scholarly journals HEALTH LITERACY IN INDIVIDUALS AT RISK FOR ALZHEIMER’S DEMENTIA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
A. Rostamzadeh ◽  
J. Stapels ◽  
A. Genske ◽  
T. Haidl ◽  
S. Jünger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Health Literacy ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Alzheimer’S Dementia ◽  
One Dimension ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Risk Disclosure ◽  
Alzheimer's Dementia

Background: Health literacy (HL) refers to the capacity to access, understand, appraise and apply information for decision-making and acting in health-related matters. In the field of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), expanding technologies of early disease detection, disease course prediction and eventually personalized prevention confront individuals at-risk with increasingly complex information, which demand substantial HL skills. Here we report current findings of HL research in at-risk groups. Methods: Search strings, referring to HL, AD, amyloid and risk, were developed. A systematic review was conducted in PUBMED, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and Web of Science to summarize the state of evidence on HL in at-risk individuals for Alzheimer’s dementia. Eligible articles needed to employ a validated tool for HL, mention the concept or one dimension (access, understand, appraise and apply information for decision-making and acting). Results: 26 quantitative and 9 qualitative studies addressing at least one dimension of HL were included. Overall, there is evidence for a wish to gain knowledge about the own brain status and risk of dementia. Psychological distress may occur and the subjective benefit-risk estimation may be modified after risk disclosure. Effects on lifestyle and planning may occur. Overall understanding and appraisal of information related to AD risk seem variable with several impacting factors. In mild cognitive impairment (MCI) basic HL skill seem to be affected by cognitive dysfunction. Conclusions: Systematic assessment of HL in at-risk population for AD is sparse. Findings indicate the paramount importance of adequate communication with persons at risk, being sensitive to individual needs and preferences. Substantial research needs were identified.

scholarly journals Psychotherapeutic interventions in individuals at risk for Alzheimer’s dementia: A systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (S7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ayda Rostamzadeh ◽  
Anna Kahlert ◽  
Franziska Kalthegener ◽  
Frank Jessen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Alzheimer’S Dementia ◽  
Alzheimer's Dementia ◽  
Psychotherapeutic Interventions

scholarly journals Communication in decision aids for stage I–III colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. e044472
Author(s):  
Saar Hommes ◽  
Ruben Vromans ◽  
Felix Clouth ◽  
Xander Verbeek ◽  
Ignace de Hingh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Specific Treatment ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Plain Language ◽  
Patient Decision

ObjectivesTo assess the communicative quality of colorectal cancer patient decision aids (DAs) about treatment options, the current systematic review was conducted.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesDAs (published between 2006 and 2019) were identified through academic literature (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and PsycINFO) and online sources.Eligibility criteriaDAs were only included if they supported the decision-making process of patients with colon, rectal or colorectal cancer in stages I–III.Data extraction and synthesisAfter the search strategy was adapted from similar systematic reviews and checked by a colorectal cancer surgeon, two independent reviewers screened and selected the articles. After initial screening, disagreements were resolved with a third reviewer. The review was conducted in concordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DAs were assessed using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) and Communicative Aspects (CA) checklist.ResultsIn total, 18 DAs were selected. Both the IPDAS and CA checklist revealed that there was a lot of variation in the (communicative) quality of DAs. The findings highlight that (1) personalisation of treatment information in DAs is lacking, (2) outcome probability information is mostly communicated verbally and (3) information in DAs is generally biased towards a specific treatment. Additionally, (4) DAs about colorectal cancer are lengthy and (5) many DAs are not written in plain language.ConclusionsBoth instruments (IPDAS and CA) revealed great variation in the (communicative) quality of colorectal cancer DAs. Developers of patient DAs should focus on personalisation techniques and could use both the IPDAS and CA checklist in the developmental process to ensure personalised health communication and facilitate shared decision making in clinical practice.

scholarly journals Outcomes of hepatitis C screening programs targeted at risk groups hidden in the general population: a systematic review

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Freke R Zuure ◽  
Anouk T Urbanus ◽  
Miranda W Langendam ◽  
Charles W Helsper ◽  
Charlotte HSB van den Berg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Hepatitis C ◽  
General Population ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Screening Programs

Clinician‐patient‐family decision‐making and health literacy in adolescents and young adults with cancer and their families: A systematic review of qualitative studies

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 1408-1419 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle Gessler ◽  
Ilona Juraskova ◽  
Ursula M. Sansom‐Daly ◽  
Heather L. Shepherd ◽  
Pandora Patterson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Young Adults ◽  
Health Literacy ◽  
Qualitative Studies ◽  
Adolescents And Young Adults ◽  
Family Decision ◽  
Family Decision Making

Randomized Controlled Trials of Headache Treatments in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisa T. Bushman ◽  
Gabriella Cozzi ◽  
Rachel G. Sinkey ◽  
Catherine H. Smith ◽  
Michael W. Varner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
At Risk ◽  
English Language ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Headache Diagnosis ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
In Pregnancy

Abstract Objective Headaches affect 88% of reproductive-aged women. Yet data are limited addressing treatment of headache in pregnancy. While many women experience improvement in pregnancy, primary and secondary headaches can develop. Consequently, pregnancy is a time when headache diagnosis can influence maternal and fetal interventions. This study was aimed to summarize existing randomized control trials (RCTs) addressing headache treatment in pregnancy. Study Design We searched PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and SCOPUS from January 1, 1970 through June 31, 2019. Studies were eligible if they were English-language RCTs addressing treatment of headache in pregnancy. Conference abstracts and studies investigating postpartum headache were excluded. Three authors reviewed English-language RCTs addressing treatment of antepartum headache. To be included, all authors agreed each article to meet the following criteria: predefined control group, participants underwent randomization, and treatment of headache occurred in the antepartum period. If inclusion criteria were met no exclusions were made. Our systematic review registration number was CRD42019135874. Results A total of 193 studies were reviewed. Of the three that met inclusion criteria all were small, with follow-up designed to measure pain reduction and showed statistical significance. Conclusion Our systematic review of RCTs evaluating treatment of headache in pregnancy revealed only three studies. This paucity of data limits treatment, puts women at risk for worsening headache disorders, and delays diagnosis placing both the mother and fetus at risk for complications.

scholarly journals Intranasal insulin in Alzheimer’s dementia or mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review

2018 ◽  
Vol 265 (7) ◽  
pp. 1497-1510 ◽  
Author(s):  
Konstantinos Ioannis Avgerinos ◽  
Grigorios Kalaitzidis ◽  
Antonia Malli ◽  
Dimitrios Kalaitzoglou ◽  
Pavlos Gr. Myserlis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Mild Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Alzheimer’S Dementia ◽  
Intranasal Insulin ◽  
Alzheimer's Dementia

Health literacy in persons at risk of and patients with coronary heart disease: A systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 245 ◽  
pp. 112711 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samia Peltzer ◽  
Marc Hellstern ◽  
Anna Genske ◽  
Saskia Jünger ◽  
Christiane Woopen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Health Literacy

scholarly journals Mapping and understanding the decision-making process for providing nutrition and hydration to people living with dementia: a systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kanthee Anantapong ◽  
Nathan Davies ◽  
Justin Chan ◽  
Daisy McInnerney ◽  
Elizabeth L. Sampson
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Family Caregivers ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Tube Feeding ◽  
Oral Feeding ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Nutrition And Hydration

Abstract Background This systematic review aimed to explore the process of decision-making for nutrition and hydration for people living with dementia from the perspectives and experiences of all involved. Methods We searched CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases. Search terms were related to dementia, decision-making, nutrition and hydration. Qualitative, quantitative and case studies that focused on decision-making about nutrition and hydration for people living with dementia were included. The CASP and Murad tools were used to appraise the quality of included studies. Data extraction was guided by the Interprofessional Shared Decision Making (IP-SDM) model. We conducted a narrative synthesis using thematic analysis. PROSPERO registration number CRD42019131497. Results Forty-five studies were included (20 qualitative, 15 quantitative and 10 case studies), comprising data from 17 countries and 6020 patients, family caregivers and practitioners. The studies covered a range of decisions from managing oral feeding to the use of tube feeding. We found that decisions about nutrition and hydration for people living with dementia were generally too complex to be mapped onto the precise linear steps of the existing decision-making model. Decision-making processes around feeding for people living with dementia were largely influenced by medical evidence, personal values, cultures and organizational routine. Although the process involved multiple people, family caregivers and non-physician practitioners were often excluded in making a final decision. Upon disagreement, nutrition interventions were sometimes delivered with conflicting feelings concealed by family caregivers or practitioners. Most conflicts and negative feelings were resolved by good relationship, honest communication, multidisciplinary team meetings and renegotiation. Conclusions The decision-making process regarding nutrition and hydration for people living with dementia does not follow a linear process. It needs an informed, value-sensitive, and collaborative process. However, it often characterized by unclear procedures and with a lack of support. Decisional support is needed and should be approached in a shared and stepwise manner.

scholarly journals 988 OUTCOMES OF HEPATITIS C SCREENING PROGRAMS TARGETED AT RISK GROUPS HIDDEN IN THE GENERAL POPULATION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

2013 ◽  
Vol 58 ◽  
pp. S406-S407
Author(s):  
A. Urbanus ◽  
F. Zuure ◽  
M. Langendam ◽  
C. Helsper ◽  
C. van den Berg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Hepatitis C ◽  
General Population ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Screening Programs

scholarly journals Health literacy and informed decision making regarding colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review

2015 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 575-582 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iris van der Heide ◽  
Ellen Uiters ◽  
A. Jantine Schuit ◽  
Jany Rademakers ◽  
Mirjam Fransen
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Literacy ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Informed Decision Making
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document