Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements

Implementation of robotic devices in nursing care. Barriers and facilitators: an integrative review

BACKGROUND

Robots in healthcare are gaining increasing attention; however, their implementation is challenging due to the complexity of both interventions themselves and the contexts in which they are implemented. The objective of this integrative review is to identify barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of robotic systems in nursing.

METHODS

Articles published from 2002 to 2019 reporting on projects to implement robotic devices in nursing care were searched on Medline (via PubMed), CINAHL and databases on funded research projects (Community Research and Development Information Services and Technische Informationsbibliothek) and in journals for robotic research in November 2017 and July 2019 for an update. No restrictions regarding study designs were imposed. All included articles underwent quality assessments with design-specific critical appraisal tools. Barriers to and facilitators of implementation were classified using the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions framework.

RESULTS

After removing all duplicates, the search revealed 11 204 studies, of which 17 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the synthesis. The majority of the studies dealt with the implementation of robots designed to support individuals, either living at home or in nursing homes (n=11). The studies were conducted in Europe, the USA and New Zealand and were carried out in nursing homes, individual living environments, hospital units and laboratories. The quality of reporting and quality of evidence were low in most studies. The most frequently reported barriers were in socioeconomic and ethical domains and were within the implementation outcomes domain. The most frequently reported facilitators were related to the sociocultural context, implementation process and implementation strategies.

DISCUSSION

This review identified barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of robotic devices in nursing within different dimensions. The results serve as a basis for the development of suitable implementation strategies to reduce potential barriers and promote the integration of elements to facilitate implementation.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018073486.

Refugee health in Europe: mapping review of research literature (2015–2019)

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to map research literature on all aspects of refugee health in Europe (2015–2019): by research domain, study design, targeted population, type of setting, host country, journal title. This will help to identify recent research trends in the field, provide policymakers with useful source of information and help researches to target important gaps in evidence.

Design/methodology/approach

WHO (with other international agencies) has developed strategic documents and produced technical guidance, which formulate priority issues of refugee health in Europe. These documents state the need for relevant information and research data to support effective decision-making at all levels of health care systems. Although recent bibliometric analysis of global migration health research (2000–2016) concluded that 25.4% of retrieved documents were about refugees and asylum seekers, still there remain critical gaps in the knowledge base on a wide range of determinants of health service delivery and access for refugees and asylum seekers in the WHO European Region. Mapping review design was chosen as it maps and categorizes existing literature from which to commission further reviews and/or primary research by identifying gaps in research literature. Search strategy was developed and searches were executed in six databases: PubMed Medline; Scopus; ProQuest (Thesis and Dissertations); Cochrane Library; BASE; eLibrary (Russian journal articles).

Findings

Mapping review revealed that although research in some domains of refugee health was growing (mental health, infectious diseases, access to health care), there are still gaps in evidence in many important aspects: maternal and reproductive health, NCD, nutrition and economic evaluations. Most of 1,291 retrieved studies used observational or quasi-experimental design (75%), while very few were experimental studies (1.8%). Secondary research constituted a significant portion of retrieved publications: systematic reviews and meta-analysis – 8%, other reviews with systematic approach – 16%.

Originality/value

Detailed mapping of research by a combination of setting, population and research domains and comparison of results with those from previous decades and with planned trials and systematic reviews.

Duration of Lactation and Maternal Risk of Metabolic Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death of women across all ages, and targeting modifiable risk factors, such as those comprised in metabolic syndrome (MetS) (e.g., waist circumference, lipid profile, blood pressure, and blood glucose), is of great importance. An inverse association between lactation and CVD has been suggested, and lactation may decrease the risk of MetS. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined how lactation may affect the development and prevalence of MetS in women. A literature search was performed using Cinahl, Embase, Web of Science, and PubMed. A total of 1286 citations were identified, and finally, ten studies (two prospective and eight cross-sectional) were included. Seven studies (two prospective and five cross-sectional) revealed associations between lactation and MetS, suggesting that breastfeeding might prevent or improve metabolic health and have a protective role in MetS prevention. This protective role might be related to the duration of lactation; however, a lack of controlling for potential confounders, such as parity, might inflict the results. The pooled effect was non-conclusive. Additional research is required to further explore the duration of lactation and its potential role in improving or reversing MetS and its components.

Critically Appraised Topics (CATs) in Veterinary Medicine: Applying Evidence in Clinical Practice

Critically appraised topics (CATs) are evidence syntheses that provide veterinary professionals with information to rapidly address clinical questions and support the practice of evidence-based veterinary medicine (EBVM). They also have an important role to play in both undergraduate and post-registration education of veterinary professionals, in research and knowledge gap identification, literature scoping, preparing research grants and informing policy. CATs are not without limitations, the primary one relating to the rapid approach used which may lead to selection bias or restrict information identified or retrieved. Furthermore, the narrow focus of CATs may limit applicability of the evidence findings beyond a specific clinical scenario, and infrequently updated CATs may become redundant. Despite these limitations, CATs are fundamental to EBVM in the veterinary profession. Using the example of a dog with osteoarthritis, the five steps involved in creating and applying a CAT to clinical practice are outlined, with an emphasis on clinical relevance and practicalities. Finally, potential future developments for CATs and their role in EBVM, and the education of veterinary professionals are discussed. This review is focused on critically appraised topics (CATs) as a form of evidence synthesis in veterinary medicine. It aims to be a primary guide for veterinarians, from students to clinicians, and for veterinary nurses and technicians (hereafter collectively called veterinary professionals). Additionally, this review provides further information for those with some experience of CATs who would like to better understand the historic context and process, including further detail on more advanced concepts. This more detailed information will appear in pop-out boxes with a double-lined surround to distinguish it from the information core to producing and interpreting CATs, and from the boxes with a single line surround which contain additional resources relevant to the different parts of the review.

[Database indexing of health science journals from the German-speaking area: A journal analysis]

BACKGROUND

Journal hand searching offers the possibility to complement a literature search as part of systematic reviews and other evidence syntheses. Hand searching is indicated in cases where scientific journals with potentially relevant publications addressing the research question are not indexed in a literature database. However, it is often unclear whether these journals are actually indexed, and when they are, in which literature databases. In many cases, it is also unknown which journals should be searched by hand in addition to systematic literature search after databases to be searched have been specified. Therefore, the project aimed to investigate the indexation of selected scientific health science journals and to provide an overview of indexation in order to facilitate the hand search planning process.

METHODS

Journals from German-speaking countries covering eight professional fields (medical laboratory assistance, occupational therapy, midwifery, logopedics, nursing, physiotherapy, public health and rehabilitation) were considered that publish original research papers or systematic reviews or other review types in German and/or English. Two researchers per field identified relevant journals and independently analyzed the indexing locations using the journal websites. In case of missing information, we contacted the editors.

RESULTS

A total of 70 journals were included: from 1 to 17 journals per field. These journals are indexed in 1 to 29 databases. Twelve journals are not indexed or do not offer information concerning indexation. Indexation is distributed across n=74 different literature databases. Most journals are indexed in LIVIVO (n=55) and bibnet.org (n=33). Other common indexing databases are Scopus (n=18), Web of Science Core Collection (n=16), PSYNDEX (n=13), and Embase (n=10).

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate a heterogeneous indexation of the included journals. Only a small number is indexed in common international literature databases such as MEDLINE or CINAHL. On the other hand, only a few journals are not indexed in any database. The results can be used as a basis to define databases for literature searches as part of systematic reviews. In addition, the findings might guide the selection of journals for hand searching after literature databases have been defined.

The mutual benefit and varied roles of librarians in supporting health care document management

Tracey Pratchett considers the emerging role for libraries in facilitating document management practices within NHS organisations and reflects on her experience of supporting this work at Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.