首页 > 最新文献

Campbell Systematic Reviews最新文献

英文 中文
Mobile apps to reduce depressive symptoms and alcohol use in youth: A systematic review and meta-analysis: A systematic review 减少青少年抑郁症状和饮酒的手机应用:系统综述和荟萃分析:系统综述
IF 3.2 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-04-26 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1398
Olivia Magwood, Ammar Saad, Dominique Ranger, Kate Volpini, Franklin Rukikamirera, Rinila Haridas, Shahab Sayfi, Jeremie Alexander, Yvonne Tan, Kevin Pottie
<div> <section> <h3> Background</h3> <p>Among youth, symptoms of depression, anxiety, and alcohol use are associated with considerable illness and disability. Youth face many personal and health system barriers in accessing mental health care. Mobile applications (apps) offer youth potentially accessible, scalable, and anonymous therapy and other support. Recent systematic reviews on apps to reduce mental health symptoms among youth have reported uncertain effectiveness, but analyses based on the type of app-delivered therapy are limited.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Objectives</h3> <p>We conducted this systematic review with youth co-researchers to ensure that this review addressed the questions that were most important to them. The objective of this review is to synthesize the best available evidence on the effectiveness of mobile apps for the reduction of depressive symptoms (depression, generalized anxiety, psychological distress) and alcohol use among youth.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Search Methods</h3> <p>We conducted electronic searches of the following bibliographic databases for studies published between January 1, 2008, and July 1, 2022: MEDLINE (via Ovid), Embase (via Ovid), PsycINFO (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCOHost), and CENTRAL (via the Cochrane Library). The search used a combination of indexed terms, free text words, and MeSH headings. We manually screened the references of relevant systematic reviews and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for additional eligible studies, and contacted authors for full reports of identified trial registries or protocols.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Selection Criteria</h3> <p>We included RCTs conducted among youth aged 15–24 years from any setting. We did not exclude populations on the basis of gender, socioeconomic status, geographic location or other personal characteristics. We included studies which assessed the effectiveness of app-delivered mental health support or therapy interventions that targeted the management of depressive disorders and/or alcohol use disorders. We excluded apps that targeted general wellness, apps which focused on prevention of psychological disorders and apps that targeted bipolar disorder, psychosis, post-traumatic stress disorder, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, substance use disorders (aside from alcohol), and sleep disorders. Eligible comparisons included usual care, no intervention, wait-list control, alternative or controlled mobile applications. We included studies which reported outcomes on depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, alcoho
背景 在青少年中,抑郁、焦虑和酗酒等症状与严重的疾病和残疾有关。青少年在获得心理健康护理方面面临着许多个人和医疗系统方面的障碍。移动应用程序(Apps)可为青少年提供潜在的、可扩展的、匿名的治疗和其他支持。最近,有关减少青少年心理健康症状的应用程序的系统性综述报告称,其有效性并不确定,但基于应用程序提供的治疗类型的分析却很有限。 目标 我们与青少年共同开展了这项系统性综述,以确保这项综述能够解决对青少年来说最重要的问题。本综述旨在综合现有的最佳证据,说明手机应用在减少青少年抑郁症状(抑郁、广泛焦虑、心理困扰)和饮酒方面的有效性。 检索方法 我们在以下文献数据库中对 2008 年 1 月 1 日至 2022 年 7 月 1 日期间发表的研究进行了电子检索:MEDLINE(通过 Ovid)、Embase(通过 Ovid)、PsycINFO(通过 Ovid)、CINAHL(通过 EBSCOHost)和 CENTRAL(通过 Cochrane 图书馆)。检索结合使用了索引术语、自由文本词和 MeSH 标题。我们人工筛选了相关系统综述的参考文献,并纳入了随机对照试验 (RCT) 以寻找更多符合条件的研究,我们还联系了作者以获取已确定的试验登记册或协议的完整报告。 筛选标准 我们纳入了在任何环境下对 15-24 岁青少年进行的随机对照试验。我们没有因性别、社会经济地位、地理位置或其他个人特征而排除人群。我们纳入的研究评估了针对抑郁障碍和/或酒精使用障碍管理的应用程序提供的心理健康支持或治疗干预的有效性。我们排除了针对一般健康的应用程序、侧重于预防心理障碍的应用程序以及针对双相情感障碍、精神病、创伤后应激障碍、注意力缺陷多动障碍、药物使用障碍(酒精除外)和睡眠障碍的应用程序。符合条件的比较研究包括常规护理、无干预、等待名单对照、替代或受控移动应用。我们纳入了报告任何随访期间抑郁症状、焦虑症状、酒精使用和心理困扰结果的研究。 数据收集与分析 我们对每项纳入研究的 PICO 定义(人群、干预、比较和结果)进行了标准化,并根据应用程序提供的治疗或支持类型对研究进行了分组。在应用程序设计和临床同质性允许的情况下,我们使用随机效应模型对结果进行了元分析。使用分类量表测量的结果数据使用几率比进行综合。使用连续量表测量的结果数据以标准化平均差进行综合。我们使用 Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 工具评估了每项纳入研究的方法学质量,并使用 GRADE 方法评估了证据的确定性。 主要结果 从 5280 条引用文献中,我们纳入了在 15 个不同国家(7984 名参与者)进行的 36 项 RCT,共发表在 37 份报告中。在纳入的 36 项试验中,我们评估了 2 项总体偏倚风险较低的试验、8 项存在一定偏倚风险的试验以及 26 项偏倚风险较高的试验。干预措施提供的治疗或支持类型各不相同。最常见的干预设计包括正念训练、认知行为疗法(CBT)或两者的结合(正念+CBT)。不过,其他干预措施还包括自我监控、用药提醒、认知偏差修正或积极刺激、辩证行为疗法、游戏化健康促进或社交技能培养。与保留对照组相比(SMD = -0.36;95% CI [-0.63,-0.10];p = 0.007,n = 3 项 RCT,GRADE:确定性极低),与积极对照组相比(SMD = -0.27;95% CI [-0.53,-0.01];p = 0.04,n = 2 项 RCT,GRADE:确定性极低),正念应用程序可在短期内改善抑郁症状。与不提供支持的对照组相比,提供此类支持的应用程序也能显著改善焦虑症状(SMD = -0.35;95% CI [-0.60,-0.09];P = 0.05)。
{"title":"Mobile apps to reduce depressive symptoms and alcohol use in youth: A systematic review and meta-analysis: A systematic review","authors":"Olivia Magwood,&nbsp;Ammar Saad,&nbsp;Dominique Ranger,&nbsp;Kate Volpini,&nbsp;Franklin Rukikamirera,&nbsp;Rinila Haridas,&nbsp;Shahab Sayfi,&nbsp;Jeremie Alexander,&nbsp;Yvonne Tan,&nbsp;Kevin Pottie","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1398","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1398","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Background&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Among youth, symptoms of depression, anxiety, and alcohol use are associated with considerable illness and disability. Youth face many personal and health system barriers in accessing mental health care. Mobile applications (apps) offer youth potentially accessible, scalable, and anonymous therapy and other support. Recent systematic reviews on apps to reduce mental health symptoms among youth have reported uncertain effectiveness, but analyses based on the type of app-delivered therapy are limited.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Objectives&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;We conducted this systematic review with youth co-researchers to ensure that this review addressed the questions that were most important to them. The objective of this review is to synthesize the best available evidence on the effectiveness of mobile apps for the reduction of depressive symptoms (depression, generalized anxiety, psychological distress) and alcohol use among youth.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Search Methods&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;We conducted electronic searches of the following bibliographic databases for studies published between January 1, 2008, and July 1, 2022: MEDLINE (via Ovid), Embase (via Ovid), PsycINFO (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCOHost), and CENTRAL (via the Cochrane Library). The search used a combination of indexed terms, free text words, and MeSH headings. We manually screened the references of relevant systematic reviews and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for additional eligible studies, and contacted authors for full reports of identified trial registries or protocols.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Selection Criteria&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;We included RCTs conducted among youth aged 15–24 years from any setting. We did not exclude populations on the basis of gender, socioeconomic status, geographic location or other personal characteristics. We included studies which assessed the effectiveness of app-delivered mental health support or therapy interventions that targeted the management of depressive disorders and/or alcohol use disorders. We excluded apps that targeted general wellness, apps which focused on prevention of psychological disorders and apps that targeted bipolar disorder, psychosis, post-traumatic stress disorder, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, substance use disorders (aside from alcohol), and sleep disorders. Eligible comparisons included usual care, no intervention, wait-list control, alternative or controlled mobile applications. We included studies which reported outcomes on depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, alcoho","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1398","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140648206","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
Effectiveness of interpersonal psychotherapy in comparison to other psychological and pharmacological interventions for reducing depressive symptoms in women diagnosed with postpartum depression in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review 人际心理治疗与其他心理和药物干预措施相比,对中低收入国家确诊产后抑郁症妇女减轻抑郁症状的效果:系统综述
IF 3.2 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-04-21 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1399
Harmeet Kaur Kang, Bandana Bisht, Manmeet Kaur, Obrey Alexis, Aaron Worsley, Denny John
<div> <section> <h3> Background</h3> <p>Postpartum depression (PPD) is a condition that can affect any woman regardless of ethnicity, age, party, marital status, income, and type of delivery. This condition is highly prevalent worldwide. PPD, if not treated timely, can affect the maternal-child bond and can have a detrimental impact on the future cognitive, emotional, and behavioral development of the child. Interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) has been reported as an effective treatment of PPD in previous studies as this focuses on relationship and social support issues. Previous reviews conducted in developed nations have reported the superior efficacy of IPT in comparison to other treatment options. There is no systematic review conducted in low to middle-income countries on the efficacy of IPT on PPD. Therefore it was necessary to undertake a systematic review to assess the effectiveness of IPT in reducing the depression among postpartum women in low and middle-income countries (LMICs).</p> </section> <section> <h3> Objectives</h3> <p>The main aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of IPT alone or in conjunction with pharmacological therapy and/or other psychological and psychosocial interventions, in reducing depressive symptoms among women diagnosed with PPD residing in LMICs.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Search Methods</h3> <p>The systematic search encompassed several prominent databases and grey literature. Furthermore, experts specializing in the field of IPT were consulted to identify any relevant studies conducted in LMICs that fulfilled the predetermined eligibility criteria. The most recent search update was performed in July 2022.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Selection Criteria</h3> <p>The PICOS criteria were meticulously defined for this review as described. Participants: Postpartum women diagnosed with PPD in LMICs were included. Intervention: IPT either as a standalone treatment or in conjunction with pharmacological therapy was included. Comparison: any form of psychological therapy or pharmacological therapy, whether administered individually or in combination, was considered for comparison. Study designs: experimental and quasi-experimental, factorial designs, and quantitative components (experimental, quasi-experimental, factorial designs) of mixed methods designs were eligible to be included. Studies with single-group study designs and qualitative studies were excluded from the review.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Data Collection and
根据总体治疗效果,研究发现,与其他干预措施(常规治疗或ADMs)相比,IPT组抑郁评分的下降幅度更大(标准化平均差[SMD] -0.62,95%置信区间[CI] (-1.01, -0.23),Z = 3.13 (p = 0.002),χ2 = 49.49; df = 2; p &lt; 0.00001; I2 = 96%;3项研究,n = 136)。在三项研究中,两项研究比较了 IPT 与常规治疗相比在降低抑郁评分方面的具体效果,在这两项研究中,IPT 组与常规治疗组相比,抑郁评分显著降低。只有一项研究直接比较了 IPT 与 ADM 的疗效,报告称 IPT 在降低产后妇女抑郁分数方面比 ADM 更有效。关于不良后果,只有一项研究报告了自杀意念,其中 IPT 组有 1 人,ADM 组有 2 人(RR 0.50,95% CI (0.05,5.30),p = 0.56,n = 78)。同一项研究报告称,ADM 组有 7 名参与者出现药物不良反应,而 IPT 组没有(RR 15.0,95% CI (0.89,254),P = 0.06,n = 78)。 作者的结论 我们的综合搜索结果显示,在此类环境中进行的研究数量有限,仅有四项。尽管可用证据很少,但研究结果共同表明,与常规治疗和药物治疗相比,IPT 确实是减少 PPD 的有效治疗方法。然而,鉴于证据的确定性较低,有必要开展进一步的研究,即设计良好的随机对照试验,样本量要大一些,并降低偏倚风险。此类研究将大大有助于提高有关在低收入和中等收入国家 PPD 情况下 IPT 有效性的证据基础的强度和可靠性。未来的研究工作所产生的知识将非常有价值,有助于指导在资源有限的环境中开发更多负担得起、更具成本效益的 PPD 治疗方法。
{"title":"Effectiveness of interpersonal psychotherapy in comparison to other psychological and pharmacological interventions for reducing depressive symptoms in women diagnosed with postpartum depression in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review","authors":"Harmeet Kaur Kang,&nbsp;Bandana Bisht,&nbsp;Manmeet Kaur,&nbsp;Obrey Alexis,&nbsp;Aaron Worsley,&nbsp;Denny John","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1399","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1399","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Background&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Postpartum depression (PPD) is a condition that can affect any woman regardless of ethnicity, age, party, marital status, income, and type of delivery. This condition is highly prevalent worldwide. PPD, if not treated timely, can affect the maternal-child bond and can have a detrimental impact on the future cognitive, emotional, and behavioral development of the child. Interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) has been reported as an effective treatment of PPD in previous studies as this focuses on relationship and social support issues. Previous reviews conducted in developed nations have reported the superior efficacy of IPT in comparison to other treatment options. There is no systematic review conducted in low to middle-income countries on the efficacy of IPT on PPD. Therefore it was necessary to undertake a systematic review to assess the effectiveness of IPT in reducing the depression among postpartum women in low and middle-income countries (LMICs).&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Objectives&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;The main aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of IPT alone or in conjunction with pharmacological therapy and/or other psychological and psychosocial interventions, in reducing depressive symptoms among women diagnosed with PPD residing in LMICs.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Search Methods&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;The systematic search encompassed several prominent databases and grey literature. Furthermore, experts specializing in the field of IPT were consulted to identify any relevant studies conducted in LMICs that fulfilled the predetermined eligibility criteria. The most recent search update was performed in July 2022.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Selection Criteria&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;The PICOS criteria were meticulously defined for this review as described. Participants: Postpartum women diagnosed with PPD in LMICs were included. Intervention: IPT either as a standalone treatment or in conjunction with pharmacological therapy was included. Comparison: any form of psychological therapy or pharmacological therapy, whether administered individually or in combination, was considered for comparison. Study designs: experimental and quasi-experimental, factorial designs, and quantitative components (experimental, quasi-experimental, factorial designs) of mixed methods designs were eligible to be included. Studies with single-group study designs and qualitative studies were excluded from the review.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Data Collection and ","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1399","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140622658","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The effectiveness of abstinence-based and harm reduction-based interventions in reducing problematic substance use in adults who are experiencing homelessness in high income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis: A systematic review 高收入国家以禁欲为基础和以减少伤害为基础的干预措施在减少无家可归成年人问题药物使用方面的有效性:系统回顾和荟萃分析:系统综述
IF 3.2 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-04-21 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1396
Chris O'Leary, Rob Ralphs, Jennifer Stevenson, Andrew Smith, Jordan Harrison, Zsolt Kiss, Harry Armitage
<div> <section> <h3> Background</h3> <p>Homelessness is a traumatic experience, and can have a devastating effect on those experiencing it. People who are homeless often face significant barriers when accessing public services, and have often experienced adverse childhood events, extreme social disadvantage, physical, emotional and sexual abuse, neglect, low self-esteem, poor physical and mental health, and much lower life expectancy compared to the general population. Rates of problematic substance use are disproportionately high, with many using drugs and alcohol to deal with the stress of living on the street, to keep warm, or to block out memories of previous abuse or trauma. Substance dependency can also create barriers to successful transition to stable housing.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Objectives</h3> <p>To understand the effectiveness of different substance use interventions for adults experiencing homelessness.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Search Methods</h3> <p>The primary source of studies for was the 4th edition of the Homelessness Effectiveness Studies Evidence and Gaps Maps (EGM). Searches for the EGM were completed in September 2021. Other potential studies were identified through a call for grey evidence, hand-searching key journals, and unpacking relevant systematic reviews.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Selection Criteria</h3> <p>Eligible studies were impact evaluations that involved some comparison group. We included studies that tested the effectiveness of substance use interventions, and measured substance use outcomes, for adults experiencing homelessness in high income countries.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3> <p>Descriptive characteristics and statistical information in included studies were coded and checked by at least two members of the review team. Studies selected for the review were assessed for confidence in the findings. Standardised effect sizes were calculated and, if a study did not provide sufficient raw data for the calculation of an effect size, author(s) were contacted to obtain these data. We used random-effects meta-analysis and robust-variance estimation procedures to synthesise effect sizes. If a study included multiple effects, we carried out a critical assessment to determine (even if only theoretically) whether the effects are likely to be dependent. Where dependent effects were identified, we used robust variance estimation to determine whether we can account for
背景无家可归是一种痛苦的经历,会对经历者造成毁灭性的影响。无家可归者在获得公共服务时往往面临重重障碍,他们往往经历了不利的童年事件、极端的社会劣势、身体、情感和性虐待、忽视、自卑、身体和心理健康状况不佳,与普通人相比,他们的预期寿命要短得多。使用问题药物的比例过高,许多人使用毒品和酒精来应对街头生活的压力、取暖或消除以前受虐待或创伤的记忆。药物依赖也会对成功过渡到稳定住房造成障碍。 目标 了解针对无家可归成年人的不同药物使用干预措施的有效性。 搜索方法 研究的主要来源是第四版《无家可归者有效性研究证据与差距地图》(EGM)。EGM 的搜索于 2021 年 9 月完成。其他潜在研究通过征集灰色证据、手工搜索主要期刊和解读相关系统综述来确定。 选择标准 符合条件的研究是涉及某些对比组的影响评价。我们纳入了针对高收入国家无家可归成年人的药物使用干预效果测试和药物使用结果测量研究。 数据收集与分析 纳入研究的描述性特征和统计信息至少由评审小组的两名成员进行编码和检查。对筛选出的研究进行评估,以确定研究结果的可信度。我们计算了标准化效应大小,如果某项研究没有提供足够的原始数据来计算效应大小,我们会联系作者以获得这些数据。我们使用随机效应荟萃分析和稳健方差估计程序来综合效应大小。如果一项研究包含多种效应,我们会进行严格评估,以确定(即使只是理论上的)这些效应是否可能具有依赖性。如果发现了依赖效应,我们会使用稳健方差估计法来确定我们是否能够解释这些效应。如果效应大小从二元变量转换为连续变量(或反之亦然),我们会进行敏感性分析,即在忽略这些研究的情况下进行额外的分析。我们还评估了结果对纳入非随机研究和对研究结果置信度低的研究的敏感性。所有分析都包括对统计异质性的评估。最后,我们进行了分析,以评估发表偏倚是否可能是影响研究结果的一个因素。对于无法纳入荟萃分析的研究,我们提供了研究及其结果的叙述性综述。 主要结果 我们共纳入了 48 篇论文,涉及 34 项独特的研究。这些研究涉及 15,255 名参与者,除一项研究外,其余均来自美国和加拿大。大多数论文的可信度较低(n = 25,占 52%)。到目前为止,研究被评为低置信度的最常见原因是研究参与者的高损耗率和/或差异损耗率低于 What Works Clearinghouse 的自由损耗标准。纳入的研究中有 11 项被评为中等可信度,12 项被评为高度可信度。与常规治疗相比,纳入分析的干预措施在减少药物使用方面更为有效,总体效应大小为-0.11 SD(95% 置信区间[CI],-0.27, 0.05)。不同研究之间存在很大的异质性,研究结果对剔除低置信度研究(-0.21 SD,95% CI [-0.59, 0.17] - 6 项研究,17 个效应大小)、剔除准实验研究(-0.14 SD,95% CI [-0.30, 0.02] - 14 项研究,41 个效应大小)以及剔除效应大小从二元结果转换为连续结果的研究(-0.08 SD,95% CI [-0.31, 0.15] - 10 项研究,31 个效应大小)很敏感。这表明,研究结果对纳入质量较低的研究很敏感,尽管当我们剔除置信度较低的研究时,平均效应会异常增加。与提供的 "常规治疗"(TAU)服务相比,基于禁欲的干预措施的平均效果为-0. 28SD(95% CI,-0.65,0.09)(6 项研究,15 个效应大小),而减低伤害干预与 TAU 服务相比接近 0,为 0.03 SD(95% CI,-0.08,0.14)(9 项研究,30 个效应大小)。这两个估计值的置信区间都很宽,且都跨越了零。这两项研究的对比组主要以禁欲为主,只有两项研究的对比组条件不明确。我们发现,断言式社区治疗和强化个案管理并不比常规治疗更好,对药物使用的平均影响分别为 0.03 SD,95% CI [-0.07, 0.13] 和 -0.47 SD,95% CI [-0.72, -0.21] 0.05 SD,95% CI [-0.28, 0.39]。这些研究结果与更广泛的研究结果一致,值得注意的是,我们只研究了对药物使用结果的影响(这些干预措施对其他结果也可能有效)。我们发现,与常规治疗相比,中医干预可以有效减少药物使用,平均效果为-0.47 SD,95% CI (-0.72, -0.21)。所有这些结果都需要根据基本证据的质量加以考虑。我们还对另外六项干预措施进行了叙述性综合。这些综述表明,小组工作、减害心理疗法和治疗社区能有效减少药物使用,而动机访谈和谈话疗法(包括认知行为疗法)的结果不一。叙述性综述表明,对于我们所关注的人群来说,住院康复在减少药物使用方面并不比常规治疗更好。 作者的结论 虽然我们对减低伤害与常规治疗、禁欲与常规治疗以及减低伤害与禁欲进行的分析表明,与常规治疗相比,这些不同的方法对取得的结果没有什么实际差别。研究结果表明,某些干预措施比其他干预措施更有效。初步研究的总体质量较低,这表明进一步的初步影响研究可能会有所裨益。
{"title":"The effectiveness of abstinence-based and harm reduction-based interventions in reducing problematic substance use in adults who are experiencing homelessness in high income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis: A systematic review","authors":"Chris O'Leary,&nbsp;Rob Ralphs,&nbsp;Jennifer Stevenson,&nbsp;Andrew Smith,&nbsp;Jordan Harrison,&nbsp;Zsolt Kiss,&nbsp;Harry Armitage","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1396","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1396","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Background&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Homelessness is a traumatic experience, and can have a devastating effect on those experiencing it. People who are homeless often face significant barriers when accessing public services, and have often experienced adverse childhood events, extreme social disadvantage, physical, emotional and sexual abuse, neglect, low self-esteem, poor physical and mental health, and much lower life expectancy compared to the general population. Rates of problematic substance use are disproportionately high, with many using drugs and alcohol to deal with the stress of living on the street, to keep warm, or to block out memories of previous abuse or trauma. Substance dependency can also create barriers to successful transition to stable housing.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Objectives&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;To understand the effectiveness of different substance use interventions for adults experiencing homelessness.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Search Methods&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;The primary source of studies for was the 4th edition of the Homelessness Effectiveness Studies Evidence and Gaps Maps (EGM). Searches for the EGM were completed in September 2021. Other potential studies were identified through a call for grey evidence, hand-searching key journals, and unpacking relevant systematic reviews.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Selection Criteria&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Eligible studies were impact evaluations that involved some comparison group. We included studies that tested the effectiveness of substance use interventions, and measured substance use outcomes, for adults experiencing homelessness in high income countries.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Data Collection and Analysis&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Descriptive characteristics and statistical information in included studies were coded and checked by at least two members of the review team. Studies selected for the review were assessed for confidence in the findings. Standardised effect sizes were calculated and, if a study did not provide sufficient raw data for the calculation of an effect size, author(s) were contacted to obtain these data. We used random-effects meta-analysis and robust-variance estimation procedures to synthesise effect sizes. If a study included multiple effects, we carried out a critical assessment to determine (even if only theoretically) whether the effects are likely to be dependent. Where dependent effects were identified, we used robust variance estimation to determine whether we can account for ","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1396","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140622659","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
PROTOCOL: The efficacy of nutritional interventions in reducing childhood/youth aggressive and antisocial behavior: A systematic review and meta-analysis 方案:营养干预对减少儿童/青少年攻击性和反社会行为的效果:系统回顾和荟萃分析
IF 3.2 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-04-18 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1400
Barna Konkolÿ Thege, Eden Kinzel, Jamie Hartmann-Boyce, Olivia Choy

This is a protocol for a Campbell systematic review of intervention effectiveness. The goal of this systematic review is to answer the following questions based on the available empirical evidence: Are there nutritional interventions (dietary manipulation, fortification or supplementation) that can reduce excessive aggression towards others in children/youth? If yes, how strong is their effect and is there a difference among the three intervention types? Are there nutritional interventions that can reduce antisocial behaviors in children/youth? If yes, how strong is their effect and is there a difference among the intervention types? Are there nutritional interventions that can reduce violent offending in children/youth? If yes, how strong is their effect and is there a difference among the intervention types? Are there nutritional interventions that can reduce non-violent offending in children/youth? If yes, how strong is their effect and is there a difference among the intervention types? What implementation barriers and solutions to these exist in relation to the above nutritional interventions in children/youth?

这是坎贝尔干预效果系统性综述的协议。本系统综述的目的是根据现有的经验证据回答以下问题:是否有营养干预措施(膳食操作、强化或补充)可以减少儿童/青少年对他人的过度攻击行为?如果有,其效果有多强,三种干预类型之间是否存在差异?是否有营养干预措施可以减少儿童/青少年的反社会行为?如果回答为 "是",那么其效果有多强?是否有营养干预措施可以减少儿童/青少年的暴力犯罪?如果回答为 "是",其效果有多强?是否有营养干预措施可以减少儿童/青少年的非暴力犯罪?如果有,其效果有多强?针对儿童/青少年的上述营养干预措施存在哪些实施障碍和解决方法?
{"title":"PROTOCOL: The efficacy of nutritional interventions in reducing childhood/youth aggressive and antisocial behavior: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Barna Konkolÿ Thege,&nbsp;Eden Kinzel,&nbsp;Jamie Hartmann-Boyce,&nbsp;Olivia Choy","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1400","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1400","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is a protocol for a Campbell systematic review of intervention effectiveness. The goal of this systematic review is to answer the following questions based on the available empirical evidence: Are there nutritional interventions (dietary manipulation, fortification or supplementation) that can reduce excessive aggression towards others in children/youth? If yes, how strong is their effect and is there a difference among the three intervention types? Are there nutritional interventions that can reduce antisocial behaviors in children/youth? If yes, how strong is their effect and is there a difference among the intervention types? Are there nutritional interventions that can reduce violent offending in children/youth? If yes, how strong is their effect and is there a difference among the intervention types? Are there nutritional interventions that can reduce non-violent offending in children/youth? If yes, how strong is their effect and is there a difference among the intervention types? What implementation barriers and solutions to these exist in relation to the above nutritional interventions in children/youth?</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1400","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140606291","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
Unlocking the power of global collaboration: Building a stronger evidence ecosystem together 释放全球合作的力量:共建更强大的证据生态系统
IF 3.2 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-04-16 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1401
Zoe Jordan, Vivian Welch, Karla Soares-Weiser
<p>Across the global evidence ecosystem, numerous organizations share a common vision and mission: to promote evidence-based decision-making worldwide. These organizations, including JBI, the Cochrane Collaboration, and the Campbell Collaboration, have each made an indelible imprint on the evidence-based movement and have been identified as “a crucial mechanism to facilitate the synthesis, transfer, and implementation of evidence into health care policy and practice” (Pilla et al., <span>2022</span>, p. 211). While the benefits of global collaboration have been well established for some time, achieving impact at scale will require a fundamental shift in mindset.</p><p>The COVID-19 pandemic marked a turning point for evidence-based health care and decision-making. It provided a unique context whereby policymakers, health care providers, researchers, and the public required immediate access to trustworthy evidence to make decisions. We collectively faced major challenges in translating a rapidly evolving body of new evidence into tangible response efforts, with health policy decisions receiving unprecedented public attention. The “stress test” of COVID-19, and the many post-pandemic initiatives that followed, highlighted the need for more effective strategies, institutional mechanisms, and capacities to systematically mobilize and contextualize the best available evidence for rapid decision-making for effective and equitable public health responses (Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges, <span>2022</span>; Stibbe & Prescott, <span>2022</span>; World Health Organization Evidence-informed Policy Network [EVIPNet], <span>2021</span>).</p><p>Each of our organizations responded to COVID-19 in different ways and were able to provide access to reliable evidence. Yet, it is essential to acknowledge the challenges of sustaining funding, upholding methodological rigor, and ensuring diversity and inclusivity in our collective endeavors. Our demonstrated success in enhancing global health care, education, and social policy underscores the value of collaborative, evidence-based approaches in addressing the world's most pressing challenges.</p><p>We find ourselves at a unique juncture where our respective global collaborative evidence networks (JBI, Cochrane, and Campbell) must reimagine the way we work together to facilitate and engage in multidisciplinary, transdisciplinary, and interdisciplinary research, dissemination, knowledge sharing, and knowledge translation to generate impact at scale across the evidence ecosystem. It is time to develop interagency collaboration as a coherent program rather than a series of standalone efforts. There is significant potential in our ability to orchestrate, integrate, coordinate, and align our activities to identify opportunities for mutual benefit, learning, and impact.</p><p>One of the most significant benefits of our respective global networks is our capacity to transcend geographic boundarie
在全球循证生态系统中,众多组织有着共同的愿景和使命:在全球范围内促进循证决策。包括 JBI、科克伦合作组织和坎贝尔合作组织在内的这些组织都在循证运动中留下了不可磨灭的印记,并被认为是 "促进证据的综合、转移以及将证据应用到医疗政策和实践中的重要机制"(Pilla et al.)虽然全球合作的益处早已得到证实,但要实现大规模的影响,还需要从根本上转变观念。COVID-19 大流行标志着循证医疗保健和决策的转折点。它提供了一个独特的环境,政策制定者、医疗服务提供者、研究人员和公众需要立即获得可信的证据来做出决策。我们共同面临着将快速发展的新证据转化为切实可行的应对措施的重大挑战,同时卫生政策决策也受到了前所未有的公众关注。COVID-19 的 "压力测试 "以及随后的许多大流行后倡议,都强调了需要更有效的战略、机构机制和能力,以系统地调动和结合现有最佳证据,为有效和公平的公共卫生应对措施做出快速决策(应对社会挑战证据全球委员会,2022 年;Stibbe &;Prescott,2022 年;世界卫生组织循证政策网络 [EVIPNet],2021 年)。我们每个组织都以不同的方式响应 COVID-19,并能够提供可靠的证据。然而,我们必须承认,在我们的集体努力中,面临着持续提供资金、坚持方法的严谨性以及确保多样性和包容性的挑战。我们在加强全球医疗保健、教育和社会政策方面所取得的成功强调了以证据为基础的合作方法在应对世界最紧迫挑战中的价值。我们发现自己正处于一个独特的关口,我们各自的全球合作证据网络(JBI、Cochrane 和 Campbell)必须重新规划我们的合作方式,以促进和参与多学科、跨学科和跨学科研究、传播、知识共享和知识转化,从而在整个证据生态系统中产生大规模影响。现在是时候将机构间合作发展成为一项连贯的计划,而不是一系列独立的工作。我们有能力统筹、整合、协调和调整我们的活动,以确定互惠互利、学习和影响的机会,这其中蕴含着巨大的潜力。通过促进更好的全球机构间合作,我们能够汇集循证实践领域的专长和知识,从而对复杂问题有更全面、更细致的了解,从而改进地方和全球层面的决策。这方面的例子可能包括:在反映证据多样性的综合方法和标准方面进行更深入的合作,以应对全球挑战;在确定综合工作的优先次序方面采取更协调的方法,以避免重复劳动;在政策和实践证据的背景化或本地化方面建立更好、更有意义的伙伴关系。通往更加光明、更加以证据为基础的未来的道路在于持续合作和我们对提供可信证据的坚定承诺。在我们这个相互联系日益紧密的世界里,在我们的全球网络之间而不仅仅是在网络内部开展合作,现在已不仅仅是一种选择,而是一种必然。
{"title":"Unlocking the power of global collaboration: Building a stronger evidence ecosystem together","authors":"Zoe Jordan,&nbsp;Vivian Welch,&nbsp;Karla Soares-Weiser","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1401","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1401","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;Across the global evidence ecosystem, numerous organizations share a common vision and mission: to promote evidence-based decision-making worldwide. These organizations, including JBI, the Cochrane Collaboration, and the Campbell Collaboration, have each made an indelible imprint on the evidence-based movement and have been identified as “a crucial mechanism to facilitate the synthesis, transfer, and implementation of evidence into health care policy and practice” (Pilla et al., &lt;span&gt;2022&lt;/span&gt;, p. 211). While the benefits of global collaboration have been well established for some time, achieving impact at scale will require a fundamental shift in mindset.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The COVID-19 pandemic marked a turning point for evidence-based health care and decision-making. It provided a unique context whereby policymakers, health care providers, researchers, and the public required immediate access to trustworthy evidence to make decisions. We collectively faced major challenges in translating a rapidly evolving body of new evidence into tangible response efforts, with health policy decisions receiving unprecedented public attention. The “stress test” of COVID-19, and the many post-pandemic initiatives that followed, highlighted the need for more effective strategies, institutional mechanisms, and capacities to systematically mobilize and contextualize the best available evidence for rapid decision-making for effective and equitable public health responses (Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges, &lt;span&gt;2022&lt;/span&gt;; Stibbe &amp; Prescott, &lt;span&gt;2022&lt;/span&gt;; World Health Organization Evidence-informed Policy Network [EVIPNet], &lt;span&gt;2021&lt;/span&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Each of our organizations responded to COVID-19 in different ways and were able to provide access to reliable evidence. Yet, it is essential to acknowledge the challenges of sustaining funding, upholding methodological rigor, and ensuring diversity and inclusivity in our collective endeavors. Our demonstrated success in enhancing global health care, education, and social policy underscores the value of collaborative, evidence-based approaches in addressing the world's most pressing challenges.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;We find ourselves at a unique juncture where our respective global collaborative evidence networks (JBI, Cochrane, and Campbell) must reimagine the way we work together to facilitate and engage in multidisciplinary, transdisciplinary, and interdisciplinary research, dissemination, knowledge sharing, and knowledge translation to generate impact at scale across the evidence ecosystem. It is time to develop interagency collaboration as a coherent program rather than a series of standalone efforts. There is significant potential in our ability to orchestrate, integrate, coordinate, and align our activities to identify opportunities for mutual benefit, learning, and impact.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;One of the most significant benefits of our respective global networks is our capacity to transcend geographic boundarie","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1401","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140556310","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
Case management interventions seeking to counter radicalisation to violence and related forms of violence: A systematic review 旨在打击激进暴力和相关暴力形式的个案管理干预措施:系统回顾
IF 3.2 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-04-12 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1386
James Lewis, Sarah Marsden, Adrian Cherney, Martine Zeuthen, Lotta Rahlf, Chloe Squires, Anne Peterscheck
<div> <section> <h3> Background</h3> <p>Increasingly, counter-radicalisation interventions are using case management approaches to structure the delivery of tailored services to those at risk of engaging in, or engaged in, violent extremism. This review sets out the evidence on case management tools and approaches and is made up of two parts with the following objectives.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Objectives</h3> <p><i>Part I</i>: (1) Synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of case management tools and approaches in interventions seeking to counter radicalisation to violence. (2) Qualitatively synthesise research examining whether case management tools and approaches are implemented as intended, and the factors that explain how they are implemented. <i>Part II</i>: (3) Synthesise systematic reviews to understand whether case management tools and approaches are effective at countering non-terrorism related interpersonal or collective forms of violence. (4) Qualitatively synthesise research analysing whether case management tools and approaches are implemented as intended, and what influences how they are implemented. (5) Assess the transferability of tools and approaches used in wider violence prevention work to counter-radicalisation interventions.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Search Methods</h3> <p>Search terms tailored for Part I and Part II were used to search research repositories, grey literature sources and academic journals for studies published between 2000 and 2022. Searches were conducted in August and September 2022. Forward and backward citation searches and consultations with experts took place between September 2022 and February 2023. Studies in English, French, German, Russian, Swedish, Norwegian and Danish were eligible.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Selection Criteria</h3> <p><i>Part I</i>: Studies had to report on a case management intervention, tool or approach, or on specific stages of the case management process. Only experimental and stronger quasi-experimental studies were eligible for inclusion in the analysis of effectiveness. The inclusion criteria for the analysis of implementation allowed for other quantitative designs and qualitative research. <i>Part II</i>: Systematic reviews examining a case management intervention, tool or approach, or stage(s) of the case management process focused on countering violence were eligible for inclusion.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3> <p><i>Part I<
背景 反激进化干预措施越来越多地采用个案管理方法,为有可能或已经参与暴力极端主义的人提供量身定制的服务。本综述列出了有关个案管理工具和方法的证据,由两部分组成,目标如下。 目标 第I部分:(1) 综合个案管理工具和方法在打击激进暴力干预中有效性的证据。(2) 对个案管理工具和方法是否按预期实施以及如何实施的因素进行定性综合研究。第二部分:(3) 综合系统综述,了解个案管理工具和方法是否能有效打击与恐怖主义无关的人际或集体暴力形式。(4) 对研究进行定性综合,分析个案管理工具和方法是否按预期实施,以及影响实施的因素。(5) 评估在更广泛的预防暴力工作中使用的工具和方法是否可用于反激进化干预措施。 搜索方法 使用为第 I 部分和第 II 部分量身定制的搜索条件,搜索研究资料库、灰色文献来源和学术期刊中 2000 年至 2022 年间发表的研究。搜索于 2022 年 8 月和 9 月进行。2022 年 9 月至 2023 年 2 月期间进行了正向和反向引文检索,并咨询了专家。符合条件的研究语言包括英语、法语、德语、俄语、瑞典语、挪威语和丹麦语。 筛选标准 第一部分:研究必须报告个案管理干预措施、工具或方法,或个案管理过程的特定阶段。只有实验研究和较强的准实验研究才有资格纳入有效性分析。实施情况分析的纳入标准允许其他定量设计和定性研究。第 II 部分:研究个案管理干预措施、工具或方法或个案管理过程中侧重于打击暴力的阶段的系统性综述符合纳入条件。 没有研究符合目标 1 的纳入标准;所有符合条件的研究都与目标 2 有关。采用框架综合法对这些研究的数据进行了综合,并以叙述的方式进行了介绍。采用 CASP(定性研究)和 EPHPP(定量研究)检查表对偏倚风险进行了评估。第一部分:八篇综述符合第二部分的要求。五篇综述符合目标 3 的纳入标准,七篇符合目标 4 的纳入标准。采用框架综合法对研究数据进行了综合,并以叙述的方式进行了介绍。使用 AMSTAR II 工具对偏倚风险进行了评估。 研究结果 第 I 部分:没有符合条件的研究考察了工具和方法的有效性。七项研究考察了不同方法的实施情况或干预措施的基本假设。没有明确界定的变革理论,但这些干预措施的实施被评估为符合其自身的基本逻辑。有 43 项研究分析了个案管理过程中各个阶段工具的实施情况,有 41 项研究审查了这一过程的整体实施情况。影响个别阶段和整个个案管理过程实施方式的因素包括:强有力的多机构工作安排;相关知识和专长的融入以及相关培训;资源的可用性。缺乏这些促进因素会阻碍实施。其他实施障碍包括:过于以风险为导向的逻辑;公众和政治压力;以及更广泛的立法。28 项研究确定了影响干预措施实施方式的调节因素,包括实施环境、当地环境、独立干预措施和客户挑战。第二部分:一篇系统性综述分别评估了辅导和多系统疗法这两种干预措施在减少暴力结果方面的有效性,三篇综述分析了风险评估工具(n = 2)和测谎仪(n = 1)的使用对结果的影响。所有这些审查报告的结果好坏参半。 研究发现,与第 I 部分所确定的因素类似,如人员培训和专业知识以及实施背景,也会影响实施情况。根据这一规模不大的样本,对打击与恐怖主义无关的暴力行为的干预措施的研究被评估为可用于打击激进化干预措施。 作者的结论 人们对现有个案管理工具和方法的有效性知之甚少,对影响不同方法实施的因素的研究也很有限。然而,关于促进个案管理干预措施的实施或对其实施造成障碍的因素的研究却在不断增加。许多与打击暴力激进化相关的因素和调节因素也会影响用于打击其他形式暴力的个案管理工具和方法的实施。这一更广泛领域的研究似乎对打击暴力激进化的工作有可借鉴的启示。本综述为进一步研究提供了一个平台,以检验不同工具的影响以及这些工具影响结果的机制。这项工作将受益于使用个案管理框架,将其作为合理化和分析各种工具、方法和流程的一种方式,这些工具、方法和流程构成了打击激进暴力的个案管理干预措施。
{"title":"Case management interventions seeking to counter radicalisation to violence and related forms of violence: A systematic review","authors":"James Lewis,&nbsp;Sarah Marsden,&nbsp;Adrian Cherney,&nbsp;Martine Zeuthen,&nbsp;Lotta Rahlf,&nbsp;Chloe Squires,&nbsp;Anne Peterscheck","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1386","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1386","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Background&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Increasingly, counter-radicalisation interventions are using case management approaches to structure the delivery of tailored services to those at risk of engaging in, or engaged in, violent extremism. This review sets out the evidence on case management tools and approaches and is made up of two parts with the following objectives.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Objectives&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Part I&lt;/i&gt;: (1) Synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of case management tools and approaches in interventions seeking to counter radicalisation to violence. (2) Qualitatively synthesise research examining whether case management tools and approaches are implemented as intended, and the factors that explain how they are implemented. &lt;i&gt;Part II&lt;/i&gt;: (3) Synthesise systematic reviews to understand whether case management tools and approaches are effective at countering non-terrorism related interpersonal or collective forms of violence. (4) Qualitatively synthesise research analysing whether case management tools and approaches are implemented as intended, and what influences how they are implemented. (5) Assess the transferability of tools and approaches used in wider violence prevention work to counter-radicalisation interventions.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Search Methods&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Search terms tailored for Part I and Part II were used to search research repositories, grey literature sources and academic journals for studies published between 2000 and 2022. Searches were conducted in August and September 2022. Forward and backward citation searches and consultations with experts took place between September 2022 and February 2023. Studies in English, French, German, Russian, Swedish, Norwegian and Danish were eligible.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Selection Criteria&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Part I&lt;/i&gt;: Studies had to report on a case management intervention, tool or approach, or on specific stages of the case management process. Only experimental and stronger quasi-experimental studies were eligible for inclusion in the analysis of effectiveness. The inclusion criteria for the analysis of implementation allowed for other quantitative designs and qualitative research. &lt;i&gt;Part II&lt;/i&gt;: Systematic reviews examining a case management intervention, tool or approach, or stage(s) of the case management process focused on countering violence were eligible for inclusion.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Data Collection and Analysis&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Part I&lt;","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1386","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140550192","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: Interventions aimed at preventing out-of-home placement of children: A systematic review 议定书:旨在防止儿童被安置在家庭外的干预措施:系统回顾
IF 3.2 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-04-10 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1395
Nina Thorup Dalgaard, Anja Bondebjerg, Elizabeth Bengtsen, Jens Dietrichson, Anders Bach-Mortensen

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The aim of the present review is to synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of interventions for at-risk families aimed at preventing the out-of-home placement of children or increasing the likelihood that children are reunited with their birth families following temporary care arrangements. The review has two objectives: (1) To assess the effectiveness of interventions for at-risk families with children aged between 0 and 17 years old on measures of out-of-home placement and on secondary outcomes. (2) To identify factors that modify intervention effectiveness (e.g., prior placements, parental risk factors such as substance abuse, mental health issues, age, minority status, child risk factors such as disabilities, age, and gender).

这是坎贝尔系统综述的协议。目标如下。本综述旨在综合有关高危家庭干预措施有效性的证据,这些干预措施旨在防止将儿童安置在家庭外,或增加儿童在临时照料安排后与亲生家庭团聚的可能性。本次研究有两个目标:(1) 评估针对有 0 至 17 岁儿童的高危家庭的干预措施对儿童离家安置和次要结果的有效性。(2) 确定影响干预效果的因素(如先前的安置、父母的风险因素,如药物滥用、精神健康问题、年龄、少数民族身份、儿童的风险因素,如残疾、年龄和性别)。
{"title":"Protocol: Interventions aimed at preventing out-of-home placement of children: A systematic review","authors":"Nina Thorup Dalgaard,&nbsp;Anja Bondebjerg,&nbsp;Elizabeth Bengtsen,&nbsp;Jens Dietrichson,&nbsp;Anders Bach-Mortensen","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1395","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1395","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The aim of the present review is to synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of interventions for at-risk families aimed at preventing the out-of-home placement of children or increasing the likelihood that children are reunited with their birth families following temporary care arrangements. The review has two objectives: (1) To assess the effectiveness of interventions for at-risk families with children aged between 0 and 17 years old on measures of out-of-home placement and on secondary outcomes. (2) To identify factors that modify intervention effectiveness (e.g., prior placements, parental risk factors such as substance abuse, mental health issues, age, minority status, child risk factors such as disabilities, age, and gender).</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1395","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140541192","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: Key characteristics of effective preschool-based interventions to promote self-regulation: A systematic review and meta-analysis 方案:促进自我调节的有效学龄前干预措施的关键特征:系统回顾和荟萃分析
IF 3.2 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-04-02 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1383
Atsushi Kanayama, Iram Siraj, Mariola Moeyaert, Kat Steiner, Elie ChingYen Yu, Katharina Ereky-Stevens, Kaoru Iwasa, Moeko Ishikawa, Mehar Kahlon, Rahel Warnatsch, Andreea Dascalu, Ruoying He, Pinal P. Mehta, Natasha Robinson, Yining Shi

This is the protocol for a Cochrane Review. The objectives are as follows: The aim of this systematic review is to advance our understanding of the key characteristics of effective preschool-based interventions designed to foster self-regulation. To accomplish this, the review addresses the following questions: 1. What types of preschool-based interventions have been developed to promote self-regulation? 2. What is the average effect of these preschool-based interventions on self-regulation, focusing on four key constructs: integrative effortful control, integrative executive function, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning? 3. What characteristics—such as Resource Allocation, Activity Type, and Instruction Method—could potentially contribute to the effects of preschool-based interventions in promoting self-regulation?

这是 Cochrane 综述的协议。目标如下:本系统综述旨在加深我们对旨在培养自我调节能力的有效学前干预措施的主要特点的了解。为此,本综述将探讨以下问题:1.已经开发了哪些类型的学前干预措施来促进自我调节?2.2. 这些以学前教育为基础的干预措施对自我调节的平均效果如何,重点关注四个关键建构:综合努力控制、综合执行功能、自我调节和自我调节学习?3.资源分配、活动类型和教学方法等方面的哪些特征可能会影响学前干预在促进自我调节方面的效果?
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Key characteristics of effective preschool-based interventions to promote self-regulation: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Atsushi Kanayama,&nbsp;Iram Siraj,&nbsp;Mariola Moeyaert,&nbsp;Kat Steiner,&nbsp;Elie ChingYen Yu,&nbsp;Katharina Ereky-Stevens,&nbsp;Kaoru Iwasa,&nbsp;Moeko Ishikawa,&nbsp;Mehar Kahlon,&nbsp;Rahel Warnatsch,&nbsp;Andreea Dascalu,&nbsp;Ruoying He,&nbsp;Pinal P. Mehta,&nbsp;Natasha Robinson,&nbsp;Yining Shi","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1383","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1383","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 <p>This is the protocol for a Cochrane Review. The objectives are as follows: The aim of this systematic review is to advance our understanding of the key characteristics of effective preschool-based interventions designed to foster self-regulation. To accomplish this, the review addresses the following questions: 1. What types of preschool-based interventions have been developed to promote self-regulation? 2. What is the average effect of these preschool-based interventions on self-regulation, focusing on four key constructs: integrative effortful control, integrative executive function, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning? 3. What characteristics—such as Resource Allocation, Activity Type, and Instruction Method—could potentially contribute to the effects of preschool-based interventions in promoting self-regulation?</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1383","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140340296","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: Factors influencing the implementation of non-pharmacological interventions for behaviours and psychological symptoms of dementia in residential aged care homes: A systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis 方案:在养老院对痴呆症的行为和心理症状实施非药物干预的影响因素:系统回顾与定性证据综述
IF 3.2 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-03-21 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1393
Hunduma Dinsa Ayeno, Gizat M. Kassie, Mustafa Atee, Tuan Nguyen

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review. The objectives are as follows. This paper aims to describe a protocol for a systematic review that will synthesise the qualitative evidence regarding factors influencing the implementation of non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) for behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) management in residential aged care homes (RACHs). The planned systematic review aims to answer the research question: ‘What are the factors influencing the implementation of NPIs in the management of BPSD at RACHs?’. Additionally, the planned systematic review also aims to generate recommendations to guide stakeholders (e.g., clinicians and aged care staff) and policymakers in the implementation of NPIs for managing BPSD at RACHs.

这是一份 Cochrane 综述协议。目标如下。本文旨在描述一项系统性综述的方案,该方案将综合有关影响安老院(RACHs)实施非药物干预(NPIs)治疗痴呆行为和心理症状(BPSD)的定性证据。计划中的系统综述旨在回答以下研究问题:"在安老院实施非药物干预治疗痴呆症行为和心理症状的影响因素有哪些?此外,计划中的系统综述还旨在提出建议,以指导利益相关者(如临床医生和老年护理人员)和政策制定者在安老院实施 NPIs 以管理 BPSD。
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Factors influencing the implementation of non-pharmacological interventions for behaviours and psychological symptoms of dementia in residential aged care homes: A systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis","authors":"Hunduma Dinsa Ayeno,&nbsp;Gizat M. Kassie,&nbsp;Mustafa Atee,&nbsp;Tuan Nguyen","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1393","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1393","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review. The objectives are as follows. This paper aims to describe a protocol for a systematic review that will synthesise the qualitative evidence regarding factors influencing the implementation of non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) for behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) management in residential aged care homes (RACHs). The planned systematic review aims to answer the research question: ‘What are the factors influencing the implementation of NPIs in the management of BPSD at RACHs?’. Additionally, the planned systematic review also aims to generate recommendations to guide stakeholders (e.g., clinicians and aged care staff) and policymakers in the implementation of NPIs for managing BPSD at RACHs.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1393","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140188543","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: Learner-educator co-creation of student assessment in health professional education courses: A scoping review protocol 方案:在健康专业教育课程中,学习者-教育者共同创建学生评估:范围审查协议
IF 3.2 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-03-20 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1392
Laura A. Killam, Rylan Egan, Christina Godfrey, Amanda Ross-White, Pilar Camargo-Plazas, Mercedes Lock, Marian Luctkar-Flude

This is a protocol for a Campbell Review following JBI scoping review methodology. The objectives are to answer the following questions: What has been reported in the literature about collaborative learner-educator design, implementation, or evaluation of learner assessment in health professional education? (1) Where is learner-educator co-creation of assessment occurring? (i.e., which disciplines, course types, level of learner, year of study). (2) What course assessment decisions are influenced or being made together? (i.e., assessment instructions and/or grades). (3) How much influence do learners have on decision-making? (i.e., where does it fall on Bovill and Bulley's ladder of participation). (4) How do learners and educators go about making decisions together? (i.e., discussion or voting, with a whole class or portion of the class). (5) What are the perceived benefits, disadvantages, barriers, and/or facilitators reported by the authors?

这是按照 JBI 范围审查方法进行坎贝尔审查的协议。目的是回答以下问题:关于健康职业教育中学习者-教育者合作设计、实施或评估学习者评估的文献报道有哪些?(1) 学习者--教育者共同创建的评估发生在哪里?(即哪些学科、课程类型、学习者水平、学习年份)。(2) 哪些课程评估决策受到影响或正在共同做出?(即评估说明和/或成绩)。(3) 学习者对决策的影响有多大? (即在 Bovill 和 Bulley 的参与阶梯上的位置)。(4) 学习者和教育者如何共同决策?(即全班或部分班级进行讨论或投票)。(5) 作者认为参与有哪些好处、坏处、障碍和/或促进因素?
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Learner-educator co-creation of student assessment in health professional education courses: A scoping review protocol","authors":"Laura A. Killam,&nbsp;Rylan Egan,&nbsp;Christina Godfrey,&nbsp;Amanda Ross-White,&nbsp;Pilar Camargo-Plazas,&nbsp;Mercedes Lock,&nbsp;Marian Luctkar-Flude","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1392","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1392","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is a protocol for a Campbell Review following JBI scoping review methodology. The objectives are to answer the following questions: What has been reported in the literature about collaborative learner-educator design, implementation, or evaluation of learner assessment in health professional education? (1) Where is learner-educator co-creation of assessment occurring? (i.e., which disciplines, course types, level of learner, year of study). (2) What course assessment decisions are influenced or being made together? (i.e., assessment instructions and/or grades). (3) How much influence do learners have on decision-making? (i.e., where does it fall on Bovill and Bulley's ladder of participation). (4) How do learners and educators go about making decisions together? (i.e., discussion or voting, with a whole class or portion of the class). (5) What are the perceived benefits, disadvantages, barriers, and/or facilitators reported by the authors?</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1392","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140164332","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Campbell Systematic Reviews
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1