scholarly journals The impact of digital interventions to support parents caring for acutely ill children at home and factors that affect their use: systematic review protocol (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madison Milne-Ives ◽  
Sarah Neill ◽  
Natasha Bayes ◽  
Mitch Blair ◽  
Jane Blewitt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Parental Knowledge ◽  
Urgent Care ◽  
Systematic Review Protocol ◽  
Digital Interventions ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
The Impact ◽  
At Home

BACKGROUND Emergency and urgent care healthcare services are overburdened and the use of these services by acutely ill infants and children is increasing. A large proportion of these visits could be sufficiently addressed by other healthcare professionals. Uncertainty about the severity of a child’s symptoms is one of many factors that play a role in parents’ decisions to take their children to emergency services, demonstrating the need for improved support for health literacy. Digital interventions are a potential tool to improve support for parents’ information, knowledge and decision-making around acute childhood illness. However, existing systematic reviews related to this topic need to be updated and expanded to provide a contemporary review of the impact, usability, and limitations of these solutions. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this systematic review protocol is to present the method for an evaluation of the impact, usability, and limitations of different types of digital interventions to support parents caring for acutely ill children at home. METHODS The review will be structured using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) and Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) frameworks. Five databases will be systematically searched for studies published in English during and after 2014: Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, APA PsycNet, and Web of Science. Two reviewers will independently screen references’ titles and abstracts, select studies for inclusion based on the eligibility criteria, and extract the data into a standardized form. Any disagreements will be discussed and resolved by a third reviewer if necessary. Risk of bias of all studies will be assessed using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) and a descriptive analysis will be used to evaluate the outcomes reported. RESULTS The systematic review will commence during 2021. CONCLUSIONS This systematic review will summarize the impact, usability, and limitations of digital interventions for parents with acutely ill children. It will provide an overview of the field, identify reported impacts on health and behavioural outcomes; parental knowledge, satisfaction, and decision making; and the factors that affect use to help inform the development of more effective and sustainable interventions.

scholarly journals Systematic review protocol exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the wellbeing of general practitioners

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Jefferson ◽  
Su Golder ◽  
Veronica Dale ◽  
Holly Essex ◽  
Elizabeth McHugh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Quality Assessment ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Systematic Review Protocol ◽  
Health And Wellbeing ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
The Impact

Background Over recent years chronic stress and burnout have been reported by doctors working in general practice in the UK NHS and internationally. The COVID-19 pandemic has changed general practitioners working lives; adding potential pressures from avoiding infection and addressing pent-up demand for care, but also changing processes such as rapidly taking up remote consultations. To date, there has been a focus on exploring the impact of the pandemic on the wellbeing of hospital clinicians. No registered systematic reviews currently focus on exploring the impact of the pandemic on the mental health and wellbeing of general practitioners. Aims and objectives To synthesise the current international evidence base exploring the impact of COVID-19 on the mental health and wellbeing of general practitioners, and which factors are associated with their reported mental health and wellbeing during the pandemic. Methods In this paper we report a systematic review protocol, following PRISMA guidance. In our search strategy we will identify primary research studies or systematic reviews exploring the mental health and wellbeing of general practitioners during the COVID-19 pandemic in four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsychInfo and Medrxiv) and Google Scholar. We will hand-search reference lists and grey literature. Two reviewers will undertake all stages including study selection, data extraction and quality assessment, with arbitration by a third reviewer where necessary. We will use standardised quality assessment tools to ensure transparency and reduce bias in quality assessment. Depending on the quality of included studies, we may undertake a sensitivity analysis by excluding studies from narrative synthesis that are rated as low quality using the checklists. We will describe the findings across studies using narrative thematic data synthesis, and if sufficiently homogenous data are identified, we will pool quantitative findings through meta-analysis.

scholarly journals The Effectiveness of Technology-Based Strategies to Promote Engagement With Digital Interventions: A Systematic Review Protocol

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. e47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ghadah Alkhaldi ◽  
Fiona L Hamilton ◽  
Rosa Lau ◽  
Rosie Webster ◽  
Susan Michie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Review Protocol ◽  
Digital Interventions ◽  
Review Protocol

scholarly journals Mobile Technology Use and Its Association With Executive Functioning in Healthy Young Adults: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel E. Warsaw ◽  
Andrew Jones ◽  
Abigail K. Rose ◽  
Alice Newton-Fenner ◽  
Sophie Alshukri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Executive Functioning ◽  
Mobile Technology ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Technology Use ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Mobile Technologies ◽  
Smartphone Use ◽  
The Impact

Introduction: Screen-based and mobile technology has grown at an unprecedented rate. However, little is understood about whether increased screen-use affects executive functioning (EF), the range of mental processes that aid goal attainment and facilitate the selection of appropriate behaviors. To examine this, a systematic review was conducted.Method: This systematic review is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using Web of Science, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Scopus databases to identify articles published between 2007 and March 2020, examining the use of mobile technologies on aspects of EF in healthy adults aged 18–35 years. In total 6079 articles were screened by title, and 39 screened by full text. Eight eligible papers were identified for inclusion. Our methods were pre-registered on the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews.Results: A total of 438 participants were included across the eight studies. Five of the eight studies examined more than one EF. Five studies measured inhibition, and four studies measured decision-making. Smartphone use was negatively associated with inhibition and decision-making. Working memory performance was found to be improved by increased time engaging in video games and by refraining from smartphone use prior to bedtime. Quality assessments indicated high risk of methodological biases across the studies and a low quality of evidence for determining the relationship between technology use and executive functioning.Conclusions: This review highlights the scarcity of the literature in this area. It presents a call for rigorous and objective research to further our understanding of the impact of mobile technology on different aspects of executive function.

Effectiveness of Physiotherapy to Promote Motor Recovery in Individuals with Stroke: A Systematic Review Protocol

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shehong Zhang ◽  
Hongyu Xie ◽  
Chuanjie Wang ◽  
Fengfeng Wu ◽  
Xin Wang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Motor Function ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Systematic Review Protocol ◽  
Qualitative Synthesis ◽  
Review Protocol

Abstract Introduction: Motor function is essential in our daily lives, one of the most common impairments caused by stroke is loss of functional movement. Over 70% of stroke survivors have motor or other neurological functional disabilities. However, rehabilitation of motor function suffered from a stroke can be rather difficult due to the complexity of organs and systems related to motor function, as well as the neural system that supported motor function. In particularly, previous evidence for the effectiveness of physiotherapy, a commonly prescribed intervention method for people with stroke, that recover motor function in people following a stroke is varied and limited in the chronic rehabilitation phase and therefore has never been reviewed systematically. With the progress of study in neurology and the development of novel tools for rehabilitation, results from more and more clinical trials are now available, thus here justifying conducting a systematic review. Methods and analysis: This systematic review protocol is developed in accordance with the methodology recommended by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols, as well as the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Relevant studies will be identified by searching the databases. We will perform searches for relevant studies in databases, including PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science, Physiotherapy Evidence Database and Cochrane Library databases. The reference lists of included articles and reviews will be searched manually. The date range parameters used in searching all databases will be restricted between January 2001 and January 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published will be included. The language used in the articles included was restricted to English. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions) approach will be used to systematically appraise the quality of methodology. We will assess the risk of bias of the RCTs included using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool and provide a qualitative synthesis. After that, we will consider conducting a meta-analysis if the final data across outcomes shows sufficient homogeneity. Ethics and dissemination: No ethical approval is needed as the proposed study does not involve the collection of primary data, and the results of this review will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. Trial registration number: CRD42021267069.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document