Guilherme G. Pinheiro, Carla Moleiro, David L. Rodrigues
This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The proposed overview of reviews aims to: (1) aggregate and systematize findings from multiple overviews of reviews, and offer a broader understanding of the factors, both facilitators and barriers related to PrEP awareness, uptake, and adherence among MSM; and (2) understand if there are gaps in the literature on potential facilitators and barriers that need greater analysis. Hence, the purpose of this overview of reviews aligns with Sustainable Development Goal 3 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, particularly with SDG 3.3, that is, end the epidemics of AIDS and other communicable diseases.
{"title":"PROTOCOL: PrEP (Non)Adherence Among Men Who Have Sex With Men: An Overview of Reviews: A Systematic Review","authors":"Guilherme G. Pinheiro, Carla Moleiro, David L. Rodrigues","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70047","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70047","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The proposed overview of reviews aims to: (1) aggregate and systematize findings from multiple overviews of reviews, and offer a broader understanding of the factors, both facilitators and barriers related to PrEP awareness, uptake, and adherence among MSM; and (2) understand if there are gaps in the literature on potential facilitators and barriers that need greater analysis. Hence, the purpose of this overview of reviews aligns with Sustainable Development Goal 3 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, particularly with SDG 3.3, that is, end the epidemics of AIDS and other communicable diseases.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"21 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70047","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144573732","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}
Matthew J. Teti, C. Clare Strange, Jordan M. Hyatt, Robert J. Kane
This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The current review will provide criminal justice and policymakers with information regarding the efficacy and effectiveness of co-responder programs on criminal justice and social service outcomes. Specifically, the authors will address the following research questions: (1) Do co-responder police-mental health programs reduce the frequency or likelihood of criminal justice system involvement (e.g., offending, police welfare check, victimization) among those experiencing homelessness, drug and/or alcohol addiction, or mental health crises (hereafter “vulnerable populations”)? (2) Do co-responder police-mental health programs improve social service outcomes among vulnerable populations? (3) Do the effects of co-responder police-mental health programs vary by the following factors: study research design, geographical location, type of population, type of outcome (e.g., official vs. unofficial reports), and intervention characteristics (e.g., setting, type of practitioners)?
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Co-Responding Police-Mental Health Programs and the Impact on Justice and Social Service Outcomes: A Systematic Review","authors":"Matthew J. Teti, C. Clare Strange, Jordan M. Hyatt, Robert J. Kane","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70051","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The current review will provide criminal justice and policymakers with information regarding the efficacy and effectiveness of co-responder programs on criminal justice and social service outcomes. Specifically, the authors will address the following research questions: (1) Do co-responder police-mental health programs reduce the frequency or likelihood of criminal justice system involvement (e.g., offending, police welfare check, victimization) among those experiencing homelessness, drug and/or alcohol addiction, or mental health crises (hereafter “vulnerable populations”)? (2) Do co-responder police-mental health programs improve social service outcomes among vulnerable populations? (3) Do the effects of co-responder police-mental health programs vary by the following factors: study research design, geographical location, type of population, type of outcome (e.g., official vs. unofficial reports), and intervention characteristics (e.g., setting, type of practitioners)?</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"21 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70051","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144573733","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}
Imasha Upulini Jayasinghe, Hannah F. Jones, E. Scott Graham, Kyle Eggleton, Russell C. Dale, Jane M. Alsweiler
Objective
The aim of this scoping review is to identify and map the available evidence on the association of antenatal cytokine concentrations with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) of the offspring and to inform future research avenues.
Introduction
NDDs are a heterogeneous group of conditions with onset in childhood which affect functioning due to altered brain development. NDDs have a multifactorial aetiology with genetic, epigenetic, and environmental factors, including the foetal intrauterine environment. Maternal immune activation (MIA) alters the intrauterine milieu of the developing foetus, and, in animal studies, has been shown to affect the brain cytoarchitecture, neuronal circuitry and glial function of the offspring. One of the mechanisms of MIA is through cytokines that may play a crucial role in affecting foetal neurodevelopment by crossing the placenta and altering cellular programming. Antenatal cytokine concentrations have the potential to be biomarkers for children at risk of NDDs, and treating a maladaptive cytokine response may reduce the risk of NDDs in these children. Therefore, it is important to understand the scope of evidence available on the association of antenatal cytokine concentration with offspring NDDs and identify the research gaps in this field.
Inclusion Criteria
The review will consider all primary and grey literature which focuses on the review objective. The review will not be limited by any time period or any language of the sources of evidence.
Method
The review will be conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodological framework for scoping reviews. Review questions and inclusion criteria will follow the Population, Concept, Context framework. A comprehensive search will be performed in SCOPUS, MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), Web of Science core collection, Embase (Ovid), CINAHL databases and trial registers. Grey literature will be searched in Google Scholar, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, Open Access Theses and Dissertations and library catalogues with the assistance of the librarian. Two independent reviewers will perform title-abstract screening and full-text screening. Eligible studies will be critically appraised using JBI critical appraisal tools. Data from eligible studies will be extracted by two reviewers using pretested data extraction tools. Findings will be presented in a final scoping review with a narrative summary and
目的本综述的目的是确定和绘制产前细胞因子浓度与后代神经发育障碍（ndd）相关的现有证据，并为未来的研究途径提供信息。ndd是一组异质性疾病，发病于儿童期，由于大脑发育改变而影响功能。ndd有多因素的病因，包括遗传、表观遗传和环境因素，包括胎儿宫内环境。母体免疫激活（MIA）改变胎儿发育的宫内环境，在动物研究中，已被证明会影响后代的脑细胞结构、神经回路和神经胶质功能。MIA的机制之一是通过细胞因子，细胞因子可能通过穿过胎盘和改变细胞程序在影响胎儿神经发育中起关键作用。产前细胞因子浓度有可能成为儿童ndd风险的生物标志物，治疗不适应的细胞因子反应可能会降低这些儿童ndd的风险。因此，了解产前细胞因子浓度与后代ndd相关的现有证据范围并确定该领域的研究空白是很重要的。纳入标准：本综述将考虑所有关注综述目标的主要文献和灰色文献。审查不受任何时间期限或证据来源的任何语言的限制。方法根据乔安娜布里格斯研究所（JBI）的范围评估方法框架进行评估。审查问题和纳入标准将遵循人口，概念，背景框架。将在SCOPUS、MEDLINE （Ovid）、PsycINFO （Ovid）、Web of Science核心合集、Embase （Ovid）、CINAHL数据库和试验注册库中进行全面检索。灰色文献将在b谷歌Scholar， ProQuest dissertation &；论文全球，开放存取的论文和学位论文和图书馆目录与图书管理员的协助。两位独立审稿人将进行标题摘要筛选和全文筛选。合格的研究将使用JBI关键评估工具进行严格评估。符合条件的研究的数据将由两名审稿人使用预先测试的数据提取工具提取。研究结果将以叙述摘要和图表形式在最后的范围审查中提出。绘制的发现和确定的研究空白将指导进一步研究评估产前细胞因子作为ndd的早期生物标志物，以及产前治疗降低ndd风险的潜力。审查方案在开放科学框架（链接：https://osf.io/twsuq）中注册。
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Association of Antenatal Cytokine Concentrations With Neurodevelopmental Disorders of the Offspring: A Scoping Review","authors":"Imasha Upulini Jayasinghe, Hannah F. Jones, E. Scott Graham, Kyle Eggleton, Russell C. Dale, Jane M. Alsweiler","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70053","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objective</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The aim of this scoping review is to identify and map the available evidence on the association of antenatal cytokine concentrations with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) of the offspring and to inform future research avenues.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>NDDs are a heterogeneous group of conditions with onset in childhood which affect functioning due to altered brain development. NDDs have a multifactorial aetiology with genetic, epigenetic, and environmental factors, including the foetal intrauterine environment. Maternal immune activation (MIA) alters the intrauterine milieu of the developing foetus, and, in animal studies, has been shown to affect the brain cytoarchitecture, neuronal circuitry and glial function of the offspring. One of the mechanisms of MIA is through cytokines that may play a crucial role in affecting foetal neurodevelopment by crossing the placenta and altering cellular programming. Antenatal cytokine concentrations have the potential to be biomarkers for children at risk of NDDs, and treating a maladaptive cytokine response may reduce the risk of NDDs in these children. Therefore, it is important to understand the scope of evidence available on the association of antenatal cytokine concentration with offspring NDDs and identify the research gaps in this field.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Inclusion Criteria</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The review will consider all primary and grey literature which focuses on the review objective. The review will not be limited by any time period or any language of the sources of evidence.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Method</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The review will be conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodological framework for scoping reviews. Review questions and inclusion criteria will follow the Population, Concept, Context framework. A comprehensive search will be performed in SCOPUS, MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), Web of Science core collection, Embase (Ovid), CINAHL databases and trial registers. Grey literature will be searched in Google Scholar, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, Open Access Theses and Dissertations and library catalogues with the assistance of the librarian. Two independent reviewers will perform title-abstract screening and full-text screening. Eligible studies will be critically appraised using JBI critical appraisal tools. Data from eligible studies will be extracted by two reviewers using pretested data extraction tools. Findings will be presented in a final scoping review with a narrative summary and","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"21 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70053","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144573214","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This is the protocol of a Campbell scoping review. This scoping review aims to identify and map the evidence regarding the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in physical activity (PA) interventions for breast cancer survivors (BCS), which includes examining the types of ICTs utilized, how they are applied, and their effects on BCS' PA-related outcomes. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist (PRISMA-ScR) was used to structure this protocol. The focus of the scoping review is guided by the mnemonic PCC (Population, Concept, Context) recommended by the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. PubMed, CINAHL (Ebsco), Web of Science (Clarivate), and SportDiscus (Ebsco) will be searched for peer-reviewed studies. We will include interventional studies using ICTs for PA promotion among BCS across the cancer care continuum. Our protocol incorporates information about the aims and importance of the scoping review, search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria, study selection, data extraction, quality assessment, and data synthesis. The total number and key characteristics of included studies will be reported in this scoping review. It will identify and map the current ICTs used in PA interventions, outline the methods and extent of their application, and summarize the related outcomes observed among BCS. Participation in PA remains insufficient among BCS despite its known benefits in lowering the risk of death and improving breast cancer prognosis. While technology-based interventions have received increased attention in recent years, there is still limited consensus within the scientific literature surrounding ICT-based PA interventions for BCS. The use of ICTs in PA interventions may promote PA among BCS and benefit their survivorship. This scoping review may lead to strategies for developing ICTs that are optimal to be used in PA interventions that benefit BCS, a large and growing population of cancer survivors. Additionally, it will identify knowledge gaps to enhance healthcare communication between healthcare practitioners and BCS using ICTs, which may promote PA and lead to improved cancer survivorship in this population. Registered and available at OSF (https://osf.io/hwde4/?view_only=be6ef619dc1a44b080bb61be32d5d56f).
这是坎贝尔公司范围审查的程序。本范围审查旨在确定和绘制关于在乳腺癌幸存者（BCS）的身体活动（PA）干预中使用信息通信技术（ict）的证据，其中包括检查所使用的ict类型，它们是如何应用的，以及它们对BCS的PA相关结果的影响。系统评价和荟萃分析扩展范围评价清单的首选报告项目（PRISMA-ScR）用于构建该方案。范围审查的重点由JBI证据综合手册推荐的助记法PCC（人口、概念、背景）指导。PubMed, CINAHL (Ebsco), Web of Science （Clarivate）和SportDiscus （Ebsco）将被搜索同行评审的研究。我们将在整个癌症治疗连续体的BCS中纳入使用ict促进PA的介入性研究。我们的方案包含了有关目的和范围审查的重要性、检索策略、纳入/排除标准、研究选择、数据提取、质量评估和数据综合的信息。纳入研究的总数和主要特征将在本范围综述中报告。它将确定和绘制目前在PA干预措施中使用的信息通信技术，概述其应用的方法和程度，并总结在BCS中观察到的相关结果。尽管已知PA在降低死亡风险和改善乳腺癌预后方面有益处，但BCS中参与PA的人数仍然不足。虽然基于技术的干预措施近年来受到越来越多的关注，但在科学文献中，关于基于信息通信技术的BCS PA干预措施的共识仍然有限。在PA干预中使用ict可促进BCS中的PA并有利于其生存。这种范围审查可能导致开发最适合用于有益于BCS（一个庞大且不断增长的癌症幸存者群体）的PA干预措施的信息通信技术的战略。此外，它将确定知识差距，以加强医疗保健从业人员和BCS之间使用ict的医疗保健沟通，这可能会促进PA并提高这一人群的癌症存活率。在OSF注册并可用（https://osf.io/hwde4/?view_only=be6ef619dc1a44b080bb61be32d5d56f）。
{"title":"PROTOCOL: The Application of Information and Communication Technologies in Physical Activity Interventions for Breast Cancer: A Scoping Review Protocol","authors":"Xin Chen, Maaz Imam, Yutong Yi, JJ Pionke, Lixcy Vega, Anna Arthur, Jessie Chin, Chungyi Chiu","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70044","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol of a Campbell scoping review. This scoping review aims to identify and map the evidence regarding the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in physical activity (PA) interventions for breast cancer survivors (BCS), which includes examining the types of ICTs utilized, how they are applied, and their effects on BCS' PA-related outcomes. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist (PRISMA-ScR) was used to structure this protocol. The focus of the scoping review is guided by the mnemonic PCC (Population, Concept, Context) recommended by the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. PubMed, CINAHL (Ebsco), Web of Science (Clarivate), and SportDiscus (Ebsco) will be searched for peer-reviewed studies. We will include interventional studies using ICTs for PA promotion among BCS across the cancer care continuum. Our protocol incorporates information about the aims and importance of the scoping review, search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria, study selection, data extraction, quality assessment, and data synthesis. The total number and key characteristics of included studies will be reported in this scoping review. It will identify and map the current ICTs used in PA interventions, outline the methods and extent of their application, and summarize the related outcomes observed among BCS. Participation in PA remains insufficient among BCS despite its known benefits in lowering the risk of death and improving breast cancer prognosis. While technology-based interventions have received increased attention in recent years, there is still limited consensus within the scientific literature surrounding ICT-based PA interventions for BCS. The use of ICTs in PA interventions may promote PA among BCS and benefit their survivorship. This scoping review may lead to strategies for developing ICTs that are optimal to be used in PA interventions that benefit BCS, a large and growing population of cancer survivors. Additionally, it will identify knowledge gaps to enhance healthcare communication between healthcare practitioners and BCS using ICTs, which may promote PA and lead to improved cancer survivorship in this population. Registered and available at OSF (https://osf.io/hwde4/?view_only=be6ef619dc1a44b080bb61be32d5d56f).</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"21 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70044","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144190951","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}
Details of new titles for systematic reviews or evidence and gap maps that have been accepted by the Editor of a Campbell Coordinating Group are published in each issue of the journal. If you would like to receive a copy of the approved title registration form, please send an email to the Managing Editor of the relevant Coordinating Group.
A list of discontinued protocols appears below these new titles. If you are interested in continuing a project, please get in touch with the Managing Editor of the relevant Coordinating Group or email [email protected].
The effectiveness of interventions in preventing or managing post-stroke cognitive impairments and enhancing the quality of life for stroke survivors: A protocol for systematic review of randomised controlled trials.
Memory Lucy Mtambo, Tetisya Ragunathan, Adeola Folayan, Kia Fatt Quek.
31 March 2025.
The Global Commercialization of Human Milk for Infant Consumption: A scoping review.
Heather Rusi, Jennifer Dion, Smitha Rodrigues, Merilee (Meredith) Brockway.
23 April 2025.
Exploring of Circadian Misalignments in Eating and Sleep on Health and School Performance in Children and Adolescents: A scoping review protocol.
Nur'Ain Mardhiyah Harun, Fatin Hanani Mazri, Zahara Abdul Manaf, Arimi Fitri Mat Ludin, Haslina Abdul Hamid, Nik Nur Izzati Nik Mohd Fakhruddin.
23 April 2025.
Access to financial resources to people with disabilities for entrepreneurship: A systematic review protocol.
Gamariel Mboya, Jackline Kiwelu, Gadiel Ketto, Howard Omukami.
27 March 2025.
Context, mechanisms and outcomes of reasonable adjustments across acute hospitals for people with intellectual disability: A scoping review protocol.
Mairead Moloney, Laurence Taggart, Owen Doody.
21 March 2025.
Telehealth services for outpatient mental health in rural populations: A systematic review.
Hannah Shanks, Julie Birkenmaier, Brandy Maynard.
31 March 2025.
Understanding the health care experiences of women who use illegal substances: An intersectional scoping review.
Marjan Kekanovich, Tyler Glass, Amanda Ross-White, Danielle Macdonald, Susan Bartels, Jacqueline Galica.
18 May 2025.
已被坎贝尔协调小组的编辑接受的系统评论或证据和差距图的新标题的详细信息发表在每期杂志上。如果您希望收到已批准的所有权登记表的副本，请发送电子邮件给相关协调小组的执行编辑。在这些新标题下面列出了已终止的协议清单。如果您有兴趣继续一个项目，请与相关协调小组的执行编辑联系，或发送电子邮件至[email protected]。干预措施在预防或管理脑卒中后认知障碍和提高脑卒中幸存者生活质量方面的有效性：随机对照试验系统评价方案纪念Lucy Mtambo， Tetisya Ragunathan, Adeola Folayan， Kia Fatt que2025年3月31日。婴儿食用母乳的全球商业化：范围审查。Heather Rusi, Jennifer Dion, Smitha Rodrigues, Merilee (Meredith) brockway， 2025年4月23日。探索儿童和青少年饮食和睡眠的昼夜节律失调对健康和学习成绩的影响：一项范围审查方案Nur'Ain Mardhiyah Harun, Fatin Hanani Mazri, Zahara Abdul Manaf, Arimi Fitri Mat Ludin, Haslina Abdul Hamid, Nik Nur Izzati Nik Mohd fakhruddin， 2025年4月23日。残疾人创业获得财政资源：系统审查方案。Gamariel Mboya, Jackline Kiwelu, gadel Ketto, Howard omukami， 2025年3月27日。智力残疾者急诊医院合理调整的背景、机制和结果：范围审查方案Mairead Moloney, Laurence Taggart, Owen doody， 2025年3月21日。农村人口门诊心理健康的远程医疗服务：系统综述。Hannah Shanks, Julie Birkenmaier, Brandy maynard， 2025年3月31日。了解使用非法药物的妇女的保健经验：交叉范围审查。Marjan Kekanovich, Tyler Glass, Amanda Ross-White, Danielle Macdonald, Susan Bartels, Jacqueline galica， 2025年5月18日。
{"title":"Campbell Title Registrations to Date – May 2025, and Discontinued Protocols","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70052","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70052","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Details of new titles for systematic reviews or evidence and gap maps that have been accepted by the Editor of a Campbell Coordinating Group are published in each issue of the journal. If you would like to receive a copy of the approved title registration form, please send an email to the Managing Editor of the relevant Coordinating Group.</p><p>A list of discontinued protocols appears below these new titles. If you are interested in continuing a project, please get in touch with the Managing Editor of the relevant Coordinating Group or email <span>[email protected]</span>.</p><p>The effectiveness of interventions in preventing or managing post-stroke cognitive impairments and enhancing the quality of life for stroke survivors: A protocol for systematic review of randomised controlled trials.</p><p>Memory Lucy Mtambo, Tetisya Ragunathan, Adeola Folayan, Kia Fatt Quek.</p><p>31 March 2025.</p><p>The Global Commercialization of Human Milk for Infant Consumption: A scoping review.</p><p>Heather Rusi, Jennifer Dion, Smitha Rodrigues, Merilee (Meredith) Brockway.</p><p>23 April 2025.</p><p>Exploring of Circadian Misalignments in Eating and Sleep on Health and School Performance in Children and Adolescents: A scoping review protocol.</p><p>Nur'Ain Mardhiyah Harun, Fatin Hanani Mazri, Zahara Abdul Manaf, Arimi Fitri Mat Ludin, Haslina Abdul Hamid, Nik Nur Izzati Nik Mohd Fakhruddin.</p><p>23 April 2025.</p><p>Access to financial resources to people with disabilities for entrepreneurship: A systematic review protocol.</p><p>Gamariel Mboya, Jackline Kiwelu, Gadiel Ketto, Howard Omukami.</p><p>27 March 2025.</p><p>Context, mechanisms and outcomes of reasonable adjustments across acute hospitals for people with intellectual disability: A scoping review protocol.</p><p>Mairead Moloney, Laurence Taggart, Owen Doody.</p><p>21 March 2025.</p><p>Telehealth services for outpatient mental health in rural populations: A systematic review.</p><p>Hannah Shanks, Julie Birkenmaier, Brandy Maynard.</p><p>31 March 2025.</p><p>Understanding the health care experiences of women who use illegal substances: An intersectional scoping review.</p><p>Marjan Kekanovich, Tyler Glass, Amanda Ross-White, Danielle Macdonald, Susan Bartels, Jacqueline Galica.</p><p>18 May 2025.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"21 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70052","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144190868","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>By Anthony Petrosino, Senior Fellow & Affiliated Faculty, Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy, George Mason University.</p><p>I was saddened to learn of the death of Professor David Farrington of Cambridge University on November 5, 2024. David was a pioneering figure in the field of criminology, whose work and influence spanned decades and left an indelible mark on both academic and practical approaches to crime and justice. He has long been considered one of the most influential criminologists in history. <i>ScholarGPS</i> ranks David at the top of its list of criminology scholars for impact, productivity, and quality (see https://scholargps.com/scholars/20828811083920/david-p-farrington). Some of us used to joke that we needed a forklift to move David's printed vita, which was well over 100 pages. There are many wonderful tributes to David and his professional accomplishments, so my comments will focus more on our personal connections (e.g., see J. W. Thulborn's tribute, “David P. Farrington, O. B. E., Distinguished Criminologist and Scholar 1944–2024” at https://www.crim.cam.ac.uk/news/david-p-farrington-obe-distinguished-criminologist-and-scholar-1944-2024. Those who want to better understand David's career pathway, at least through 1997, may appreciate this interview of him by Rolf Leiber for the American Society of Criminology Oral History of Criminology Project at: https://asc41.org/oral-history/david-farrington-interviewed-by-rolf-loeber-november-20-1997/).</p><p>One of my first interactions with David came when I was doing my dissertation in the mid-1990s. I reached out to him, as he was one of the leading proponents of using randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to test criminological interventions (Farrington <span>1983</span>), and he was excited to hear that my research focused on individual-level RCTs that tested a strategy to reduce criminal offending (Petrosino <span>1997</span>). He sent me relevant articles and reports, and periodically would send encouraging notes pushing me to finish the dissertation. Later, after I got the doctorate, I put in a proposal to Oxford University Press for a book based on my dissertation research. I later learned that David was a peer reviewer and the strongest advocate for Oxford to contract with me to write it. Unfortunately, my progress stalled on this book idea when other work commitments got in the way. David pushed me to finish, saying “it was the thing that would last,” and I wish I had listened to him, as I remain “bookless” as an author, all these years later.</p><p>We finally crossed paths in person in 1998 when I got involved in preliminary efforts to launch the Campbell Collaboration (Petrosino <span>2013</span>). Building on the success of its older sibling, the Cochrane Collaboration in health care, the Campbell Collaboration would prepare, update, and disseminate high-quality reviews of research on the effects of social and educational interventions. Sir Iain Chalmers had bee
安东尼·彼得罗西诺，高级研究员乔治梅森大学基于证据的犯罪政策中心附属学院。得知剑桥大学大卫·法灵顿教授于2024年11月5日逝世，我深感悲痛。大卫是犯罪学领域的先驱人物，他的工作和影响跨越了几十年，在犯罪和司法的学术和实践方法上都留下了不可磨灭的印记。他一直被认为是历史上最有影响力的犯罪学家之一。在ScholarGPS的犯罪学学者名单中，David在影响力、生产力和质量方面名列前茅（见https://scholargps.com/scholars/20828811083920/david-p-farrington）。我们中的一些人曾经开玩笑说，我们需要一辆叉车来移动戴维的印刷简历，那份简历有100多页。对大卫和他的专业成就有很多精彩的致敬，所以我的评论将更多地集中在我们的个人联系上(例如，参见J. W. Thulborn的致敬，“大卫P.法林顿，o.b.e.， 1944-2024年杰出的犯罪学家和学者”https://www.crim.cam.ac.uk/news/david-p-farrington-obe-distinguished-criminologist-and-scholar-1944-2024。那些想更好地了解大卫的职业道路的人，至少在1997年之前，可能会欣赏罗尔夫·利伯为美国犯罪学协会的犯罪学口述历史项目所做的采访：https://asc41.org/oral-history/david-farrington-interviewed-by-rolf-loeber-november-20-1997/).One我第一次与大卫接触是在20世纪90年代中期，当时我正在做论文。我联系了他，因为他是使用随机对照试验（rct）来测试犯罪学干预措施的主要支持者之一（Farrington 1983），他很高兴听到我的研究集中在个人水平的rct上，以测试减少犯罪的策略（Petrosino 1997）。他给我发了相关的文章和报告，并定期给我发鼓励的留言，督促我完成论文。后来，在我获得博士学位后，我向牛津大学出版社提交了一份基于我的论文研究的书的提案。后来我才知道，大卫是一位同行评议人，也是牛津大学与我签约撰写该书的最强烈支持者。不幸的是，当其他工作任务阻碍了我写书的想法时，我的进展就停滞了。大卫催促我把书写完，说“这本书会一直流传下去”，我真希望当初听了他的话，因为这么多年过去了，作为一个作家，我仍然“没有书”。1998年，当我参与坎贝尔合作项目（2013年中石油）的初步工作时，我们终于有了交集。在其前辈Cochrane合作项目在医疗保健领域取得成功的基础上，Campbell合作项目将准备、更新和传播有关社会和教育干预效果的高质量研究综述。伊恩·查尔默斯爵士在科克伦合作项目的启动过程中发挥了重要作用，并与宾夕法尼亚大学的罗伯特·博鲁克教授一起为坎贝尔奠定了基础。这些基础工作包括组建协调小组和选择谁来领导这些小组监督特定政策领域的系统审查。对于这样一项刚刚起步的努力，需要在该领域具有高度合法性的领导人和一个庞大的网络。最简单的决定之一是坎贝尔犯罪与司法合作协调小组由大卫·法灵顿领导。伊恩和我去了剑桥，在那里我们遇到了大卫，还有莎伦·库尔，她正在研究一项与攻击性和暴力行为相关的随机对照试验（Cure et al. 2005）。大卫非常慷慨，不仅热情地同意领导犯罪与司法小组，还邀请我在1999年美国犯罪学学会（ASC）会议的全体会议上做报告。这是件大事。作为当时的ASC主席，他可以自行选择组织几次主席全体会议。这些通常是会议上参加人数最多的会议之一，这是他给坎贝尔合作团队和我广泛曝光的方式。参加一个由大卫主持的小组，包括詹姆斯·肖特和大卫·韦斯伯格等著名学者，我的膝盖都在颤抖，但我还是完成了演讲。它立即产生了影响。天普大学（Temple University）杰出的已故教授琼·麦考德（Joan McCord）是众多听众中的一员。她听了我的演讲后，立刻去见了宾夕法尼亚大学的罗伯特·博鲁克，加入了坎贝尔的努力，她一直大力协助坎贝尔的努力，直到她去世。大卫正是坎贝尔犯罪与司法小组所需要的领袖。很快，他获得了资金来支持该组织的早期活动，包括支持我担任协调员。在2004年卸任之前，我一直与大卫密切合作。
{"title":"Tribute to David P. Farrington (1944–2024)","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70049","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70049","url":null,"abstract":"<p>By Anthony Petrosino, Senior Fellow & Affiliated Faculty, Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy, George Mason University.</p><p>I was saddened to learn of the death of Professor David Farrington of Cambridge University on November 5, 2024. David was a pioneering figure in the field of criminology, whose work and influence spanned decades and left an indelible mark on both academic and practical approaches to crime and justice. He has long been considered one of the most influential criminologists in history. <i>ScholarGPS</i> ranks David at the top of its list of criminology scholars for impact, productivity, and quality (see https://scholargps.com/scholars/20828811083920/david-p-farrington). Some of us used to joke that we needed a forklift to move David's printed vita, which was well over 100 pages. There are many wonderful tributes to David and his professional accomplishments, so my comments will focus more on our personal connections (e.g., see J. W. Thulborn's tribute, “David P. Farrington, O. B. E., Distinguished Criminologist and Scholar 1944–2024” at https://www.crim.cam.ac.uk/news/david-p-farrington-obe-distinguished-criminologist-and-scholar-1944-2024. Those who want to better understand David's career pathway, at least through 1997, may appreciate this interview of him by Rolf Leiber for the American Society of Criminology Oral History of Criminology Project at: https://asc41.org/oral-history/david-farrington-interviewed-by-rolf-loeber-november-20-1997/).</p><p>One of my first interactions with David came when I was doing my dissertation in the mid-1990s. I reached out to him, as he was one of the leading proponents of using randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to test criminological interventions (Farrington <span>1983</span>), and he was excited to hear that my research focused on individual-level RCTs that tested a strategy to reduce criminal offending (Petrosino <span>1997</span>). He sent me relevant articles and reports, and periodically would send encouraging notes pushing me to finish the dissertation. Later, after I got the doctorate, I put in a proposal to Oxford University Press for a book based on my dissertation research. I later learned that David was a peer reviewer and the strongest advocate for Oxford to contract with me to write it. Unfortunately, my progress stalled on this book idea when other work commitments got in the way. David pushed me to finish, saying “it was the thing that would last,” and I wish I had listened to him, as I remain “bookless” as an author, all these years later.</p><p>We finally crossed paths in person in 1998 when I got involved in preliminary efforts to launch the Campbell Collaboration (Petrosino <span>2013</span>). Building on the success of its older sibling, the Cochrane Collaboration in health care, the Campbell Collaboration would prepare, update, and disseminate high-quality reviews of research on the effects of social and educational interventions. Sir Iain Chalmers had bee","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"21 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70049","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144190952","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The EGM has three main objectives: (1) Identify the strength (in terms of evidence quality) and depth (in terms of volume of evidence) of evidence base on the efficacy of situational crime prevention measures in preventing terrorist attacks against soft targets and crowded places. (2) Identify the heterogeneity in the effects of situational crime prevention measures against terrorist attacks and link this to issues related to context and implementation. (3) Identify the mechanisms through which situational crime prevention measures have an effect on terrorist attacks. To achieve these objectives, an EGM will seek out reliable quantitative evidence on effect and qualitative evidence on mechanisms, moderators, implementation and economics. Resultingly, it will be possible to identify research gaps and evidence imbalances to facilitate research investment, identify gaps and topics for new research, and provide a foundation for systematic reviews by showing where sufficient evidence exists for aggregation. The underpinning programme of work will result in the presentation of rigorous empirical research on this topic to help researchers and decision-makers understand the available evidence.
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Situational Crime Prevention Measures to Prevent Terrorist Attacks Against Soft Targets and Crowded Places: An Evidence and Gap Map","authors":"Zoe Marchment, Caitlin Clemmow, Paul Gill","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70040","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70040","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The EGM has three main objectives: (1) Identify the strength (in terms of evidence quality) and depth (in terms of volume of evidence) of evidence base on the efficacy of situational crime prevention measures in preventing terrorist attacks against soft targets and crowded places. (2) Identify the heterogeneity in the effects of situational crime prevention measures against terrorist attacks and link this to issues related to context and implementation. (3) Identify the mechanisms through which situational crime prevention measures have an effect on terrorist attacks. To achieve these objectives, an EGM will seek out reliable quantitative evidence on effect and qualitative evidence on mechanisms, moderators, implementation and economics. Resultingly, it will be possible to identify research gaps and evidence imbalances to facilitate research investment, identify gaps and topics for new research, and provide a foundation for systematic reviews by showing where sufficient evidence exists for aggregation. The underpinning programme of work will result in the presentation of rigorous empirical research on this topic to help researchers and decision-makers understand the available evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"21 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2025-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70040","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143883800","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This is a protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are to synthesize published and unpublished scientific literature on (1) the prevalence of and (2) the risk and protective factors for school-aged youth radicalization. In the nascent field of research on radicalized youth, a priority of the review is to examine the breadth of empirical evidence on prevalence and risk and protective factors, and to identify gaps and opportunities for further research. Our research questions are: Part 1: Prevalence: What is the prevalence of radicalization among school-aged youth? How does the prevalence of radicalization of school-aged youth vary over time and by type of radical ideology (e.g., religiously motivated, far left and far right, ethno-nationalist, racially and ethnically motivated, gender-based, online conspiracy-based)? Part 2: Risk and Protective Factors What are the cognitive and behavioral risk and protective factors for school-aged youth radicalization? How do the cognitive and behavioral risk and protective factors for youth radicalization vary by type of radical ideology (e.g., religiously motivated, far left and far right, ethno-nationalist, racially and ethnically motivated, gender-based, online conspiracy-based)?
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Prevalence and Risk and Protective Factors for Radicalization Among School-Aged Youth: A Systematic Review","authors":"Anthony Petrosino, Claire Morgan","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70041","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is a protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are to synthesize published and unpublished scientific literature on (1) the prevalence of and (2) the risk and protective factors for school-aged youth radicalization. In the nascent field of research on radicalized youth, a priority of the review is to examine the breadth of empirical evidence on prevalence and risk and protective factors, and to identify gaps and opportunities for further research. Our research questions are: Part 1: Prevalence: What is the prevalence of radicalization among school-aged youth? How does the prevalence of radicalization of school-aged youth vary over time and by type of radical ideology (e.g., religiously motivated, far left and far right, ethno-nationalist, racially and ethnically motivated, gender-based, online conspiracy-based)? Part 2: Risk and Protective Factors What are the cognitive and behavioral risk and protective factors for school-aged youth radicalization? How do the cognitive and behavioral risk and protective factors for youth radicalization vary by type of radical ideology (e.g., religiously motivated, far left and far right, ethno-nationalist, racially and ethnically motivated, gender-based, online conspiracy-based)?</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"21 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2025-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70041","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143865819","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}
Lawrence W. Sherman, Friedrich Loesel, Dorothy Newbury-Birch, David Weisburd
<p>In late 1997, the key founder of the medical Cochrane Collaboration, Ian Chalmers, called Larry Sherman from Oxford to discuss the recent “Maryland Report” (<i>Preventing Crime: What Works? What Doesn't? What's Promising?</i>) submitted to the US Congress by Attorney General Janet Reno and her Assistant Attorney General, Laurie Robinson. The report had attempted to undertake a series of semi-systematic reviews in all areas for which federal funding had been made available. Sherman directed the project at the University of Maryland, where the co-authors collaborated. All of them had been informed, in part, by the systematic reviews that David Farrington had already published at Cambridge, such as his 1981 review of randomized experiments in crime and justice.</p><p>Chalmers was not the only person to suggest that the Maryland report should become a springboard for an ongoing process of systematic reviews. The same idea struck a Philadelphia radio broadcaster, Jerry Lee, who contacted Sherman in mid-1997 to discuss his possible donations to make that continuation happen. Within months, Jerry Lee had donated major funding to Maryland, including money for a visiting professorship at Maryland for Cambridge Professor David Farrington.</p><p>Farrington's engagement with the Maryland authors and Jerry Lee's support coincided with the developing support of the Cochrane community. By April 2000, Sherman delivered his inaugural lecture at the University of Pennsylvania, where by 2003, he founded its criminology department. The April 2000 event turned into a joint event for founding the Campbell Collaboration (named after program evaluation pioneer Donald T. Campbell) under the leadership of Penn Professor Robert Boruch (a former colleague of Campbell's and a renowned methodologist in social experiments).</p><p>A central actor in this effort was to be the first Chair of the Campbell Coordinating Committee on Crime and Justice, one of three initial substantive committees for overseeing systematic review production in social and human services. That Chair, by acclaim, was David P. Farrington. He was, for many reasons, an ideal choice. He had hundreds of co-authors from all over the globe, including students and many others who had asked him to collaborate. He also had an incredibly broad range of subject matter interests, from juvenile delinquency to domestic abuse to crime prevention programs, from street lighting to cognitive therapies.</p><p>For the next 4 years, the Campbell Crime and Justice Group (CCJG) met up to twice yearly, with Farrington as the Chair and Jerry Lee's foundation supporting meetings in Europe—and in conjunction with annual meetings of the American Society of Criminology. Farrington's leadership attracted a group of outstanding scholars, all of whom with years of experience in conducting and reviewing evaluations of anticrime programs. Farrington led these meetings to highly productive results. He also ensured that peer reviewers wit
1997年末，医学科克伦合作组织的主要创始人伊恩·查默斯（Ian Chalmers）打电话给牛津大学的拉里·谢尔曼（Larry Sherman），讨论最近的“马里兰报告”（预防犯罪：什么有效？）不什么?)，由司法部长珍妮特·雷诺和她的助理司法部长劳里·罗宾逊提交给美国国会。该报告试图对所有获得联邦资金的领域进行一系列半系统的审查。谢尔曼在马里兰大学领导了这个项目，该项目的合著者也在那里合作。他们所有人都在一定程度上受到了大卫·法灵顿（David Farrington）已经在剑桥发表的系统综述的启发，比如他1981年对犯罪和司法领域随机实验的综述。Chalmers并不是唯一一个建议马里兰报告应该成为一个正在进行的系统审查过程的跳板的人。费城的一位广播播音员杰里·李也有同样的想法，他在1997年年中联系了谢尔曼，讨论他是否有可能捐款以使这一计划得以延续。在短短几个月内,杰瑞·李就捐赠的主要资金马里兰州,包括马里兰为客座教授剑桥大学教授大卫·法灵顿。法灵顿与马里兰作者的合作以及杰里·李的支持与科克伦社区不断发展的支持不期而遇。2000年4月，谢尔曼在宾夕法尼亚大学发表了他的就职演讲，到2003年，他在宾夕法尼亚大学成立了犯罪学系。2000年4月的活动变成了在宾夕法尼亚大学教授Robert Boruch （Campbell的前同事，著名的社会实验方法学家）的领导下成立Campbell协作组织（以项目评估先驱Donald T. Campbell的名字命名）的联合活动。这一努力的一个核心行动者是担任坎贝尔犯罪和司法协调委员会的首任主席，该委员会是监督社会和人类服务方面系统审查工作的三个初步实质性委员会之一。这位主席是大卫·p·法灵顿。出于许多原因，他是一个理想的选择。他有来自世界各地的数百名合作者，其中包括学生和许多其他要求他合作的人。他的兴趣领域也非常广泛，从青少年犯罪到家庭暴力到犯罪预防项目，从街道照明到认知疗法。在接下来的4年里，坎贝尔犯罪与司法小组（CCJG）每年召开两次会议，由Farrington担任主席，Jerry Lee的基金会在欧洲支持会议，并与美国犯罪学学会的年度会议一起召开。法灵顿的领导吸引了一群杰出的学者，他们都有多年开展和审查反犯罪项目评估的经验。法林顿领导这些会议取得了卓有成效的成果。他还确保找到具有适当专业知识的同行评审人员来完成Campbell评审。他对出版的承诺也确保了委员会工作的高知名度和政策影响力。他不仅招募了美国和英国公民，还招募了亚洲和欧洲人，这有助于这些评论的全球特色。其中最活跃的成员之一是获得斯德哥尔摩奖的德国犯罪学家弗里德里希·a·洛塞尔。作为德国犯罪学的领军人物，Loesel自20世纪80年代起就与Farrington在德国研究基金会的儿童和青少年预防与干预高级研究中心合作。作为欧洲心理学和法律协会的第一任主席，Loesel和Farrington推动了这一心理学应用领域的实验研究。两人在CCJG合作多年，并共同发表了关于项目评估和防止青少年暴力的保护因素的文章。Farrington和Loesel还在实验犯罪学学院（Academy of Experimental Criminology）合作过，1999年谢尔曼担任该学院的首任院长。作为他的继任者，法灵顿和其他几位院长在罗塞尔担任院长期间出版了一份纪念学院成立20周年的出版物。它总结了已经取得的成就，但也包含了未来实验工作及其与非实验犯罪学研究的关系的重要观点。值得注意的是，大卫致力于推进循证政策和实验研究这一更广泛的理念。他在推动一年一度的杰瑞·李研讨会（由杰瑞·李基金会支持）方面发挥了关键作用，该研讨会汇集了主要研究人员、政策制定者和实践者，并展示了坎贝尔的努力。在David担任主席期间，他鼓励David Weisburd创办了《实验犯罪学杂志》（Journal of Experimental Criminology），该杂志由b施普林格出版，现在已成为最具影响力的犯罪学杂志。 David Farrington也从David Weisburd的团队中受益，David Weisburd和他的合作者一起，对问题导向的警务、社区警务、第二响应者和DNA测试等主题进行了早期评论。大卫·F.还与大卫·W.和劳伦斯·谢尔曼合作，从国家司法研究所和其他来源筹集资金，这为杰瑞·李基金会为CCJG的活动提供了重要支持。法灵顿不仅是一位领袖；他努力指导年轻的同事担任领导角色。David F.邀请David W.担任联合主席（2004年）和犯罪与司法小组主席（2008年起）。Farrington和Weisburd致力于扩大CCJG的知名度，例如，他们在2007年撰写了一篇关于该组织努力的犯罪学家文章（https://asc41.org/wp-content/uploads/ASC-Criminologist-2007-01.pdf）。2002年早些时候，法灵顿与安东尼·彼得罗西诺（Anthony Petrosino，早年曾与大卫·f一起担任该组织的编辑）和韦斯伯格为司法研究与统计协会（Justice Research and Statistics Association）的出版物《论坛》（the Forum）写了一篇文章。2: 1 - 6)。在此期间，Farrington和Weisburd非常重视扩大可以发表的系统评论的数量。大卫·威尔逊被任命为CCJG的编辑，极大地帮助了这一点。Farrington与同事一起为CCJG贡献了许多系统的评论和荟萃分析，例如，关于发展犯罪预防，反对学校欺凌和罪犯治疗的计划，街道照明对犯罪的影响，以及父母监禁对儿童的影响。他与玛丽亚·托菲（Maria Ttofi）和汉娜·加夫尼（Hannah Gaffney）合作，对以学校为基础的反对欺凌行为和受害者的项目进行了系统回顾和元分析，获得了特别高的浏览量。在这项研究的部分内容中，他还与洛泽尔合作，洛泽尔成为剑桥大学犯罪学研究所所长（2005-2012）。自2012年退休以来，法灵顿一直孜孜不倦地发表着他那享誉世界的《剑桥犯罪发展研究》（Cambridge Study in criminal Development），以及许多其他主题的论文，尤其是犯罪学实验。他点燃了中共中央的火炬，并高举火炬，直到2024年11月5日去世。要进一步了解他的杰出工作，请参阅Loesel应欧洲犯罪学学会的要求为Farrington写的讣告（Loesel 2024: https://escnewsletter.org/archive/in-memoriam-david-p-farrington）。
{"title":"In Memoriam: David Farrington, Founding Chair of the Campbell Crime and Justice Group","authors":"Lawrence W. Sherman, Friedrich Loesel, Dorothy Newbury-Birch, David Weisburd","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70045","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In late 1997, the key founder of the medical Cochrane Collaboration, Ian Chalmers, called Larry Sherman from Oxford to discuss the recent “Maryland Report” (<i>Preventing Crime: What Works? What Doesn't? What's Promising?</i>) submitted to the US Congress by Attorney General Janet Reno and her Assistant Attorney General, Laurie Robinson. The report had attempted to undertake a series of semi-systematic reviews in all areas for which federal funding had been made available. Sherman directed the project at the University of Maryland, where the co-authors collaborated. All of them had been informed, in part, by the systematic reviews that David Farrington had already published at Cambridge, such as his 1981 review of randomized experiments in crime and justice.</p><p>Chalmers was not the only person to suggest that the Maryland report should become a springboard for an ongoing process of systematic reviews. The same idea struck a Philadelphia radio broadcaster, Jerry Lee, who contacted Sherman in mid-1997 to discuss his possible donations to make that continuation happen. Within months, Jerry Lee had donated major funding to Maryland, including money for a visiting professorship at Maryland for Cambridge Professor David Farrington.</p><p>Farrington's engagement with the Maryland authors and Jerry Lee's support coincided with the developing support of the Cochrane community. By April 2000, Sherman delivered his inaugural lecture at the University of Pennsylvania, where by 2003, he founded its criminology department. The April 2000 event turned into a joint event for founding the Campbell Collaboration (named after program evaluation pioneer Donald T. Campbell) under the leadership of Penn Professor Robert Boruch (a former colleague of Campbell's and a renowned methodologist in social experiments).</p><p>A central actor in this effort was to be the first Chair of the Campbell Coordinating Committee on Crime and Justice, one of three initial substantive committees for overseeing systematic review production in social and human services. That Chair, by acclaim, was David P. Farrington. He was, for many reasons, an ideal choice. He had hundreds of co-authors from all over the globe, including students and many others who had asked him to collaborate. He also had an incredibly broad range of subject matter interests, from juvenile delinquency to domestic abuse to crime prevention programs, from street lighting to cognitive therapies.</p><p>For the next 4 years, the Campbell Crime and Justice Group (CCJG) met up to twice yearly, with Farrington as the Chair and Jerry Lee's foundation supporting meetings in Europe—and in conjunction with annual meetings of the American Society of Criminology. Farrington's leadership attracted a group of outstanding scholars, all of whom with years of experience in conducting and reviewing evaluations of anticrime programs. Farrington led these meetings to highly productive results. He also ensured that peer reviewers wit","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"21 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2025-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70045","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143856747","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}
Jordie A. J. Fischer, Jonathan Thomas, Despo Ierodiakonou, Kesso G. van Zutphen-Küffer, Vanessa Garcia-Larsen
<div> <section> <p>Breakfast skipping is a commonly reported dietary habit among adolescents despite this life stage marked by critical growth and development. Limited comparable evidence exists from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where the detrimental effect of inadequate diets remains a major public health challenge. We conducted a systematic review to assess the scientific evidence available from LMICs regarding the association of breakfast skipping and consumption habits and anthropometry- and nutrition-related outcomes in adolescents 10–19 years old. Electronic searches for relevant studies were conducted on MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL and Web of Science from the date of database inception until June 28, 2023. Additionally, reference lists of included studies and gray literature were searched. We included studies of all designs that compared breakfast skipping and consumption habits among adolescents aged 10–19 years in LMICs. Exclusion criteria included the following: review articles, if the target population age was outside the WHO definition of adolescents, assessed only lunch or dinner consumption, skipped any other meal besides breakfast, only collected point prevalence data, did not include a breakfast consumer control group, or co-interventions were inconsistent across breakfast habit groups. The primary outcomes were body mass index (BMI in kg/m<sup>2</sup>), also defined categorically as underweight, normal weight, overweight and obese or as BMI-for-age (<i>z</i>-score) and anemia (defined according to Hemoglobin (Hb) levels in different age groups for boys and girls). Secondary outcomes included other adiposity measures and nutrient concentrations or deficiencies. Title screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted in duplicate. The risk of bias was evaluated using the NHLBI Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Random-effects meta-analysis models were used to pool data for each outcome measure from the included studies. Standardized mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated for continuous outcomes, while odds ratios (OR) with 95% CIs were computed for dichotomous outcomes. The certainty of the evidence for each outcome was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Our search yielded 3604 records, and 41 studies met our inclusion criteria. Among these, 39 cross-sectional studies and two prospective cohort studies were eligible, with 36 providing data for meta-analysis. Overall, there was very low certainty of evidence regarding the association between breakfast consumption habits and the risk of being overweight/obese, mainly due to the risk of bias and inconsistency. Adolescents who infrequently ate breakfast (0–2 days/week) were twice as likely to be overweight/obese (OR: 2.05, 95% CI: 1.61–
{"title":"Breakfast Habits, Anthropometry, and Nutrition-Related Outcomes in Adolescents From Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis","authors":"Jordie A. J. Fischer, Jonathan Thomas, Despo Ierodiakonou, Kesso G. van Zutphen-Küffer, Vanessa Garcia-Larsen","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70039","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Breakfast skipping is a commonly reported dietary habit among adolescents despite this life stage marked by critical growth and development. Limited comparable evidence exists from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where the detrimental effect of inadequate diets remains a major public health challenge. We conducted a systematic review to assess the scientific evidence available from LMICs regarding the association of breakfast skipping and consumption habits and anthropometry- and nutrition-related outcomes in adolescents 10–19 years old. Electronic searches for relevant studies were conducted on MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL and Web of Science from the date of database inception until June 28, 2023. Additionally, reference lists of included studies and gray literature were searched. We included studies of all designs that compared breakfast skipping and consumption habits among adolescents aged 10–19 years in LMICs. Exclusion criteria included the following: review articles, if the target population age was outside the WHO definition of adolescents, assessed only lunch or dinner consumption, skipped any other meal besides breakfast, only collected point prevalence data, did not include a breakfast consumer control group, or co-interventions were inconsistent across breakfast habit groups. The primary outcomes were body mass index (BMI in kg/m<sup>2</sup>), also defined categorically as underweight, normal weight, overweight and obese or as BMI-for-age (<i>z</i>-score) and anemia (defined according to Hemoglobin (Hb) levels in different age groups for boys and girls). Secondary outcomes included other adiposity measures and nutrient concentrations or deficiencies. Title screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted in duplicate. The risk of bias was evaluated using the NHLBI Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Random-effects meta-analysis models were used to pool data for each outcome measure from the included studies. Standardized mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated for continuous outcomes, while odds ratios (OR) with 95% CIs were computed for dichotomous outcomes. The certainty of the evidence for each outcome was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Our search yielded 3604 records, and 41 studies met our inclusion criteria. Among these, 39 cross-sectional studies and two prospective cohort studies were eligible, with 36 providing data for meta-analysis. Overall, there was very low certainty of evidence regarding the association between breakfast consumption habits and the risk of being overweight/obese, mainly due to the risk of bias and inconsistency. Adolescents who infrequently ate breakfast (0–2 days/week) were twice as likely to be overweight/obese (OR: 2.05, 95% CI: 1.61–","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"21 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2025-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70039","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143856748","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}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号