首页 > 最新文献

Campbell Systematic Reviews最新文献

英文 中文
Campbell title registrations to date – August 2024, and discontinued protocols 坎贝尔所有权注册到目前为止- 2024年8月,并停止协议。
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-12-10 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.70015

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 to continue a project, please get in touch with the Managing Editor of the relevant Coordinating Group or email [email protected].

Long distance walking and well-being: A scoping review

Hind Sabri, Elizabeth Ghogomu, Victoria Barbeau, Tracey Howe, Howard White, Yanfei Li, Qian Liu, Weize Kong, Nina Cruz, Vivian Welch

6 November 2024

Effects of long-term care interventions for older adults: An evidence and gap map

Elizabeth Tanjong-Ghogomu, Nadisha Ratnasekera, Paul Hebert, Vivian Welch

30 October 2024

Data pricing: An evidence and gap map

Yufeng Wen, Yajie Zhou, Liping Guo, Wenjie Zhou, Yueyan Zhao, Weijie Lin,

4 November 2024

What are the reasons mothers choose human milk as their method of infant nutrition? A mixed methods systematic review

Niamh Ryan, Patricia Leahy-Warren, Siobhain O'Mahony, Helen Mulcahy, Lloyd Philpott

9 October 2024

Determinants of student well-being and perceived social support in higher education: A systematic literature review

Dawei Li, Farhana Kamarul Bahrin

23 September 2024

The interventions for Youth Employment in China: A country evidence map

Xiya Shao, Liping Guo, Wenjie Zhou, Yufeng Wen, Weijie Lin, Yueyan Zhao, Yang Yang, Hongli Shang, Yajie Zhou, Yijie Zhang

23 September 2024

The impact of relocation processes on people facing socio-territorial iniquities: A scoping review

Pascale Chagnon, Pierre Paul Audate, Geneviève Cloutier

23 August 2024

Understanding the structure, content, and impact of far-right extremist propaganda disseminated online: A systematic review

Mia Doolan, Kiran Sarma

25 October 2024

Strategies to enhance inclusion in informed consent practice for people with sensory impairment: A systematic literature review

Fleur O'Hare, Sujani Thrimawithana, Aimee Clague, Camille Paynter, David Foran, Caroline Ondracek, Eden Robertson, Tessa Saunders, Lauren Ayton

24 October 2024

Evidence and gap map of climate change adaptation interventions for enhancing food security and livelihoods in sub-Saharan Africa

David Sarfo Ameyaw, Kwadwo Danso-Mensah, Joseph Clottey, Clarice Panyin Nyan, Sheila Agyemang Oppong, Miriam Oppong, Nana Esi Badu-Ansah, Desmond Kaledzi, Isaac Letsa

29 August 2024

Randomized controlled trials for poverty alleviation and environmental conservation in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review

Adriana Molina Garzon, Aemro Worku, Andres R

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]。ind Sabri, Elizabeth Ghogomu, Victoria Barbeau, Tracey Howe, Howard White,李艳飞,刘谦,孔伟泽,Nina Cruz, Vivian welch2024年11月6日老年人长期护理干预的影响:证据和差距图Elizabeth Tanjong-Ghogomu, Nadisha Ratnasekera, Paul Hebert, Vivian welch2024年10月30日数据价格:温玉峰,周亚杰,郭丽萍,周文杰,赵月艳,林伟杰,2024年11月4日母亲选择母乳作为婴儿营养方式的原因是什么?niamh Ryan, Patricia Leahy-Warren, Siobhain O'Mahony, Helen Mulcahy, Lloyd philpote . 2009年10月9日高等教育中学生幸福感和感知社会支持的决定因素:系统文献综述李大维,Farhana Kamarul bahri . 23 September 24中国青年就业的干预措施:邵希亚,郭丽萍,周文杰,温玉峰,林伟杰,赵月艳,杨洋,尚红丽,周亚杰,张一杰23年9月23日搬迁过程对面临社会-领土不平等的人的影响:一个范围综述pascale Chagnon, Pierre Paul Audate, genevi<e:1>, Cloutier23年8月23日理解极右极端主义宣传的结构、内容和影响mia Doolan, Kiran sarma2024年10月25日加强对感觉障碍患者知情同意实践的包容策略:flur O'Hare, Sujani Thrimawithana, Aimee Clague, Camille Paynter, David Foran, Caroline Ondracek, Eden Robertson, Tessa Saunders, Lauren ayton2024年10月24日David Sarfo Ameyaw, Kwadwo Danso-Mensah, Joseph Clottey, Clarice Panyin Nyan, Sheila Agyemang Oppong, Miriam Oppong, Nana Esi Badu-Ansah, Desmond Kaledzi,中低收入国家减贫和环境保护的随机对照试验:系统综述adriana Molina Garzon, Aemro Worku, Andres Ramasco, Lakshmi Iyer, Ellis Adams, Krister Andersson, Daniel miller2024年8月29日草药和天然溶液对古达尔茶封闭前消毒效果的评价-系统综述emalatha Hiremath, Priyankar Roy, Sadanand kulkarni2024年11月22日药物基因组学检测基因分型平台的准确性和一致性诊断测试准确性的系统评价方案kiflu Tesfamicael, Mike Musker, David Adelson, Martin lewis 2024年10月31日农村提供者对提供者远程医疗对急诊和住院护理的价值:证据和差距图kaylie Toll, Danika Jurat, Suzanne Robinson, Stephen Andrew, Aled Williams, Zaheerah Haywood, Amy Cole, Joanna moullin 2024年10月31日提供性健康和生殖健康的卫生保健专业人员采用远程医疗:范围审查ma。维罗妮卡·克鲁兹,妈。emma Cocking, Joseph Daher, Majid alabbood .信息通信技术在乳腺癌营养干预中的应用:陈欣,易宇彤,Maaz Imam, j.j. Pionke, Lixcy Vega, Anna Arthur, Jessie Chin, chuchungyi 4 October 2024可解释的机器学习用于乳房x光检查和超声图像的乳腺癌诊断:系统综述daraje Gurmessa, Worku jimma2024年10月3日基于人工智能的心理治疗在治疗精神障碍中的有效性samit Soni, Vinit Singh, Mohit kumar2024年9月2日如果您有兴趣继续以下其中一个项目,请与相关协调小组的执行编辑联系或发送电子邮件[email protected].https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/CL2.85PROTOCOL:巴拉克·阿里尔,劳伦斯·w·谢尔曼https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/CL2.215Protocol系统综述:提高小学学龄儿童数学成绩的干预措施:系统综述维多利亚·西姆斯,卡米拉·吉尔摩,肖恩·斯隆,克莱尔·麦基维尼https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cl2。 1011协议:系统审查协议:改善儿童和青少年教育和社会成果的校际合作:系统审查保罗·康诺利,詹妮弗·汉拉蒂,乔安妮·休斯,克里斯托弗·查普曼,丹妮尔·布拉洛克https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/CL2.145PROTOCOL:增强儿童和青少年亲社会行为的实践和计划组成部分:A . L. Spivak, Mark W. Lipsey, Dale C. Farran, Joshua R. Polaninhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/CL2.185PROTOCOL:基于学校的执行功能干预对儿童和青少年执行功能、学业、社会情感和行为结果的直接和间接影响:一项系统综述。提供信息和通信技术(ICT)以提高4 - 18岁学生的学习成绩和学校参与度kristin Liabo, Laurenz Langer, Antonia Simon, Kathy-Ann Daniel-Gittens, Alex Elwick, Janice Tripneyhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/CL2.210PROTOCOL:为改善3-11岁儿童的社交和情感结果而开展的以学校为基础的普遍项目paul Connolly, Sarah Miller, Jennifer Hanratty, Jennifer Roberts, Seaneen Sloanhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/CL2.110PROTOCOL:为改善患有慢
{"title":"Campbell title registrations to date – August 2024, and discontinued protocols","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70015","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.70015","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 <i>send an email</i> 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 to continue a project, please get in touch with the Managing Editor of the relevant Coordinating Group or email <span>[email protected]</span>.</p><p>Long distance walking and well-being: A scoping review</p><p>Hind Sabri, Elizabeth Ghogomu, Victoria Barbeau, Tracey Howe, Howard White, Yanfei Li, Qian Liu, Weize Kong, Nina Cruz, Vivian Welch</p><p>6 November 2024</p><p>Effects of long-term care interventions for older adults: An evidence and gap map</p><p>Elizabeth Tanjong-Ghogomu, Nadisha Ratnasekera, Paul Hebert, Vivian Welch</p><p>30 October 2024</p><p>Data pricing: An evidence and gap map</p><p>Yufeng Wen, Yajie Zhou, Liping Guo, Wenjie Zhou, Yueyan Zhao, Weijie Lin,</p><p>4 November 2024</p><p>What are the reasons mothers choose human milk as their method of infant nutrition? A mixed methods systematic review</p><p>Niamh Ryan, Patricia Leahy-Warren, Siobhain O'Mahony, Helen Mulcahy, Lloyd Philpott</p><p>9 October 2024</p><p>Determinants of student well-being and perceived social support in higher education: A systematic literature review</p><p>Dawei Li, Farhana Kamarul Bahrin</p><p>23 September 2024</p><p>The interventions for Youth Employment in China: A country evidence map</p><p>Xiya Shao, Liping Guo, Wenjie Zhou, Yufeng Wen, Weijie Lin, Yueyan Zhao, Yang Yang, Hongli Shang, Yajie Zhou, Yijie Zhang</p><p>23 September 2024</p><p>The impact of relocation processes on people facing socio-territorial iniquities: A scoping review</p><p>Pascale Chagnon, Pierre Paul Audate, Geneviève Cloutier</p><p>23 August 2024</p><p>Understanding the structure, content, and impact of far-right extremist propaganda disseminated online: A systematic review</p><p>Mia Doolan, Kiran Sarma</p><p>25 October 2024</p><p>Strategies to enhance inclusion in informed consent practice for people with sensory impairment: A systematic literature review</p><p>Fleur O'Hare, Sujani Thrimawithana, Aimee Clague, Camille Paynter, David Foran, Caroline Ondracek, Eden Robertson, Tessa Saunders, Lauren Ayton</p><p>24 October 2024</p><p>Evidence and gap map of climate change adaptation interventions for enhancing food security and livelihoods in sub-Saharan Africa</p><p>David Sarfo Ameyaw, Kwadwo Danso-Mensah, Joseph Clottey, Clarice Panyin Nyan, Sheila Agyemang Oppong, Miriam Oppong, Nana Esi Badu-Ansah, Desmond Kaledzi, Isaac Letsa</p><p>29 August 2024</p><p>Randomized controlled trials for poverty alleviation and environmental conservation in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review</p><p>Adriana Molina Garzon, Aemro Worku, Andres R","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11632157/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142814404","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
Medical-financial partnerships for improving financial and medical outcomes for lower-income Americans: A systematic review 改善低收入美国人财务和医疗结果的医疗-金融伙伴关系:系统回顾。
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-12-06 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.70008
Julie Birkenmaier, Brandy R. Maynard, Harly M. Blumhagen, Hannah Shanks
<div> <section> <h3> Background</h3> <p>Poverty is considered one of the social determinants of health (i.e., a range of social and environmental conditions that affect health and well-being) because of its association with significant health problems. In recent years, healthcare settings have emerged as focal points for poverty interventions with direct health implications. Medical institutions are increasingly implementing financial partnerships to provide interventions targeted at improving the financial well-being of patients with the dual objective of boosting appointment attendance rates and alleviating financial burdens on patients. While medical-financial partnerships (MFPs) appear to be growing in popularity, it is unclear if these interventions positively impact financial and/or health outcomes.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Objectives</h3> <p>The purpose of this review is to inform policy and practice relevant to MFPs by analyzing and synthesizing empirical evidence related to their health and financial outcomes. The primary objectives of this review is to answer the following research questions: (1) What is the extent and quality of MFP intervention research? (2) What are the effects on financial outcomes of financial services embedded within healthcare settings? (3) What are the effects on health-related outcomes of financial services embedded within healthcare settings?</p> </section> <section> <h3> Search Methods</h3> <p>We conducted a comprehensive search for published and gray literature from September to December 2023. We searched for and retrieved published studies from Google, Google Scholar, and 10 Electronic databases. We also searched five relevant websites and two trial registries for registered studies. We harvested from the reference lists of included studies and conducted forward citation searching using Google Scholar. Lastly, we contacted the first authors of the four included studies and requested information about unpublished studies, studies in progress, and published studies potentially missed in the other search activities.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Selection Criteria</h3> <p>Studies eligible for this review met the following criteria. First, studies must have used a prospective randomized controlled trial or quasi-experimental (QED) research design with parallel cohorts. Second, studies must have involved an intervention that provides financial services on-site within a healthcare setting. Third, the studies must have measured a financial outcome. Fourth, to meet the criteria for on-site financial services, in
背景:贫穷被认为是健康(即影响健康和福祉的一系列社会和环境条件)的社会决定因素之一,因为它与重大健康问题有关。近年来,卫生保健环境已成为具有直接健康影响的贫困干预措施的协调中心。医疗机构越来越多地实施财务伙伴关系,以提供旨在改善患者财务状况的干预措施,实现提高预约出勤率和减轻患者经济负担的双重目标。虽然医疗-金融伙伴关系(mfp)似乎越来越受欢迎,但尚不清楚这些干预措施是否对财务和/或健康结果产生积极影响。目的:本审查的目的是通过分析和综合与产妇健康和财务结果有关的经验证据,为产妇的相关政策和做法提供信息。本综述的主要目的是回答以下研究问题:(1)MFP干预研究的范围和质量是什么?(2)医疗环境中嵌入的金融服务对财务结果的影响是什么?(3)医疗环境中嵌入的金融服务对健康相关结果的影响是什么?检索方法:我们对2023年9月至12月的已发表文献和灰色文献进行了综合检索。我们检索并检索了谷歌、谷歌Scholar和10个电子数据库中发表的研究。我们还检索了5个相关网站和2个已注册研究的试验注册中心。我们从纳入研究的参考文献列表中获取数据,并使用谷歌Scholar进行前向引文检索。最后,我们联系了四项纳入研究的第一作者,并询问了未发表的研究、正在进行的研究和在其他搜索活动中可能遗漏的已发表研究的信息。入选标准:入选本综述的研究符合以下标准。首先,研究必须使用前瞻性随机对照试验或准实验(QED)研究设计与平行队列。其次,研究必须涉及在医疗保健环境中提供现场金融服务的干预措施。第三,这些研究必须衡量财务结果。第四,为了满足现场金融服务的标准,干预措施必须至少包括以下一项:(1)金融教育、咨询或指导,(2)信用咨询,或(3)提供帮助患者获得金融产品或服务的服务,如免费报税服务,或(4)增加收入的服务,如筛选公共福利和协助申请流程,以及就业服务(如协助撰写简历和工作面试技巧)。提取和分析了与健康相关的结果,但不是入选的必要条件。数据收集和分析:检索结果保存在文献管理软件EndNote2中,删除重复并上传到Rayyan。四名审稿人随后完成了对Rayyan中66807个条目的标题和摘要筛选。三名审稿人独立审查了26篇被提交全文筛选的文章。第四名审稿人审查差异,并做出最终决定,包括或排除。四项符合纳入标准的研究被保留下来,使用标准化的提取表格进行数据提取。由于纳入的研究没有测量和报告足够的数据来计算类似结果的效应量,因此不可能进行定量综合。在可能的情况下计算效应量,并描述研究结果。主要结果:本综述纳入的4项独特研究中,2项为随机对照试验,2项为qed。四项研究中有三项是在儿科环境中进行的。其中两项研究仅将税务准备作为其财务干预措施,均在医疗保健诊所设置现场提供VITA税务诊所。一项研究以财务指导为特色,包括一对一的案例管理、预算和目标设定等一系列服务,第四项研究提供了两次远程授课的财务咨询。所有四项研究都报告了至少一项财务结果,两项研究报告了至少一项健康相关结果。由于纳入的研究数量少,且缺乏作者报告计算效应量的数据,因此关于mfp对健康和财务影响的证据有限。结果表明,mfp对报告的财务结果的影响很小且不显著,而一些作者报告的对参加预约和遵守疫苗接种计划的积极统计显着影响。 偏倚评估的风险表明纳入研究的重要方法学弱点。作者的结论是:尽管mfp正变得越来越流行,并且有可能改善财务和健康状况,但总体上缺乏关于mfp是否达到其目标的证据。很少有研究符合纳入标准,而那些符合标准的研究通常质量较低,因此,我们无法得出有关干预效果的任何结论。考虑到这项研究的新生性质,对MFPS的高度热情似乎超过了它们对重要结果的有效性的证据。我们主张医疗保健机构首先投资于试点mfp的严格研究,并广泛传播其研究结果,然后再决定将其推广到实践中,并/或将其纳入医疗保健政策。
{"title":"Medical-financial partnerships for improving financial and medical outcomes for lower-income Americans: A systematic review","authors":"Julie Birkenmaier,&nbsp;Brandy R. Maynard,&nbsp;Harly M. Blumhagen,&nbsp;Hannah Shanks","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70008","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.70008","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;Poverty is considered one of the social determinants of health (i.e., a range of social and environmental conditions that affect health and well-being) because of its association with significant health problems. In recent years, healthcare settings have emerged as focal points for poverty interventions with direct health implications. Medical institutions are increasingly implementing financial partnerships to provide interventions targeted at improving the financial well-being of patients with the dual objective of boosting appointment attendance rates and alleviating financial burdens on patients. While medical-financial partnerships (MFPs) appear to be growing in popularity, it is unclear if these interventions positively impact financial and/or health outcomes.&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 purpose of this review is to inform policy and practice relevant to MFPs by analyzing and synthesizing empirical evidence related to their health and financial outcomes. The primary objectives of this review is to answer the following research questions: (1) What is the extent and quality of MFP intervention research? (2) What are the effects on financial outcomes of financial services embedded within healthcare settings? (3) What are the effects on health-related outcomes of financial services embedded within healthcare settings?&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 a comprehensive search for published and gray literature from September to December 2023. We searched for and retrieved published studies from Google, Google Scholar, and 10 Electronic databases. We also searched five relevant websites and two trial registries for registered studies. We harvested from the reference lists of included studies and conducted forward citation searching using Google Scholar. Lastly, we contacted the first authors of the four included studies and requested information about unpublished studies, studies in progress, and published studies potentially missed in the other search activities.&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;Studies eligible for this review met the following criteria. First, studies must have used a prospective randomized controlled trial or quasi-experimental (QED) research design with parallel cohorts. Second, studies must have involved an intervention that provides financial services on-site within a healthcare setting. Third, the studies must have measured a financial outcome. Fourth, to meet the criteria for on-site financial services, in","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11621975/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142802577","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: Complementarity between informal care and formal care to adults: Knowledge mapping through a scoping review of the literature 协议:成人非正式护理和正式护理之间的互补性:通过文献范围审查的知识图谱
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-12-02 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.70004
Marta Osório de Matos, Elzbieta Bobrowicz-Campos, Rosa Silva, Francisca Castanheira, Diana Santos

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The aim of this scoping review is to map, describe and characterize the available evidence on the role that formal care might have in complementing informal caregivers role – romantic partners, parallel family members (e.g., [step]siblings, cousins or in-laws) or descendants (e.g., the care-receivers are [step]parents, [step]aunts/uncles, [step]grandparents or in-laws) – when providing care to adults with acquired diseases (physical or neurologic) in domestic settings and will set the ground for future research on this topic. The scoping review questions are the following: (i) What is the existing literature on the complementarity between formal and informal care? (ii) Which are the types of formal cares' services/interventions that have been described in the literature as complementary to informal care, provided to the informal caregiver and/or to the adult being cared for? (iii) Which outcomes have been assessed in the caregiver's physical, psychological, and social health domains, and how have they been measured?

这是坎贝尔系统评价的方案。这项范围审查的目的是绘制、描述和描述关于正式照顾可能在补充非正式照顾者角色方面的作用的现有证据——浪漫的伴侣、平行的家庭成员(例如,[继]兄弟姐妹、表亲或姻亲)或后代(例如,照顾接受者是[继]父母、[继]阿姨/叔叔、[继]父母、[继]兄弟姐妹或姻亲)。[继]祖父母或姻亲)-在家庭环境中照顾患有获得性疾病(身体或神经系统)的成年人时,并将为该主题的未来研究奠定基础。范围审查问题如下:(i)关于正式护理和非正式护理之间互补性的现有文献是什么?(ii)哪些类型的正式护理服务/干预措施在文献中被描述为非正式护理的补充,提供给非正式护理者和/或被照顾的成年人?(三)在照顾者的身体、心理和社会健康方面评估了哪些结果,以及如何衡量这些结果?
{"title":"Protocol: Complementarity between informal care and formal care to adults: Knowledge mapping through a scoping review of the literature","authors":"Marta Osório de Matos,&nbsp;Elzbieta Bobrowicz-Campos,&nbsp;Rosa Silva,&nbsp;Francisca Castanheira,&nbsp;Diana Santos","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70004","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The aim of this scoping review is to map, describe and characterize the available evidence on the role that formal care might have in complementing informal caregivers role – romantic partners, parallel family members (e.g., [step]siblings, cousins or in-laws) or descendants (e.g., the care-receivers are [step]parents, [step]aunts/uncles, [step]grandparents or in-laws) – when providing care to adults with acquired diseases (physical or neurologic) in domestic settings and will set the ground for future research on this topic. The scoping review questions are the following: (i) What is the existing literature on the complementarity between formal and informal care? (ii) Which are the types of formal cares' services/interventions that have been described in the literature as complementary to informal care, provided to the informal caregiver and/or to the adult being cared for? (iii) Which outcomes have been assessed in the caregiver's physical, psychological, and social health domains, and how have they been measured?</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70004","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142759851","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
Guidance for engagement in health guideline development: A scoping review 健康指南制定的参与指南:范围审查
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-11-25 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.70006
Jennifer Petkovic, Alison Riddle, Lyubov Lytvyn, Joanne Khabsa, Elie A. Akl, Vivian Welch, Olivia Magwood, Pearl Atwere, Ian D. Graham, Sean Grant, Denny John, Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi, Etienne V. Langlois, Reem A. Mustafa, Alex Todhunter-Brown, Holger Schünemann, Airton T. Stein, Thomas W. Concannon, Peter Tugwell

Background

Health guideline developers engage with interested people and groups to ensure that guidelines and their recommendations are relevant and useful to those who will be affected by them. These ‘interest-holders’ include patients, payers/purchasers of health services, payers of health research, peer review editors, product makers, programme managers, policymakers, providers, principal investigators, and the public. The Guidelines International Network (GIN) and McMaster University Guideline Development Checklist describes 146 steps of the guideline process organized into 18 topics. While one topic focuses on engagement, it does not describe how to engage with interest-holders. In addition, interest-holder input could be sought throughout the guideline development process. This scoping review is part of a series of four related reviews. The three other reviews address barriers and facilitators to engagement in guideline development, managing conflicts of interest in guideline development, and assessing the impact of interest-holder engagement on guideline development. The four reviews will inform the development of guidance for multi-interest-holder engagement in guideline development; the GIN-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist Extension for Engagement.

Objectives

The objective of this scoping review is to identify, describe, and summarise existing guidance and methods for multi-interest-holder engagement throughout the health guideline development process.

Search Methods

We conducted one comprehensive search for studies of engagement in guidelines to meet the inclusion criteria of one or more of the four systematic reviews in this series. We searched MEDLINE (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCO), EMBASE (OVID), PsycInfo (OVID) and SCOPUS databases up to September 2022. We did not include limits for date, study design, or language. We searched websites of agencies and organizations that engage interest-holder groups, such as the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), CIHR Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR), National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Be Part of Research, Guidelines International Network (G-I-N), the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and the PatientCentred Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). We handsearched the websites of guideline producing agencies. We solicited additional grey literature from the members of the MuSE Consortium.

Selection Criteria

背景 健康指南制定者与相关人员和团体接触,以确保指南及其建议对受其影响的人相关且有用。这些 "利益相关者 "包括患者、医疗服务的支付者/购买者、医疗研究的支付者、同行评审编辑、产品制造商、项目经理、政策制定者、医疗服务提供者、主要研究者和公众。国际指南网络 (GIN) 和麦克马斯特大学指南制定核对表将指南制定过程的 146 个步骤分为 18 个主题。虽然有一个主题侧重于参与,但并未说明如何与利益相关者进行接触。此外,在整个指南制定过程中都可以征求利益相关者的意见。本范围界定审查是四个相关审查系列的一部分。其他三篇综述涉及参与指南制定的障碍和促进因素、管理指南制定中的利益冲突以及评估利益持有者参与对指南制定的影响。这四篇综述将为制定多方利益相关者参与指南制定指南提供参考;GIN-McMaster 指南制定核对表扩展版(GIN-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist Extension for Engagement)。 目标 本范围界定综述的目的是识别、描述和总结现有的指南和方法,以促进多方利益相关者参与整个卫生指南的制定过程。 检索方法 我们对符合本系列四篇系统综述中一篇或多篇纳入标准的指南参与研究进行了一次全面检索。我们检索了截至 2022 年 9 月的 MEDLINE (OVID)、CINAHL (EBSCO)、EMBASE (OVID)、PsycInfo (OVID) 和 SCOPUS 数据库。我们没有对日期、研究设计或语言进行限制。我们搜索了有利益持有者团体参与的机构和组织的网站,如医疗保健研究与质量机构 (AHRQ)、CIHR 以患者为导向的研究战略 (SPOR)、国家健康与护理研究所 (NIHR) 参与研究、国际指南网络 (G-I-N)、国家健康与护理卓越研究所 (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) 和以患者为中心的结果研究所 (PCORI)。我们手工搜索了指南制定机构的网站。我们还向 MuSE 联合会成员征集了更多灰色文献。 选择标准 如果研究报告涉及我们所确定的任何群体(患者、研究的支付者/资助者、医疗服务的支付者/购买者、政策制定者、计划管理者、医疗服务提供者、主要研究者/研究人员、同行评审编辑、产品制造商)参与健康指南的制定,则将其纳入本综述。对确定的引文的标题和摘要进行独立筛选,一式两份。对可能相关的论文全文进行筛选,以确定是否有资格纳入四篇系列综述中的一篇或多篇。筛选工作由两名审稿人独立完成。团队每周与所有参与筛选的审稿人召开会议,讨论并解决冲突。 数据收集与分析 两名审稿人使用 Excel 将相关数据提取到经过试验测试的数据提取表中。我们使用 GIN-McMaster 指南开发核对表作为框架,在整个开发过程中为我们确定的每个利益持有者群体提取可用的指南。我们列出了在指南制定过程的各个步骤中,针对各群体报告指南的论文数量的描述性统计。我们采用定性元摘要法对相关文本进行了综合。 主要结果 我们收录了 16 篇论文(来自 17 份报告)。这些论文分别来自澳大利亚、丹麦、荷兰、英国和美国,另有 8 篇国际论文(未指明国家)。这些论文为至少一个利益相关者群体提供了至少一个阶段的指南制定指导。我们将这些指南与 GIN-McMaster 指南制定核对表进行了比对,以确定在指南制定过程的所有阶段中针对每个利益持有者群体的可用指南。在 16 篇论文中,有 15 篇为患者参与提供了指导。至少有两篇论文为 GIN-McMaster 指南开发核对表中的 18 个主题提供了指导。
{"title":"Guidance for engagement in health guideline development: A scoping review","authors":"Jennifer Petkovic,&nbsp;Alison Riddle,&nbsp;Lyubov Lytvyn,&nbsp;Joanne Khabsa,&nbsp;Elie A. Akl,&nbsp;Vivian Welch,&nbsp;Olivia Magwood,&nbsp;Pearl Atwere,&nbsp;Ian D. Graham,&nbsp;Sean Grant,&nbsp;Denny John,&nbsp;Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi,&nbsp;Etienne V. Langlois,&nbsp;Reem A. Mustafa,&nbsp;Alex Todhunter-Brown,&nbsp;Holger Schünemann,&nbsp;Airton T. Stein,&nbsp;Thomas W. Concannon,&nbsp;Peter Tugwell","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70006","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Health guideline developers engage with interested people and groups to ensure that guidelines and their recommendations are relevant and useful to those who will be affected by them. These ‘interest-holders’ include patients, payers/purchasers of health services, payers of health research, peer review editors, product makers, programme managers, policymakers, providers, principal investigators, and the public. The Guidelines International Network (GIN) and McMaster University Guideline Development Checklist describes 146 steps of the guideline process organized into 18 topics. While one topic focuses on engagement, it does not describe how to engage with interest-holders. In addition, interest-holder input could be sought throughout the guideline development process. This scoping review is part of a series of four related reviews. The three other reviews address barriers and facilitators to engagement in guideline development, managing conflicts of interest in guideline development, and assessing the impact of interest-holder engagement on guideline development. The four reviews will inform the development of guidance for multi-interest-holder engagement in guideline development; the GIN-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist Extension for Engagement.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The objective of this scoping review is to identify, describe, and summarise existing guidance and methods for multi-interest-holder engagement throughout the health guideline development process.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Search Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We conducted one comprehensive search for studies of engagement in guidelines to meet the inclusion criteria of one or more of the four systematic reviews in this series. We searched MEDLINE (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCO), EMBASE (OVID), PsycInfo (OVID) and SCOPUS databases up to September 2022. We did not include limits for date, study design, or language. We searched websites of agencies and organizations that engage interest-holder groups, such as the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), CIHR Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR), National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Be Part of Research, Guidelines International Network (G-I-N), the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and the PatientCentred Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). We handsearched the websites of guideline producing agencies. We solicited additional grey literature from the members of the MuSE Consortium.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Selection Criteria</h3>\u0000 \u0000 ","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70006","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142708288","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: What works to increase the use of evidence for policy decision-making: A systematic review 协议:在政策决策中更多使用证据的有效方法:系统回顾
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-11-22 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1435
Promise Nduku, John Ategeka, Andile Madonsela, Tanya Mdlalose, Jennifer Stevenson, Shannon Shisler, Suvarna Pande, Laurenz Mahlanza-Langer

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: Our aim is to collect, assess, and synthesise all the available empirical evidence on what works to support evidence-informed decision-making by policymakers. In doing so, we will aim to answer the following research questions: What are the impacts of interventions to support evidence-informed decision-making by policymakers? What are the factors which have influenced the impact of these interventions, and their design and implementation in low- and middle-income countries? In answering these questions, our goal is to estimate the overall impact and relative effectiveness of different interventions, identify factors or configurations of factors that support or hinder their effectiveness in low- and middle-income countries and to identify gaps and areas for future primary research.

这是坎贝尔系统综述的协议。目标如下:我们的目标是收集、评估和综合所有可用的经验证据,了解哪些措施对支持政策制定者根据证据做出决策有效。在此过程中,我们将致力于回答以下研究问题:支持政策制定者循证决策的干预措施有哪些影响?有哪些因素影响了这些干预措施的效果以及它们在中低收入国家的设计和实施?在回答这些问题时,我们的目标是估算不同干预措施的总体影响和相对效果,确定在中低收入国家支持或阻碍干预措施效果的因素或因素组合,并找出差距和未来初级研究的领域。
{"title":"Protocol: What works to increase the use of evidence for policy decision-making: A systematic review","authors":"Promise Nduku,&nbsp;John Ategeka,&nbsp;Andile Madonsela,&nbsp;Tanya Mdlalose,&nbsp;Jennifer Stevenson,&nbsp;Shannon Shisler,&nbsp;Suvarna Pande,&nbsp;Laurenz Mahlanza-Langer","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1435","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1435","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: Our aim is to collect, assess, and synthesise all the available empirical evidence on what works to support evidence-informed decision-making by policymakers. In doing so, we will aim to answer the following research questions: What are the impacts of interventions to support evidence-informed decision-making by policymakers? What are the factors which have influenced the impact of these interventions, and their design and implementation in low- and middle-income countries? In answering these questions, our goal is to estimate the overall impact and relative effectiveness of different interventions, identify factors or configurations of factors that support or hinder their effectiveness in low- and middle-income countries and to identify gaps and areas for future primary research.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1435","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142708368","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: Proactive resilience programmes for improving resilience and psychological adaptation in employees in high-risk occupations: A systematic review 协议:提高高危职业员工抗压能力和心理适应能力的前瞻性抗压计划:系统综述
IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Pub Date : 2024-11-22 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.70007
Trine Filges, Anja Bondebjerg Mølgaard, Geir Smedslund, Malene W. Kildemoes, Elizabeth Bengtsen

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

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

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

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

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

本系统性综述的目标之一是评估薪酬比率(即公司首席执行官与非管理人员员工的薪酬之间的相对差异)是否与随后的公司业绩相关。第二个目标是找出影响上市公司之间这种关系的因素,包括薪酬比例在员工心目中的公平性、公司的业务战略以及相关因素。
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Is the CEO/employee pay ratio related to firm performance in publicly traded companies?","authors":"Denise M. Rousseau,&nbsp;Cédric Velghe,&nbsp;Ryan Splenda,&nbsp;Byeong Jo Kim,&nbsp;Jangbum Lee","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70003","url":null,"abstract":"<p>One goal of this systematic review is to assess whether the pay ratio, that is, the relative difference between the compensation a firm's CEO receives and that of its nonmanagerial employees, is related to subsequent firm performance. A second goal is to identify factors influencing this relationship across publicly traded firms, including the pay ratio's perceived fairness by employees, the firm's business strategy, and related factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70003","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142579672","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Campbell Systematic Reviews
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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