Brief psychological therapies for emotional disorders in primary care: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 363-376
Author(s):  
Jorge Corpas ◽  
Juan A. Moriana ◽  
Jose F. Venceslá ◽  
Mario Gálvez-Lara
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Emotional Disorders ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Psychological Therapies

scholarly journals Which Non-Pharmaceutical Primary Care Interventions Reduce Inequalities in Common Mental Health Disorders? A Protocol for a Systematic Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (24) ◽  
pp. 12978
Author(s):  
Louise Tanner ◽  
Sarah Sowden ◽  
Madeleine Still ◽  
Katie Thomson ◽  
Clare Bambra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Social Inequalities ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mental Health Disorders ◽  
Health Concern ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Psychological Therapies ◽  
Health Disorders

Common mental health disorders (CMDs) represent a major public health concern and are particularly prevalent in people experiencing disadvantage or marginalisation. Primary care is the first point of contact for people with CMDs. Pharmaceutical interventions, such as antidepressants, are commonly used in the treatment of CMDs; however, there is concern that these treatments are over-prescribed and ineffective for treating mental distress related to social conditions. Non-pharmaceutical primary care interventions, such as psychological therapies and “social prescribing”, provide alternatives for CMDs. Little is known, however, about which such interventions reduce social inequalities in CMD-related outcomes, and which may, unintentionally, increase them. The aim of this protocol (PROSPERO registration number CRD42021281166) is to describe how we will undertake a systematic review to assess the effects of non-pharmaceutical primary care interventions on CMD-related outcomes and social inequalities. A systematic review of quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods primary studies will be undertaken and reported according to the PRISMA-Equity guidance. The following databases will be searched: Assia, CINAHL, Embase, Medline, PsycInfo and Scopus. Retrieved records will be screened according to pre-defined eligibility criteria and synthesised using a narrative approach, with meta-analysis if feasible. The findings of this review will guide efforts to commission more equitable mental health services.

scholarly journals Approaches for combining primary care electronic health record data from multiple sources: a systematic review of observational studies

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e037405
Author(s):  
Daniel Dedman ◽  
Melissa Cabecinha ◽  
Rachael Williams ◽  
Stephen J W Evans ◽  
Krishnan Bhaskaran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Electronic Health Record ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Data Sources ◽  
Health Record ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
One Stage ◽  
Electronic Health

ObjectiveTo identify observational studies which used data from more than one primary care electronic health record (EHR) database, and summarise key characteristics including: objective and rationale for using multiple data sources; methods used to manage, analyse and (where applicable) combine data; and approaches used to assess and report heterogeneity between data sources.DesignA systematic review of published studies.Data sourcesPubmed and Embase databases were searched using list of named primary care EHR databases; supplementary hand searches of reference list of studies were retained after initial screening.Study selectionObservational studies published between January 2000 and May 2018 were selected, which included at least two different primary care EHR databases.Results6054 studies were identified from database and hand searches, and 109 were included in the final review, the majority published between 2014 and 2018. Included studies used 38 different primary care EHR data sources. Forty-seven studies (44%) were descriptive or methodological. Of 62 analytical studies, 22 (36%) presented separate results from each database, with no attempt to combine them; 29 (48%) combined individual patient data in a one-stage meta-analysis and 21 (34%) combined estimates from each database using two-stage meta-analysis. Discussion and exploration of heterogeneity was inconsistent across studies.ConclusionsComparing patterns and trends in different populations, or in different primary care EHR databases from the same populations, is important and a common objective for multi-database studies. When combining results from several databases using meta-analysis, provision of separate results from each database is helpful for interpretation. We found that these were often missing, particularly for studies using one-stage approaches, which also often lacked details of any statistical adjustment for heterogeneity and/or clustering. For two-stage meta-analysis, a clear rationale should be provided for choice of fixed effect and/or random effects or other models.

scholarly journals Gambling problems in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Amanda Roberts ◽  
Jim Rogers ◽  
Stephen Sharman ◽  
G. J. Melendez-Torres ◽  
Sean Cowlishaw
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Gambling Problems

scholarly journals Prevalence, aetiologies and prognosis of the symptom cough in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Milena Bergmann ◽  
Jörg Haasenritter ◽  
Dominik Beidatsch ◽  
Sonja Schwarm ◽  
Kaja Hörner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Respiratory Tract ◽  
Chronic Cough ◽  
Respiratory Tract Infections ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Current Guideline ◽  
Acute Cough ◽  
Reason For Encounter ◽  
Tract Infections

Abstract Background Cough is a relevant reason for encounter in primary care. For evidence-based decision making, general practitioners need setting-specific knowledge about prevalences, pre-test probabilities, and prognosis. Accordingly, we performed a systematic review of symptom-evaluating studies evaluating cough as reason for encounter in primary care. Methods We conducted a search in MEDLINE and EMBASE. Eligibility criteria and methodological quality were assessed independently by two reviewers. We extracted data on prevalence, aetiologies and prognosis, and estimated the variation across studies. If justifiable in terms of heterogeneity, we performed a meta-analysis. Results We identified 21 eligible studies on prevalence, 12 on aetiology, and four on prognosis. Prevalence/incidence estimates were 3.8–4.2%/12.5% (Western primary care) and 10.3–13.8%/6.3–6.5% in Africa, Asia and South America. In Western countries the underlying diagnoses for acute cough or cough of all durations were respiratory tract infections (73–91.9%), influenza (6–15.2%), asthma (3.2–15%), laryngitis/tracheitis (3.6–9%), pneumonia (4.0–4.2%), COPD (0.5–3.3%), heart failure (0.3%), and suspected malignancy (0.2–1.8%). Median time for recovery was 9 to 11 days. Complete recovery was reported by 40.2- 67% of patients after two weeks, and by 79% after four weeks. About 21.1–35% of patients re-consulted; 0–1.3% of acute cough patients were hospitalized, none died. Evidence is missing concerning subacute and chronic cough. Conclusion Prevalences and incidences of cough are high and show regional variation. Acute cough, mainly caused by respiratory tract infections, is usually self-limiting (supporting a “wait-and-see” strategy). We have no setting-specific evidence to support current guideline recommendations concerning subacute or chronic cough in Western primary care. Our study presents epidemiological data under non non-pandemic conditions. It will be interesting to compare these data to future research results of the post-pandemic era.

scholarly journals Diagnostic value of symptoms of oesophagogastric cancers in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 65 (639) ◽  
pp. e677-e691 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret P Astin ◽  
Tanimola Martins ◽  
Nicky Welton ◽  
Richard D Neal ◽  
Peter W Rose ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Diagnostic Value
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document