scholarly journals Systematic review and Meta-analysis on the Patient Health Questionnare-9 (PHQ-9) for depression screening in Chinese primary care patients

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
CHIU Chi Fai Billy ◽  
CHIN Weng Yee
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Depression Screening ◽  
Patient Health ◽  
Primary Care Patients

Validation of Patient Health Questionnaire for depression screening among primary care patients in Taiwan

2011 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shen-Ing Liu ◽  
Zai-Ting Yeh ◽  
Hui-Chun Huang ◽  
Fang-Ju Sun ◽  
Jin-Jin Tjung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Depression Screening ◽  
Patient Health Questionnaire ◽  
Health Questionnaire ◽  
Patient Health ◽  
Primary Care Patients

Diagnostic Accuracy of the Screening Instruments Used to Identify Postpartum Depression in the Primary Care Setting: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Russy Novita Andriani ◽  
Siti Solichatul Makkiyyah ◽  
Amanda Safira Dea Hertika ◽  
Wahyudi Istiono ◽  
Mohammad Hakimi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Postpartum Depression ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Primary Care Setting ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Depression Screening ◽  
Screening Instruments ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background Postpartum depression (PPD) is a prevalent complication of pregnancy, this condition affects maternal and child well-being and functioning. Results from a meta-analysis showed an incidence of 13% PPD cases in the first 12 weeks after labor. Primary care is the first gate and continuing point of care for patients. Despite the controversy of screening and early identification in primary care settings, many PPD cases remain undetected. Given the uncertainty about this issue, screening instruments must be effective in identifying the cases. This systematic review and meta-analyses aim to identify the most suitable postpartum depression screening instrument for use in primary care. Methods PubMed, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest databases were used to search using relevant keywords or MeSH, with limitation of publication from January 1st, 2010 through December 31st, 2020. We will include screening studies on postpartum women using validated screening tools followed by validated structured or semi-structured interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) as the reference standard in the primary care setting. Study designs included in the review are cross-sectional and randomized controlled trial without no screening arm on the diagnostic study. We will use a liberal accelerated method on the title and abstract review stage, then perform full-text article reviews on selected studies. Methodological quality will be assessed independently by two authors according to QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2). Extraction of the study data will be undertaken by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Disagreements will be resolved by consensus and including a third investigator as necessary. The test characteristics will be extracted into 2x2 tables for all included studies. Study-specific estimates of sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals will be displayed in forest plots. Discussion The proposed systematic review and meta-analyses will allow us to obtain the most suitable postpartum depression screening instrument for use in primary care. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42020216067

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