevant databases and all reported the databases searched. All reviews searched grey literature and most (82%) provided a full list of grey literature sources. Detailed information about databases such as platform and date range coverage was lacking in 16% and 77% of the reviews, respectively. In terms of search strategies, most used Boolean operators, search syntax and phrase searching correctly, but subject headings in databases with controlled vocabulary were

系统性综述中使用的检索方法为建立文献库、从中得出结论和提出建议奠定了基础。检索应力求全面，检索方法的报告应透明且可重复。坎贝尔协作组织的系统性综述努力遵守此类检索的最佳方法指导。目前的工作旨在对坎贝尔协作系统综述的检索行为和报告进行评估。我们的目标是研究坎贝尔系统性综述目前是如何进行检索的，检索策略、检索方法和检索报告是如何遵守《坎贝尔合作干预综述方法学期望》（MECCIR）和 PRISMA 标准的，并确定坎贝尔系统性综述检索中使用的新兴或新型方法。我们还调查了信息专家在坎贝尔系统综述中的作用。我们手工检索了 2017 年 1 月至 2024 年 3 月的坎贝尔系统综述期刊目录。我们纳入了自 2017 年以来发表的所有系统综述。我们排除了其他类型的证据综合（如证据和差距图）、检索方法与 2017 年之前的原始综述相比没有变化的系统综述更新，以及没有进行自己的原始检索的系统综述。我们根据 MECCIR 和 PRISMA 中的行为和报告项目开发了数据提取表。此外，我们还根据布尔运算符、关键词、数据库语法和主题词的使用情况，提取了有关检索总体质量的信息。数据提取包括以下方面的信息：检索来源的报告、检索质量的某些方面、补充检索方法的使用和报告、检索策略的报告、信息专家的参与、最近一次检索的日期以及坎贝尔检索方法指南的引用。项目被评为完全、部分或未进行或未报告。我们将数据提取项目与 2019 年 MECCIR 标准和 2020 年 PRISMA 指南进行了交叉比对，并对坎贝尔系统性综述中检索的进行和报告情况进行了描述性分析，同时在适用的情况下说明了遵守标准的程度。我们纳入了自 2017 年起至检索日止发表的 111 篇坎贝尔系统性综述，涉及所有协调组。几乎所有（98%）纳入的综述都检索了至少两个相关数据库，并且所有综述都报告了检索的数据库。所有综述都检索了灰色文献，大多数（82%）提供了灰色文献来源的完整清单。分别有 16% 和 77% 的综述缺乏数据库的详细信息，如平台和日期范围。在检索策略方面，大多数综述都正确使用了布尔运算符、检索语法和短语检索，但只有大约一半的综述使用了数据库中的主题词表和控制词汇。大多数综述报告了至少一种完整的数据库检索策略（90%），其中 63% 提供了所有数据库的完整检索策略。大多数综述都进行了一些补充检索，最常见的是检索纳入研究的参考文献，而手工检索期刊和前向引文检索的报告较少（分别为 51% 和 62%）。29% 的综述有信息专家作为合著者，约 45% 的综述没有提及任何信息专家的参与。当信息专家是合著者时，许多报告和行为标准及指南的遵守率也随之提高，包括报告网站 URL、报告前向引文检索方法、正确使用数据库语法和使用主题词。在遵守行为和报告标准方面没有发现纵向趋势，2017年发布的坎贝尔检索方法指南仅在12篇综述中被引用。我们还发现，最近一次检索与发表日期之间的中位时滞为 20 个月。总体而言，收录的坎贝尔系统性综述检索了范围广泛的书目数据库和灰色文献，并至少进行了一些补充检索，如检索收录研究的参考文献或联系专家。强制性标准的报告不尽相同，有些标准经常未报告（如网站 URL 和数据库日期范围），而其他标准在大多数综述中都有详细报告。例如，大多数综述都详细报告了数据库检索策略。对于灰色文献，来源名称的报告较多，但搜索策略的报告较少。研究结果将用于确定通过更新指南、同行评审流程以及作者培训和支持来推进坎贝尔综述当前做法的机会。
{"title":"Searching and reporting in Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews: A systematic assessment of current methods","authors":"Sarah Young,&nbsp;Heather MacDonald,&nbsp;Diana Louden,&nbsp;Ursula M. Ellis,&nbsp;Zahra Premji,&nbsp;Morwenna Rogers,&nbsp;Alison Bethel,&nbsp;David Pickup","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1432","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1432","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The search methods used in systematic reviews provide the foundation for establishing the body of literature from which conclusions are drawn and recommendations made. Searches should aim to be comprehensive and reporting of search methods should be transparent and reproducible. Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews strive to adhere to the best methodological guidance available for this type of searching. The current work aims to provide an assessment of the conduct and reporting of searches in Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews. Our objectives were to examine how searches are currently conducted in Campbell systematic reviews, how search strategies, search methods and search reporting adhere to the Methodological Expectations of Campbell Collaboration Intervention Reviews (MECCIR) and PRISMA standards, and identify emerging or novel methods used in searching in Campbell systematic reviews. We also investigated the role of information specialists in Campbell systematic reviews. We handsearched the <i>Campbell Systematic Reviews</i> journal tables of contents from January 2017 to March 2024. We included all systematic reviews published since 2017. We excluded other types of evidence synthesis (e.g., evidence and gap maps), updates to systematic reviews when search methods were not changed from the original pre-2017 review, and systematic reviews that did not conduct their own original searches. We developed a data extraction form in part based on the conduct and reporting items in MECCIR and PRISMA. In addition, we extracted information about the general quality of searches based on the use of Boolean operators, keywords, database syntax and subject headings. Data extraction included information about reporting of sources searched, some aspects of search quality, the use and reporting of supplementary search methods, reporting of the search strategy, the involvement of information specialists, date of the most recent search, and citation of the Campbell search methods guidance. Items were rated as fully, partially or not conducted or reported. We cross-walked our data extraction items to the 2019 MECCIR standards and 2020 PRISMA guidelines and provide descriptive analyses of the conduct and reporting of searches in Campbell systematic reviews, indicating level of adherence to standards where applicable. We included 111 Campbell systematic reviews across all coordinating groups published since 2017 up to the search date. Almost all (98%) included reviews searched at least two relevant databases and all reported the databases searched. All reviews searched grey literature and most (82%) provided a full list of grey literature sources. Detailed information about databases such as platform and date range coverage was lacking in 16% and 77% of the reviews, respectively. In terms of search strategies, most used Boolean operators, search syntax and phrase searching correctly, but subject headings in databases with controlled vocabulary were","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11339316/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142037283","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
What is the effect of intergenerational activities on the wellbeing and mental health of children and young people?: A systematic review 代际活动对儿童和青少年的福祉和心理健康有何影响？系统回顾
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Pub Date : 2024-08-18 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1429
Fiona Campbell, Rebecca Whear, Morwenna Rogers, Anthea Sutton, Jane Barlow, Andrew Booth, Andrew Tattersall, Louise Wolstenholme, Joanna Thompson-Coon

Background

Societal changes have led to greater isolation and higher levels of loneliness particularly for older generations. Loneliness is a significant public health challenge leading to increased levels of poor mental health. Depression and anxiety are also increasing in prevalence amongst children and young people. Intergenerational activities are interventions designed to bring together older and younger generations with the purpose of allowing participants to utilise their experiences and skills, and to give participants a chance to experience the pleasure and excitement that occurs with the transmission of knowledge and skills from one generation to another. Intergenerational activities are therefore potential interventions that can address the growing problems associated with loneliness and lack of wellbeing.

Objectives

This systematic review aims to examine the impact of intergenerational interventions on the wellbeing and mental health in children and adolescents, and potential harmful effects. It also aims to identify areas for future research as well as key messages for service commissioners.

Search Methods

We searched an evidence and gap map published in 2022 (comprehensive searches conducted July 2021 and updated June 2023) to identify randomised controlled trials of intergenerational interventions that report mental health and wellbeing outcomes for children and young people.

Selection Criteria

Randomised controlled trials of intergenerational interventions that involved unrelated younger and older people with at least one skipped generation between them and reported mental health or wellbeing outcomes for children and young people were included in this review.

Data Collection and Analysis

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Campbell Collaboration. We conducted data extraction and Cochrane risk of bias assessments in EPPI reviewer.

Main Results

While we identified 500 evaluations of intergenerational interventions, where the impact on participating children and/or young people was evaluated this was most often limited to assessing their impact on attitudes to aging. We identified five studies eva

背景 社会变革导致人们更加孤独，尤其是老一代人的孤独感更强。孤独是一项重大的公共卫生挑战，会导致心理健康水平下降。抑郁症和焦虑症在儿童和青少年中的发病率也在上升。代际活动是一种干预措施，旨在将老一代人和年轻一代人聚集在一起，让参与者利用他们的经验和技能，并让参与者有机会体验知识和技能代代相传所带来的快乐和兴奋。因此，代际活动是一种潜在的干预措施，可以解决与孤独和缺乏幸福感相关的日益严重的问题。 目标 本系统综述旨在研究代际干预对儿童和青少年福祉和心理健康的影响，以及潜在的有害影响。它还旨在确定未来研究的领域以及为服务委托人提供的关键信息。 检索方法 我们检索了 2022 年发布的证据和差距图（2021 年 7 月进行了全面检索，2023 年 6 月进行了更新），以确定报告儿童和青少年心理健康和幸福结果的代际干预随机对照试验。 选择标准 本综述纳入了有关代际干预的随机对照试验，这些试验涉及无亲属关系的年轻人和老年人，他们之间至少隔了一代人，并报告了儿童和青少年的心理健康或幸福结果。 数据收集与分析 我们采用了坎贝尔协作组织所要求的标准方法程序。我们在 EPPI 评审员中进行了数据提取和 Cochrane 偏倚风险评估。 主要结果 虽然我们发现了 500 项关于代际干预的评估，但在评估对参与儿童和/或年轻人的影响时，大多仅限于评估其对老龄化态度的影响。我们发现有五项研究对五种不同类型的代际干预措施进行了评估，其中包括一次性课程和持续一年的课程，以衡量其对儿童和/或青少年心理健康和福祉的影响。干预的目的各不相同，包括促进社交技能、预防有害行为和促进学习。五项研究中儿童的年龄也各不相同，其中一项研究的对象是年龄较小的儿童，两项研究的对象是年龄较小的青少年，两项研究的对象是年龄较大的青少年。有一项研究的对象是社会经济条件较差的儿童，而其他研究则未说明儿童和青少年的社会经济背景。用于评估干预措施的结果测量方法各不相同，没有一项研究测量相同的结果。有一项研究显示，干预措施改善了儿童的幸福指数，这是一项针对贫困社区儿童的干预措施，干预持续时间为一年，使年龄较小的参与者和年龄较大的参与者之间建立了更深层次的关系。四项研究没有发现.......。所纳入的研究存在较高的偏倚风险，因此研究结果的可靠性存在不确定性。支持干预措施发展和解释效果机制的基础理论描述不充分。 作者的结论 有关代际干预对儿童和青少年心理健康和幸福的有效性的证据很有限，而且没有定论。很少有评估试图衡量代际干预对儿童和青少年的影响，而在衡量这种影响时，重点通常仅限于对老龄化的态度。已收集到的证据过于分散，无法对评估结果进行综合。支持其发展的基础理论描述不清，也没有后续数据来确定其效益是否得以保持。代际干预措施显示了前景，但研究人员未能衡量这些措施对儿童和青年的心理健康和福祉的影响。
{"title":"What is the effect of intergenerational activities on the wellbeing and mental health of children and young people?: A systematic review","authors":"Fiona Campbell,&nbsp;Rebecca Whear,&nbsp;Morwenna Rogers,&nbsp;Anthea Sutton,&nbsp;Jane Barlow,&nbsp;Andrew Booth,&nbsp;Andrew Tattersall,&nbsp;Louise Wolstenholme,&nbsp;Joanna Thompson-Coon","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1429","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1429","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Societal changes have led to greater isolation and higher levels of loneliness particularly for older generations. Loneliness is a significant public health challenge leading to increased levels of poor mental health. Depression and anxiety are also increasing in prevalence amongst children and young people. Intergenerational activities are interventions designed to bring together older and younger generations with the purpose of allowing participants to utilise their experiences and skills, and to give participants a chance to experience the pleasure and excitement that occurs with the transmission of knowledge and skills from one generation to another. Intergenerational activities are therefore potential interventions that can address the growing problems associated with loneliness and lack of wellbeing.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This systematic review aims to examine the impact of intergenerational interventions on the wellbeing and mental health in children and adolescents, and potential harmful effects. It also aims to identify areas for future research as well as key messages for service commissioners.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Search Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We searched an evidence and gap map published in 2022 (comprehensive searches conducted July 2021 and updated June 2023) to identify randomised controlled trials of intergenerational interventions that report mental health and wellbeing outcomes for children and young people.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Selection Criteria</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Randomised controlled trials of intergenerational interventions that involved unrelated younger and older people with at least one skipped generation between them and reported mental health or wellbeing outcomes for children and young people were included in this review.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Campbell Collaboration. We conducted data extraction and Cochrane risk of bias assessments in EPPI reviewer.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Main Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>While we identified 500 evaluations of intergenerational interventions, where the impact on participating children and/or young people was evaluated this was most often limited to assessing their impact on attitudes to aging. We identified five studies eva","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1429","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142002532","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
Value chain interventions for improving women's economic empowerment: A mixed-methods systematic review and meta-analysis: A systematic review 提高妇女经济能力的价值链干预措施：混合方法的系统综述和荟萃分析：系统综述。
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Pub Date : 2024-08-12 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1428
Suchi Kapoor Malhotra, Swati Mantri, Neha Gupta, Ratika Bhandari, Ralph Nii Armah, Hamdiyah Alhassan, Sarah Young, Howard White, Ranjitha Puskur, Hugh Sharma Waddington, Edoardo Masset

Background

Value chain interventions have become widespread throughout the international development sector over the last 20 years, and there is a need to evaluate their effectiveness in improving women's welfare across multiple dimensions. Agricultural value chains are influenced by socio-cultural norms and gender dynamics that have an impact on the distribution of resources, benefits, and access to opportunities. While women play a critical role in agriculture, they are generally confined to the least-valued parts of the value chain with the lowest economic returns, depending on the local, social and institutional contexts.

Objectives

The review assesses the effectiveness of approaches, strategies and interventions focused on women's engagement in agricultural value chains that lead to women's economic empowerment in low- and middle-income countries. It explores the contextual barriers and facilitators that determine women's participation in value chains and ultimately impact their effectiveness.

Search Methods

We searched completed and on-going studies from Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection (Social Sciences Citation Index [SSCI], Science Citation Index Expanded [SCI-EXPANDED], Conference Proceedings Citation Index – Science [CPCI-S], Conference Proceedings Citation Index – Social Science & Humanities [CPCI-SSH], and Emerging Sources Citation Index [ESCI]), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, EconLit, Business Source Premier, APA PsycInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane, Database of Systematic Reviews, CAB Abstracts and Sociological Abstracts. We also searched relevant websites such as Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers (CGIAR); the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD); AgriProFocus; the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF); Donor Committee for Enterprise Development; the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO); the International Labour Organisation (ILO); the Netherlands Development Organisation; USAID; the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation; the International Food Policy Research Institute; World Agroforestry; the International Livestock Research Institute; the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office; the British Library for Development Studies (BLDS); AGRIS; the IMMANA grant database; the 3ie impact evaluation database; Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA); The Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL); the World Bank IEG evaluations; the USAID Development Data Library; Experience Clearinghouse; the proceedings of the Agr

背景：在过去的 20 年中，价值链干预措施已在国际发展领域得到广泛应用，因此有必要评估这些措施在多方面改善妇女福利的有效性。农业价值链受到社会文化规范和性别动态的影响，对资源、利益和机会的分配产生了影响。虽然妇女在农业中发挥着关键作用，但根据当地、社会和制度环境的不同，她们通常被限制在价值链中价值最低、经济回报率最低的部分：本综述评估了以妇女参与农业价值链为重点的方法、战略和干预措施的有效性，这些方法、战略和干预措施可增强中低收入国家妇女的经济权能。它探讨了决定妇女参与价值链并最终影响其有效性的背景障碍和促进因素：我们检索了 Scopus、Web of Science Core Collection（社会科学引文索引[SSCI]、科学引文索引扩展版[SCI-EXPANDED]、会议录引文索引-科学[CPCI-S]、会议录引文索引-社会科学与人文科学[CPCI-SSH]）中已完成和正在进行的研究、和新兴资源引文索引 [ESCI]）、国际社会科学书目、EconLit、Business Source Premier、APA PsycInfo、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials、Cochrane、Database of Systematic Reviews、CAB Abstracts 和 Sociological Abstracts。我们还搜索了相关网站，如国际农业研究中心联合会 (CGIAR)、国际农业发展基金 (IFAD)、AgriProFocus、比尔及梅林达-盖茨基金会 (BMGF)、企业发展捐助委员会、联合国粮食及农业组织 (FAO)、国际劳工组织 (ILO)、荷兰发展组织、美国国际开发署 (USAID)、瑞士发展与合作署、国际粮食政策研究所 (International Food Policy Research Institute)、世界农林业 (World Agroforestry)、国际家畜研究所 (International Livestock Research Institute)、外交、联邦与发展办公室 (Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office)；英国发展研究图书馆 (BLDS)；AGRIS；IMMANA 赠款数据库；3ie 影响评估数据库；创新扶贫行动 (IPA)；阿卜杜勒-拉蒂夫-贾米尔扶贫行动实验室 (J-PAL)；世界银行 IEG 评估；美国国际开发署发展数据图书馆；经验交流中心；农业、营养与健康学院会议记录；非洲经济研究中心 (CSAE) 会议记录；东北大学发展联盟 (NEUDC) 会议记录；以及世界银行经济评论。数据库搜索于 2022 年 3 月进行，网站搜索于 2022 年 8 月完成：审查包括评估经济赋权成果的价值链干预措施。数据收集与分析：两位综述作者独立评估研究的纳入情况、提取数据、严格评估研究并综合研究结果：我们发现，价值链干预措施成功地改善了预期受益者的经济状况。干预措施可改善妇女的经济成果，如收入、资产持有量、生产率和储蓄，但这些效果的规模较小，且受到方法质量可信度低的限制。荟萃分析表明，这更多地是通过获得技能和改进投入实现的，而不是通过改善进入有利可图市场的机会实现的。有关干预措施的定性证据表明，文化障碍和其他制约因素依然存在。在撒哈拉以南非洲和南亚实施的干预措施在所考虑的所有结果方面一直较为成功，但在世界其他地区开展的研究很少：审查得出的结论是，价值链干预措施增强了妇女的权能，但程度可能低于预期。经济赋权并不能立即转化为家庭和社区的赋权。干预措施要么应降低对赋权目标的预期，要么应以确保提高妇女参与率和获得更大决策权的方式实施。
{"title":"Value chain interventions for improving women's economic empowerment: A mixed-methods systematic review and meta-analysis: A systematic review","authors":"Suchi Kapoor Malhotra,&nbsp;Swati Mantri,&nbsp;Neha Gupta,&nbsp;Ratika Bhandari,&nbsp;Ralph Nii Armah,&nbsp;Hamdiyah Alhassan,&nbsp;Sarah Young,&nbsp;Howard White,&nbsp;Ranjitha Puskur,&nbsp;Hugh Sharma Waddington,&nbsp;Edoardo Masset","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1428","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1428","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Value chain interventions have become widespread throughout the international development sector over the last 20 years, and there is a need to evaluate their effectiveness in improving women's welfare across multiple dimensions. Agricultural value chains are influenced by socio-cultural norms and gender dynamics that have an impact on the distribution of resources, benefits, and access to opportunities. While women play a critical role in agriculture, they are generally confined to the least-valued parts of the value chain with the lowest economic returns, depending on the local, social and institutional contexts.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The review assesses the effectiveness of approaches, strategies and interventions focused on women's engagement in agricultural value chains that lead to women's economic empowerment in low- and middle-income countries. It explores the contextual barriers and facilitators that determine women's participation in value chains and ultimately impact their effectiveness.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Search Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We searched completed and on-going studies from Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection (Social Sciences Citation Index [SSCI], Science Citation Index Expanded [SCI-EXPANDED], Conference Proceedings Citation Index – Science [CPCI-S], Conference Proceedings Citation Index – Social Science &amp; Humanities [CPCI-SSH], and Emerging Sources Citation Index [ESCI]), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, EconLit, Business Source Premier, APA PsycInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane, Database of Systematic Reviews, CAB Abstracts and Sociological Abstracts. We also searched relevant websites such as Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers (CGIAR); the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD); AgriProFocus; the Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF); Donor Committee for Enterprise Development; the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO); the International Labour Organisation (ILO); the Netherlands Development Organisation; USAID; the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation; the International Food Policy Research Institute; World Agroforestry; the International Livestock Research Institute; the Foreign, Commonwealth &amp; Development Office; the British Library for Development Studies (BLDS); AGRIS; the IMMANA grant database; the 3ie impact evaluation database; Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA); The Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL); the World Bank IEG evaluations; the USAID Development Data Library; Experience Clearinghouse; the proceedings of the Agr","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11317815/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141972016","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
Revisiting the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural therapy for reducing reoffending in the criminal justice system: A systematic review 重新审视认知行为疗法对减少刑事司法系统中重新犯罪的有效性：系统回顾。
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Pub Date : 2024-07-31 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1425
Andrew Smith, Anton Roberts, Karolina Krzemieniewska-Nandwani, Elizabeth Eggins, Will Cook, Chris Fox, Shadd Maruna, Stephanie Wallace, Kirstine Szifris

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The proposed systematic review is an update to, and extension of, Lipsey et al. (2007). As such we build on their previous aims to: (i) Assess and synthesise the overall impact of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) on offender recidivism; (ii) Examine possible sources of variability in the effectiveness of CBT. Data permitting, we will examine if the effectiveness of CBT varies by: (a) Characteristics of the CBT intervention (e.g., cognitive restructuring vs. cognitive skills training, group v. individual implementation; and/or custodial v. community setting, and/or), (b) Characteristics of the population (e.g., juveniles vs. adult offenders), (c) Implementation factors (e.g., implementing practitioner, use of structured/manualised approaches, delivery mode, and/or programme duration or intensity), (d) Evaluation methods (e.g., randomised vs. non-randomised research designs); (iv) Determine whether there is a decline in the effect of CBT on recidivism over time; and (v) Investigate whether there is an interaction between implementation factors and time in terms of the effect on recidivism.

这是坎贝尔系统综述的协议。目标如下。拟议的系统综述是对 Lipsey 等人（2007 年）的更新和扩展。因此，我们以他们之前的目标为基础：(i) 评估和综合认知行为疗法（CBT）对罪犯累犯的总体影响；(ii) 研究 CBT 效果变化的可能来源。在数据允许的情况下，我们将研究认知行为疗法的效果是否因以下因素而异：(a) 干预方法的特点（如认知重组与认知技能训练、小组与个人实施；和/或监禁与社区环境，和/或），(b) 人群特点（如青少年与成年罪犯），(c) 实施因素（如、(d) 评估方法（如随机研究设计与非随机研究设计）；(iv) 确定随着时间的推移，CBT 对惯犯的影响是否会下降；以及 (v) 调查实施因素与时间之间是否存在相互作用，从而影响对惯犯的影响。
{"title":"Revisiting the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural therapy for reducing reoffending in the criminal justice system: A systematic review","authors":"Andrew Smith,&nbsp;Anton Roberts,&nbsp;Karolina Krzemieniewska-Nandwani,&nbsp;Elizabeth Eggins,&nbsp;Will Cook,&nbsp;Chris Fox,&nbsp;Shadd Maruna,&nbsp;Stephanie Wallace,&nbsp;Kirstine Szifris","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1425","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1425","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The proposed systematic review is an update to, and extension of, Lipsey et al. (2007). As such we build on their previous aims to: (i) Assess and synthesise the overall impact of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) on offender recidivism; (ii) Examine possible sources of variability in the effectiveness of CBT. Data permitting, we will examine if the effectiveness of CBT varies by: (a) Characteristics of the CBT intervention (e.g., cognitive restructuring vs. cognitive skills training, group v. individual implementation; and/or custodial v. community setting, and/or), (b) Characteristics of the population (e.g., juveniles vs. adult offenders), (c) Implementation factors (e.g., implementing practitioner, use of structured/manualised approaches, delivery mode, and/or programme duration or intensity), (d) Evaluation methods (e.g., randomised vs. non-randomised research designs); (iv) Determine whether there is a decline in the effect of CBT on recidivism over time; and (v) Investigate whether there is an interaction between implementation factors and time in terms of the effect on recidivism.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11289900/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141861093","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: Mindfulness-based interventions for improving tic-related symptoms in children and adults with chronic tic disorder and Tourette's disorder: A systematic review 方案：基于正念的干预措施，用于改善患有慢性抽动障碍和妥瑞症的儿童和成人的抽动相关症状：系统综述。
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Pub Date : 2024-07-21 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1427
Ilana Singer, Méliza Gagnon, Julie B. Leclerc

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (prototype). The objectives are as follows: This systematic review aims to summarize the available scientific literature on the effect of mindfulness-based approaches in children and adults with Chronic Tic Disorder (CTD) or Tourette Disorder (TD). More specifically, the research question is: What is the effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions in reducing tic severity and improving overall functioning, quality of life, and co-occurring symptoms in children and adults with CTD or TD?

这是一份科克伦综述（原型）协议。目标如下：本系统综述旨在总结关于正念方法对患有慢性抽搐症（CTD）或抽动障碍（TD）的儿童和成人的影响的现有科学文献。更具体地说，研究问题是：基于正念的干预措施在降低抽搐严重程度、改善整体功能、生活质量以及儿童和成人 CTD 或 TD 并发症状方面的效果如何？
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Mindfulness-based interventions for improving tic-related symptoms in children and adults with chronic tic disorder and Tourette's disorder: A systematic review","authors":"Ilana Singer,&nbsp;Méliza Gagnon,&nbsp;Julie B. Leclerc","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1427","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1427","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 <p>This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (prototype). The objectives are as follows: This systematic review aims to summarize the available scientific literature on the effect of mindfulness-based approaches in children and adults with Chronic Tic Disorder (CTD) or Tourette Disorder (TD). More specifically, the research question is: What is the effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions in reducing tic severity and improving overall functioning, quality of life, and co-occurring symptoms in children and adults with CTD or TD?</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11260994/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141749181","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
Psychological and psychosocial determinants of COVID related face covering behaviours: A systematic review 与 COVID 相关的捂脸行为的心理和社会心理决定因素：系统综述。
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Pub Date : 2024-07-20 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1422
Rachel Leonard, Sean R. O'Connor, Jennifer Hanratty, Ciara Keenan, Yuan Chi, Jenny Ferguson, Ariana Axiaq, Anna Volz, Ceri Welsh, Kerry Campbell, Victoria Hawkins, Sarah Miller, Declan Bradley, Martin Dempster

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, has resulted in illness, deaths and societal disruption on a global scale. Societies have implemented various control measures to reduce transmission of the virus and mitigate its impact. Individual behavioural changes are crucial to the successful implementation of these measures. One commonly recommended measure to limit risk of infection is face covering. It is important to identify those factors that can predict the uptake and maintenance of face covering.

Objectives

We aimed to identify and synthesise the evidence on malleable psychological and psychosocial factors that determine uptake and adherence to face covering aimed at reducing the risk of infection or transmission of COVID-19.

Search Methods

We searched various literature sources including electronic databases (Medline ALL, Child Development & Adolescent Studies, ERIC, PsycInfo, CINAHL & Web of Science), web searches, conference proceedings, government reports, other repositories of literature and grey literature. The search strategy was built around three concepts of interest including (1) context (terms relating to COVID19), (2) behaviour of interest and (3) terms related to psychological and psychosocial determinants of COVID Health-Related Behaviours and adherence or compliance with face covering, to capture malleable determines. Searches capture studies up until October 2021.

Selection Criteria

Eligibility criteria included observational studies (both retrospective and prospective) and experimental studies that measure and report malleable psychological and psychosocial determinants and handwashing at an individual level, amongst the general public. Screening was supported by the Cochrane Crowd. Studies titles and abstracts were screened against the eligibility criteria by three independent screeners. Following this, all potentially relevant studies were screened at full-text level by the research team. All conflicts between screeners were resolved by discussion between the core research team.

Data Collection and Analysis

All data extraction was managed in EPPI-Reviewer software. All eligible studies, identified through full-text screening were extracted by one author. We extracted data on study information, population, determinan

背景：由 SARS-CoV-2 病毒引起的 COVID-19 大流行在全球范围内造成了疾病、死亡和社会混乱。社会已采取各种控制措施，以减少病毒传播并减轻其影响。个人行为的改变对这些措施的成功实施至关重要。通常推荐的一种限制感染风险的措施是遮盖面部。确定哪些因素可以预测面部遮盖的接受和维持情况非常重要：我们旨在确定并综合有关可塑的心理和社会心理因素的证据，这些因素决定了是否采取和坚持遮盖面部以降低 COVID-19 的感染或传播风险：我们搜索了各种文献来源，包括电子数据库（Medline ALL、儿童发展与青少年研究、ERIC、PsycInfo、CINAHL 和 Web of Science）、网络搜索、会议记录、政府报告、其他文献库和灰色文献。搜索策略围绕三个感兴趣的概念展开，包括：(1) 背景（与 COVID19 相关的术语）；(2) 感兴趣的行为；(3) 与 COVID 健康相关行为的心理和社会心理决定因素相关的术语，以及坚持或遵守遮盖面部的行为，以捕捉可塑的决定因素。筛选标准：资格标准包括观察性研究（包括回顾性研究和前瞻性研究）和实验性研究，这些研究测量并报告了大众中个人层面的可塑性心理和社会心理决定因素以及洗手情况。筛选工作得到了 Cochrane Crowd 的支持。由三位独立筛选员根据资格标准对研究标题和摘要进行筛选。随后，研究小组对所有可能相关的研究进行全文筛选。筛选者之间的所有冲突均由核心研究团队讨论解决：所有数据提取均通过 EPPI-Reviewer 软件进行管理。通过全文筛选确定的所有符合条件的研究均由一位作者负责提取。我们提取了有关研究信息、人群、决定因素、行为和效果的数据。第二位作者检查了所有收录论文中 20% 的数据提取情况。所有冲突均由两位作者讨论，直至达成共识。我们使用乔安娜-布里格斯研究所（Joanna Briggs Institute）针对横断面研究的质量评估工具的改编版对所有纳入研究的方法学质量进行了评估：我们的初步搜索结果为 23,587 项，其中 23 项被纳入本综述。所纳入的研究均为横断面研究，来自 9 个国家，共有 54,401 名参与者。绝大多数研究的样本都来自普通公众，其中有 5 项研究针对特定样本。所有纳入的研究都考虑了 18 岁以上的人群。其中 10 项研究的质量被评为不明确，10 项被评为低质量，3 项被评为高偏倚风险，主要是由于缺乏对招募、样本特征和方法的报告。10 项研究被纳入荟萃分析，16 项研究被纳入叙述性综述。荟萃分析结果表明，对 COVID-19 的了解程度（0.341，95% 置信区间 [CI] = 0.06，0.530，I 2 = 100%）是与遮盖面部行为最相关的可塑决定因素。COVID-19 的易感性（r = 0.088，95% CI = -0.004，0.180，I 2 = 80%）和 COVID 相关的担忧和焦虑（r = 0.064，95% CI = -0.066，0.191，I 2 = 93%）对遮盖面部行为几乎没有影响。在叙述性综述中，发现感知到的行为益处和有效性与戴面具行为之间的关联性最强：了解各种可塑决定因素对 COVID 相关遮面行为的影响有助于制定和实施干预措施和公共卫生运动，以促进 COVID-19 或其他呼吸道感染潜在新发病例中的遮面行为。在未来的研究和政策中，对 COVID 的了解以及对遮盖面部好处的认知值得进一步考虑。
{"title":"Psychological and psychosocial determinants of COVID related face covering behaviours: A systematic review","authors":"Rachel Leonard,&nbsp;Sean R. O'Connor,&nbsp;Jennifer Hanratty,&nbsp;Ciara Keenan,&nbsp;Yuan Chi,&nbsp;Jenny Ferguson,&nbsp;Ariana Axiaq,&nbsp;Anna Volz,&nbsp;Ceri Welsh,&nbsp;Kerry Campbell,&nbsp;Victoria Hawkins,&nbsp;Sarah Miller,&nbsp;Declan Bradley,&nbsp;Martin Dempster","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1422","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1422","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, has resulted in illness, deaths and societal disruption on a global scale. Societies have implemented various control measures to reduce transmission of the virus and mitigate its impact. Individual behavioural changes are crucial to the successful implementation of these measures. One commonly recommended measure to limit risk of infection is face covering. It is important to identify those factors that can predict the uptake and maintenance of face covering.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We aimed to identify and synthesise the evidence on malleable psychological and psychosocial factors that determine uptake and adherence to face covering aimed at reducing the risk of infection or transmission of COVID-19.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Search Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We searched various literature sources including electronic databases (Medline ALL, Child Development &amp; Adolescent Studies, ERIC, PsycInfo, CINAHL &amp; Web of Science), web searches, conference proceedings, government reports, other repositories of literature and grey literature. The search strategy was built around three concepts of interest including (1) context (terms relating to COVID19), (2) behaviour of interest and (3) terms related to psychological and psychosocial determinants of COVID Health-Related Behaviours and adherence or compliance with face covering, to capture malleable determines. Searches capture studies up until October 2021.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Selection Criteria</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Eligibility criteria included observational studies (both retrospective and prospective) and experimental studies that measure and report malleable psychological and psychosocial determinants and handwashing at an individual level, amongst the general public. Screening was supported by the Cochrane Crowd. Studies titles and abstracts were screened against the eligibility criteria by three independent screeners. Following this, all potentially relevant studies were screened at full-text level by the research team. All conflicts between screeners were resolved by discussion between the core research team.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>All data extraction was managed in EPPI-Reviewer software. All eligible studies, identified through full-text screening were extracted by one author. We extracted data on study information, population, determinan","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11260276/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141735160","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
Interventions for intimate partner violence during the perinatal period: A scoping review: A systematic review 围产期亲密伴侣暴力干预措施：范围综述：系统综述。
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Pub Date : 2024-07-15 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1423
Olivia Mercier, Sarah Yu Fu, Rachel Filler, Alexie Leclerc, Kari Sampsel, Karine Fournier, Mark Walker, Shi Wu Wen, Katherine Muldoon

Background

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a prevalent global health problem. IPV that occurs before pregnancy often continues during the perinatal period, resulting in ongoing violence and many adverse maternal, obstetrical, and neonatal outcomes.

Objectives

This scoping review is designed to broadly capture all potential interventions for perinatal IPV and describe their core components and measured outcomes.

Search Methods

We conducted a search for empirical studies describing IPV interventions in the perinatal population in June 2022. The search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts, ClinicalTrials.gov and MedRxiv. Hand searching of references from select articles was also performed.

Selection Criteria

Included studies described an intervention for those experiencing IPV during the perinatal period, including 12 months before pregnancy, while pregnant or in the 12 months post-partum. The search encompassed January 2000 to June 2022 and only peer-reviewed studies written in either English or French were included. Included interventions focused on the survivor exposed to IPV, rather than healthcare professionals administering the intervention. Interventions designed to reduce IPV revictimization or any adverse maternal, obstetrical, or neonatal health outcomes as well as social outcomes related to IPV victimization were included.

Data Collections and Analysis

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Campbell Collaboration.

Main Results

In total, 10,079 titles and abstracts were screened and 226 proceeded to full text screening. A total of 67 studies included perinatal IPV interventions and were included in the final sample. These studies included a total of 27,327 participants. Included studies originated from 19 countries, and the majority were randomized controlled trials (n = 43). Most studies were of moderate or low quality. Interventions included home visitation, educational modules, counseling, and cash transfer programs and occurred primarily in community obstetrician and gyn

背景：亲密伴侣暴力（IPV）是一个普遍存在的全球性健康问题。孕前发生的 IPV 通常会在围产期持续存在，导致暴力不断发生，并对孕产妇、产科和新生儿造成许多不利影响：本范围综述旨在广泛收集针对围产期 IPV 的所有潜在干预措施，并描述其核心内容和测量结果：我们检索了 2022 年 6 月描述围产期 IPV 干预措施的实证研究。检索范围包括 MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsycInfo、CINAHL、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials、Web of Science、Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts、ClinicalTrials.gov 和 MedRxiv。此外，还对部分文章的参考文献进行了人工检索：所纳入的研究描述了针对围产期（包括怀孕前 12 个月、怀孕期间或产后 12 个月）内遭受 IPV 者的干预措施。检索时间为 2000 年 1 月至 2022 年 6 月，仅纳入以英语或法语撰写的同行评审研究。所纳入的干预措施主要针对遭受 IPV 的幸存者，而非实施干预措施的医护人员。数据收集与分析：我们采用了坎贝尔合作组织所要求的标准方法程序：共筛选了 10,079 篇标题和摘要，其中 226 篇进入全文筛选。共有 67 项研究包含围产期 IPV 干预措施，并被纳入最终样本。这些研究共纳入 27,327 名参与者。纳入的研究来自 19 个国家，大部分为随机对照试验（n = 43）。大多数研究的质量为中等或较低。干预措施包括家访、教育模块、咨询和现金转移计划，主要在社区妇产科诊所、医院或参与者家中进行。大多数干预措施侧重于减少 IPV 的再次伤害（38 例）、提高幸存者对暴力的认识或接受程度、对社区资源的了解以及减少暴力的行动（28 例），以及改善孕产妇的心理健康结果（26 例）。很少有研究评估了围产期 IPV 干预措施对产科、新生儿或儿童健康结果的影响：作者的结论：大多数针对围产期 IPV 的干预研究侧重于减少再次受害和改善心理健康结果，很少有研究包括产科、新生儿和其他身体健康结果。未来的干预措施应更加重视针对产妇和新生儿的结果，以便对 IPV 幸存者及其婴儿的生活和家庭产生尽可能大的影响。
{"title":"Interventions for intimate partner violence during the perinatal period: A scoping review: A systematic review","authors":"Olivia Mercier,&nbsp;Sarah Yu Fu,&nbsp;Rachel Filler,&nbsp;Alexie Leclerc,&nbsp;Kari Sampsel,&nbsp;Karine Fournier,&nbsp;Mark Walker,&nbsp;Shi Wu Wen,&nbsp;Katherine Muldoon","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1423","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1423","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a prevalent global health problem. IPV that occurs before pregnancy often continues during the perinatal period, resulting in ongoing violence and many adverse maternal, obstetrical, and neonatal outcomes.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This scoping review is designed to broadly capture all potential interventions for perinatal IPV and describe their core components and measured outcomes.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Search Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We conducted a search for empirical studies describing IPV interventions in the perinatal population in June 2022. The search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts, ClinicalTrials.gov and MedRxiv. Hand searching of references from select articles was also performed.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Selection Criteria</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Included studies described an intervention for those experiencing IPV during the perinatal period, including 12 months before pregnancy, while pregnant or in the 12 months post-partum. The search encompassed January 2000 to June 2022 and only peer-reviewed studies written in either English or French were included. Included interventions focused on the survivor exposed to IPV, rather than healthcare professionals administering the intervention. Interventions designed to reduce IPV revictimization or any adverse maternal, obstetrical, or neonatal health outcomes as well as social outcomes related to IPV victimization were included.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Data Collections and Analysis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Campbell Collaboration.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Main Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In total, 10,079 titles and abstracts were screened and 226 proceeded to full text screening. A total of 67 studies included perinatal IPV interventions and were included in the final sample. These studies included a total of 27,327 participants. Included studies originated from 19 countries, and the majority were randomized controlled trials (<i>n</i> = 43). Most studies were of moderate or low quality. Interventions included home visitation, educational modules, counseling, and cash transfer programs and occurred primarily in community obstetrician and gyn","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11247475/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141621184","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
Psychological and psychosocial determinants of COVID-related handwashing behaviours: A systematic review 与 COVID 相关的洗手行为的心理和社会心理决定因素：系统综述。
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Pub Date : 2024-07-15 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1421
Rachel Leonard, Sean R. O'Connor, Jennifer Hanratty, Ciara Keenan, Yuan Chi, Jenny Ferguson, Ariana Axiaq, Anna Volz, Ceri Welsh, Kerry Campbell, Victoria Hawkins, Sarah Miller, Declan Bradley, Martin Dempster

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, has resulted in illness, deaths and societal disruption on a global scale. Societies have implemented various control measures to reduce transmission of the virus and mitigate its impact. Individual behavioural changes are crucial to the successful implementation of these measures. One commonly recommended measure to limit risk of infection is frequent handwashing. It is important to identify those factors that can predict the uptake and maintenance of handwashing.

Objectives

We aimed to identify and synthesise the evidence on malleable psychological and psychosocial factors that determine uptake and adherence to handwashing aimed at reducing the risk of infection or transmission of COVID-19.

Search Methods

We searched various literature sources including electronic databases (Medline ALL, Child Development & Adolescent Studies, ERIC, PsycInfo, CINAHL and Web of Science), web searches, conference proceedings, government reports, other repositories of literature and grey literature. The search strategy was built around three concepts of interest including (1) context (terms relating to COVID-19), (2) behaviour of interest and (3) terms related to psychological and psychosocial determinants of COVID Health-Related Behaviours and adherence or compliance with handwashing, to capture malleable determines. Searches capture studies up until October 2021.

Selection Criteria

Eligibility criteria included observational studies (both retrospective and prospective) and experimental studies that measure and report malleable psychological and psychosocial determinants and handwashing at an individual level, amongst the general public. Screening was supported by the Cochrane Crowd. Titles and abstracts were screened against the eligibility criteria by three independent screeners. Following this, all potentially relevant studies were screened at full-text level by the research team. All conflicts between screeners were resolved by discussion between the core research team.

Data Collection and Analysis

All data extraction was managed in EPPI-Reviewer software. All eligible studies, identified through full-text screening were extracted by one author. We extracted data on study information, population, determinant, behav

背景：由 SARS-CoV-2 病毒引起的 COVID-19 大流行在全球范围内造成了疾病、死亡和社会混乱。社会已采取各种控制措施，以减少病毒传播并减轻其影响。个人行为的改变对这些措施的成功实施至关重要。通常推荐的一项限制感染风险的措施是勤洗手。确定哪些因素可以预测是否接受和坚持洗手非常重要：我们旨在确定并综合有关可塑心理和社会心理因素的证据，这些因素决定了是否采取和坚持洗手，从而降低感染或传播 COVID-19 的风险：我们搜索了各种文献来源，包括电子数据库（Medline ALL、儿童发展与青少年研究、ERIC、PsycInfo、CINAHL 和 Web of Science）、网络搜索、会议记录、政府报告、其他文献库和灰色文献。搜索策略围绕三个感兴趣的概念展开，包括：(1) 背景（与 COVID-19 相关的术语）；(2) 感兴趣的行为；(3) 与 COVID 健康相关行为的心理和社会心理决定因素以及坚持或遵守洗手相关的术语，以捕捉可塑的决定因素。筛选标准：资格标准包括观察性研究（包括回顾性研究和前瞻性研究）和实验性研究，这些研究测量并报告了可塑的心理和社会心理决定因素以及普通大众个人层面的洗手情况。筛选工作得到了 Cochrane Crowd 的支持。三名独立筛选员根据资格标准对标题和摘要进行筛选。随后，研究团队对所有可能相关的研究进行全文筛选。筛选者之间的所有冲突均由核心研究团队讨论解决：所有数据提取均通过 EPPI-Reviewer 软件进行管理。通过全文筛选确定的所有符合条件的研究均由一位作者负责提取。我们提取了有关研究信息、人群、决定因素、行为和效果的数据。第二位作者检查了所有收录论文中 20% 的数据提取情况。我们使用乔安娜-布里格斯研究所（Joanna Briggs Institute）的横断面研究质量评估工具（Quality appraisal tool）的改编版对所有纳入研究的方法学质量进行了评估：我们的初步搜索结果为 23,587 项，其中 56 项研究被纳入本综述。纳入的研究均为横断面设计，来自 22 个国家，共有 199376 名参与者。绝大多数研究的样本都来自普通公众，其中 8 项研究的重点是特定样本。所有纳入的研究都考虑了 18 岁以上的人群。大多数研究的质量良好（30 项研究被评为低偏倚风险），8 项研究被评为高偏倚风险，主要原因是缺乏对招募、样本特征和方法的报告。研究结果表明，COVID-19（担忧[0.381，置信区间[CI] = 0.270-0.482，I 2 = 92%）和焦虑（0.308，CI = 0.154-0.448，I 2 = 91%]）、对 COVID-19 的了解（0.323，CI = 0.223-0.417，I 2 = 94%）和感知的社会规范（0.303，CI = 0.184-0.413，I 2 = 92%）是与洗手最相关的可塑决定因素。认为的严重程度（0.006，CI = -0.011-0.023）和 COVID-19 的易感性（0.041，CI = -0.034-0.115）对洗手行为几乎没有影响：了解各种可塑性决定因素对与 COVID 相关的洗手行为的影响有助于制定和实施干预措施和公共卫生运动，以促进在 COVID-19 或其他呼吸道感染的潜在新一波流行中的洗手行为。在未来的研究和政策中，需要进一步考虑对 COVID 的情绪、对 COVID 的了解以及对社会规范的认知。
{"title":"Psychological and psychosocial determinants of COVID-related handwashing behaviours: A systematic review","authors":"Rachel Leonard,&nbsp;Sean R. O'Connor,&nbsp;Jennifer Hanratty,&nbsp;Ciara Keenan,&nbsp;Yuan Chi,&nbsp;Jenny Ferguson,&nbsp;Ariana Axiaq,&nbsp;Anna Volz,&nbsp;Ceri Welsh,&nbsp;Kerry Campbell,&nbsp;Victoria Hawkins,&nbsp;Sarah Miller,&nbsp;Declan Bradley,&nbsp;Martin Dempster","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1421","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1421","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, has resulted in illness, deaths and societal disruption on a global scale. Societies have implemented various control measures to reduce transmission of the virus and mitigate its impact. Individual behavioural changes are crucial to the successful implementation of these measures. One commonly recommended measure to limit risk of infection is frequent handwashing. It is important to identify those factors that can predict the uptake and maintenance of handwashing.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We aimed to identify and synthesise the evidence on malleable psychological and psychosocial factors that determine uptake and adherence to handwashing aimed at reducing the risk of infection or transmission of COVID-19.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Search Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We searched various literature sources including electronic databases (Medline ALL, Child Development &amp; Adolescent Studies, ERIC, PsycInfo, CINAHL and Web of Science), web searches, conference proceedings, government reports, other repositories of literature and grey literature. The search strategy was built around three concepts of interest including (1) context (terms relating to COVID-19), (2) behaviour of interest and (3) terms related to psychological and psychosocial determinants of COVID Health-Related Behaviours and adherence or compliance with handwashing, to capture malleable determines. Searches capture studies up until October 2021.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Selection Criteria</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Eligibility criteria included observational studies (both retrospective and prospective) and experimental studies that measure and report malleable psychological and psychosocial determinants and handwashing at an individual level, amongst the general public. Screening was supported by the Cochrane Crowd. Titles and abstracts were screened against the eligibility criteria by three independent screeners. Following this, all potentially relevant studies were screened at full-text level by the research team. All conflicts between screeners were resolved by discussion between the core research team.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>All data extraction was managed in EPPI-Reviewer software. All eligible studies, identified through full-text screening were extracted by one author. We extracted data on study information, population, determinant, behav","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11247476/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141621185","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: Behavioral, information and monetary interventions to reduce energy consumption in households: A “living” systematic review 方案：减少家庭能源消耗的行为、信息和货币干预措施：活 "系统回顾。
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Pub Date : 2024-07-10 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1424
Tarun M. Khanna, Diana Danilenko, Mark Andor, Max Callaghan, Julian H. Elliott, Tim Repke, Luke A. Smith, Jorge Sanchez, T. V. Bhumika, Jan C. Minx

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: Our proposed systematic review and meta-analysis will integrate the evidence available from all sources to answer the following questions: (1) to what extent can information, behavioral and monetary interventions reduce energy consumption of households in residential buildings? (average treatment effect of interventions) (2) what is the relative effectiveness of interventions? (account for heterogeneity in treatment effects across and within studies) (3) how effective are combinations of different interventions?

这是坎贝尔系统综述的协议。目标如下：我们建议的系统综述和荟萃分析将整合所有来源的可用证据，以回答以下问题：（1）信息、行为和货币干预措施能在多大程度上降低住宅建筑中家庭的能源消耗？(干预措施的平均治疗效果）（2）干预措施的相对效果如何？(考虑到不同研究之间和研究内部治疗效果的异质性）（3）不同干预措施组合的效果如何？
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Behavioral, information and monetary interventions to reduce energy consumption in households: A “living” systematic review","authors":"Tarun M. Khanna,&nbsp;Diana Danilenko,&nbsp;Mark Andor,&nbsp;Max Callaghan,&nbsp;Julian H. Elliott,&nbsp;Tim Repke,&nbsp;Luke A. Smith,&nbsp;Jorge Sanchez,&nbsp;T. V. Bhumika,&nbsp;Jan C. Minx","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1424","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1424","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: Our proposed systematic review and meta-analysis will integrate the evidence available from all sources to answer the following questions: (1) to what extent can information, behavioral and monetary interventions reduce energy consumption of households in residential buildings? (average treatment effect of interventions) (2) what is the relative effectiveness of interventions? (account for heterogeneity in treatment effects across and within studies) (3) how effective are combinations of different interventions?</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11237337/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141591636","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
首页 上一页 下一页 尾页
类型
全部 化学•材料 生命科学 医学 物理 工程技术 环境•农林 材料科学 地球科学 法学 管理学 化学 环境科学与生态学 计算机科学 教育学 经济学 农林科学 人文科学 生物学 数学 物理与天体物理 心理学 综合性期刊 其他 工业工程 理学 历史学 农学 文学 信息工程
数据库
全部 ACS Publications Elsevier ieeexplore Springer The Royal Society of Chemistry Wiley
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
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