Use and value of systematic reviews in English local authority public health: a qualitative study

Critical appraisal of methodological quality and completeness of reporting in Chinese social science systematic reviews with meta-analysis: A systematic review

Background

A systematic review is a type of literature review that uses rigorous methods to synthesize evidence from multiple studies on a specific topic. It is widely used in academia, including medical and social science research. Social science is an academic discipline that focuses on human behaviour and society. However, consensus regarding the standards and criteria for conducting and reporting systematic reviews in social science is lacking. Previous studies have found that the quality of systematic reviews in social science varies depending on the topic, database, and country.

Objectives

This study evaluates the completeness of reporting and methodological quality of intervention and non-intervention systematic reviews in social science in China. Additionally, we explore factors that may influence quality.

Search Methods

We searched three major Chinese electronic databases-CNKI, VIP, and Wangfang-for intervention and non-intervention reviews in social science published in Chinese journals from 1 January 2009 to 2 December 2022.

Selection Criteria

We included intervention and non-intervention reviews; however, we excluded overviews, qualitative syntheses, integrative reviews, rapid reviews, and evidence syntheses/summaries. We also excluded meta-analyses that used advanced methods (e.g., cross-sectional, cumulative, Bayesian, structural equation, or network meta-analyses) or that focused on instrument validation.

Data Collection and Analysis

We extracted data using a coding form with publication information and study content characteristics. This study conducted pilot extraction and quality assessment with four authors and formal extraction and assessment with two groups of four authors each. PRISMA2020 and MOOSE were used to evaluate the reporting completeness of intervention and non-intervention reviews. AMSTAR-2 and DART tools were adopted to assess their methodological quality. We described the characteristics of the included reviews with frequencies and percentages. We used SPSS (version 26.0) to conduct a linear regression analysis and ANOVA to explore the factors that may influence both completeness of reporting and methodological quality.

Main Results

We included 1176 systematic reviews with meta-analyses published in Chinese journals between 2009 and 2022. The top three fields of publication were psychology (417, 35.5%), education (388, 33.0%), and management science (264, 22.4%). Four hundred and thirty-two intervention reviews were included. The overall completeness of reporting in PRISMA and compliance rate of the methodological process in AMSTAT-2 were 49.9% and 45.5%, respectively. Intervention reviews published in Chinese Social Science Citation Index (CSSCI) journals had lower reporting completeness than those published in non-CSSCI journals (46.7% vs. 51.1%), similar to methodological quality (39.6% vs. 47.9%). A few reviews reported the details on registration (0.2%), rationality of study selection criteria (1.6%), sources of funding for primary studies (0.2%), reporting bias assessment (2.8%), certainty of evidence assessment (1.2%), and sensitivity analysis (107, 24.8%). Seven hundred and forty-four non-intervention reviews were included. The overall completeness of reporting in MOOSE and compliance rate of the methodological process in DART were 51.8% and 50.5%, respectively. Non-intervention reviews published in CSSCI journals had higher reporting completeness than those published in non-CSSCI journals (53.3% vs. 50.3%); however, there was no difference in methodological quality (51.0% vs. 50.0%). Most reviews did not report the process and results of selection (80.8%), and 58.9% of reviews did not describe the process of data extraction; only 9.5% assessed the quality of included studies; while none of the reviews examined bias by confounding, outcome reporting bias, and loss to follow-up. An improving trend over time was observed for both intervention and non-intervention reviews in completeness of reporting and methodological quality (PRISMA: β = 0.24, p < 0.01; AMSTAR-2: β = 0.17, p < 0.01; MOOSE: β = 0.34, p < 0.01; DART: β = 0.30, p < 0.01). The number of authors and financial support also have a positive effect on quality.

Authors' Conclusions

Completeness of reporting and methodological quality were low in both intervention and non-intervention reviews in Chinese social sciences, especially regarding registration, protocol, risk of bias assessment, and data and code sharing. The sources of literature, number of authors, publication year, and funding source declarations were identified as factors that may influence the quality of reviews. More rigorous standards and guidelines for conducting and reporting reviews are required in social science research as well as more support and incentives for reviewers to adhere to them.

Literature Searches in Medical Informatics Systematic Reviews: Suggested Approaches

This study explores database selection for systematic reviews in medical informatics, addressing challenges researchers face in maximizing relevant article retrieval. Systematic reviews from top medical informatics journals in 2021 were analyzed, divided into randomized control trials and non-randomized control trials groups. Four databases were evaluated based on Recall, Precision, and Unique references. Findings revealed that for randomized control trials, the best combination was PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, while for the non-restricted group, recommended combination included PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus, highlighting effective literature search strategies.

Various application roles for Campbell systematic reviews: a citation analysis

OBJECTIVES

Systematic reviews (SRs) are becoming essential evidence in the decision-making process within the field of social sciences. This study aimed to investigate how Campbell SRs were cited and explore their specific application roles.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We included Campbell SRs published between 2016 and 2020 by searching the Wiley online library, and retrieved the articles and documents citing Campbell SRs from the Web of Science and Google Scholar by December 31, 2021. We described the characteristics of the SRs and citations, and formulated a set of application roles by analyzing the sentences or paragraphs where the SRs were cited.

RESULTS

Sixty nine Campbell SRs were published between 2016 and 2020; they were cited in 641 articles or documents a total of 1,289 times. The primary types of articles that cited Campbell SRs were cross-sectional studies (n = 226, 35.3%), SRs (n = 112, 17.5%), randomized controlled trials (n = 77, 12.0%), and policy reports (n = 57, 8.8%). Articles utilizing Campbell SRs were predominantly led by authors from the United States (n = 184, 28.7%), the United Kingdom (n = 98, 15.3%), and Australia (n = 51, 8.0%). We formulated a set of 10 application roles for the Campbell SRs, of which the most frequent were: describing the current status in the field of interest (n = 691, 53.6%), corroboration of the results (n = 140, 10.9%), identifying research gaps (n = 130, 10.1%), and providing methodological references (n = 126, 9.8%); the role of supporting policy recommendations or decisions accounted for 6.0% (n = 77) of the citations. Approximately 12% of Campbell SRs were used to support policy recommendations or decisions.

CONCLUSION

Campbell SRs are widely applied, particularly in scientific research, to describe the current status in the field of interest. Although the current application of Campbell SRs in supporting policy recommendations and decisions may not be predominant, there is a growing recognition of their value in using Campbell SRs to inform decision-making.

Interventions in the workplace to reduce risk factors for noncommunicable diseases: an umbrella review of systematic reviews of effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Workplaces are an important setting to deliver programs to reduce risk factors for noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). To help decision makers understand the most current and relevant evidence regarding effectiveness of workplace programs, we conducted an umbrella review to present a comprehensive synthesis of the large volume of literature.

METHODS

Systematic reviews of workplace interventions targeting primary risk factors for NCDs-unhealthy diet, insufficient physical activity, overweight/obesity, tobacco use, and/or excessive alcohol use-published since 2010 were sourced. For each risk factor, reviews were categorized by intervention type and quality. The most recent, high-quality review was included for each intervention type. Evidence for the effectiveness of each intervention type was then broadly classified based on the review summary findings.

RESULTS

Twenty-one reviews were included. Most reviews focused on diet (n = 5), physical activity (n = 7), or obesity (n = 9) interventions, with fewer targeting alcohol (n = 2) or tobacco (n = 2) use. Reviews of interventions focusing on individual behavior (such as education or counseling) were most common. Across diet, obesity, physical activity, and tobacco use, multicomponent interventions were consistently likely to be classified as "likely effective." Motivational interviewing and broad health promotion interventions were identified as "promising" for alcohol use.

CONCLUSION

This umbrella review identified that multicomponent workplace interventions were effective to reduce NCD risk factors. There is a gap around interventions targeting alcohol use as most syntheses lacked enough studies to draw conclusions about effectiveness. Exploring the impact of interventions that utilize policy and/or environmental strategies is a critical gap for future research.

Research evidence use in local government-led public health interventions: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Local governments play an important role in improving public health outcomes globally, critical to this work is applying the best-available research evidence. Despite considerable exploration of research use in knowledge translation literature, how research is practically applied by local governments remains poorly understood. This systematic review examined research evidence use in local government-led public health interventions. It focused on how research was used and the type of intervention being actioned.

METHODS

Quantitative and qualitative literature published between 2000 and 2020 was searched for studies that described research evidence use by local governments in public health interventions. Studies reporting interventions developed outside of local government, including knowledge translation interventions, were excluded. Studies were categorised by intervention type and their level of description of research evidence use (where 'level 1' was the highest and 'level 3' was the lowest level of detail).

FINDINGS

The search identified 5922 articles for screening. A final 34 studies across ten countries were included. Experiences of research use varied across different types of interventions. However, common themes emerged including the demand for localised research evidence, the legitimising role of research in framing public health issues, and the need for integration of different evidence sources.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in how research was used were observed across different local government public health interventions. Knowledge translation interventions aiming to increase research use in local government settings should consider known barriers and facilitators and consider contextual factors associated with different localities and interventions.

Factors of the policy process influencing Health in All Policies in local government: A scoping review

Objectives

This review aimed to identify factors in the policymaking environment that influence a Health in all Policies approach in local government, how these vary across different municipal contexts, and the extent that theories of the policy process are applied.

Methods

A scoping review was conducted to include sources published in English, between 2001 and 2021 in three databases, and assessed for inclusion by two blind reviewers.

Results

Sixty-four sources were included. Sixteen factors of the policy process were identified, expanding on previously reported literature to include understanding and framing of health, use of evidence, policy priority, and influence of political ideology. Eleven sources applied or referred to theories of the policy process and few reported findings based on different local government contexts.

Conclusion

There are a range of factors influencing a Health in All Policies approach in local government, although a limited understanding of how these differ across contexts. A theory-informed lens contributed to identifying a breadth of factors, although lack of explicit application of theories of the policy process in studies makes it difficult to ascertain meaningful synthesis of the interconnectedness of these factors.

How can rural businesses thrive in the digital economy? A UK perspective

Unlocking the digital potential of the UK's rural areas is important for the future of rural businesses, rural communities and the UK economy as a whole. The use of digital technologies is yielding new opportunities for businesses, including those located rurally, to enhance business growth and economic development, which significantly contributes to UK prosperity. However, businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), in rural areas are often digitally disconnected due to inferior digital connectivity and digital exclusion, including lack of internet access and lower levels of digital literacy. Therefore, this paper provides a better understanding of the rural digital economy, highlighting key digital challenges and opportunities for rural businesses in the UK. An extensive review of both academic and non-academic literature is conducted to identify key digital challenges, digital opportunities, and solutions to overcome the digital disadvantage for rural businesses in the UK in the digital age. Our review emphasises the effectiveness of public sector market interventions in developing broadband infrastructure and smarter digital training and skills development to help address digital deprivation in rural areas. A series of policy recommendations is then formulated to support rural business growth in the digital age and contributing to debates regarding smart rural development in rural areas. This paper has potential limitations due to a non-systematic literature review. Therefore, we recommend applying a systematic review as well as empirical and place-based research to explore the emerging themes of this study for future research.

Supporting and enabling health research in a local authority (SERLA): an exploratory study

BACKGROUND

The use of research evidence to underpin public health practice and policy decisions in local government is strongly promoted but its implementation has not been straightforward. This study aimed to explore the factors, relationships and processes that contribute towards accessing, using, and generating research evidence that is relevant to local authority public health and social care and shapes its practice.

METHODS

Semi-structured individual interviews with elected councillors, officers directly involved with public health and social care and with community members from one urban unitary authority in South England were conducted. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Fourteen participants took part in the semi-structured interviews. Local knowledge and evidence are prioritised, and anecdotal evidence is valued. The Director of Public Health was the principal source of information and support. Academics were rarely mentioned as information sources, and their involvement was ad hoc. The use of research evidence varied between individuals and departments, with wider engagement among public health specialists. Key barriers to the use of research evidence included access (not reported among public health professionals), research timeliness, local applicability, competence in finding and interpreting evidence and the role of research evidence within a political context. Public health and adult social care teams are not currently research active or research ready. Major barriers exist due to financial constraints and the socio-political context of local authorities. COVID-19 disrupted siloed ways of working, strengthening and opening potential collaborations within the local authority. This changed perspectives about the value of research but is likely time-limited unless underpinned by sustainable funding.

CONCLUSION

Creating strategic level roles within local government to work with the Director of Public Health to champion the research agenda and embedding researchers within and across teams would build capacity for local authorities to sustainably co-create, undertake, and use evidence to better inform future actions.

[Promotion of physical activity among the elderly as an example of knowledge translation: How do scientific findings enter community practice?]

BACKGROUND

Scientific findings can be an important source of knowledge for public health stakeholders involved in promoting physical activity, but several barriers hinder their use. Knowledge translation can simplify this process, but it requires the understanding of the stakeholder's needs.

OBJECTIVES

This qualitative study aims to describe how public health stakeholders access information and scientific findings, identify possible barriers, and highlight the needs of stakeholders in terms of presentation and processing.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with twelve local- and state-level stakeholders from North Rhine-Westphalia, Saxony-Anhalt, and Thuringia working in the area of physical activity promotion. The interviewees were selected through purposive sampling. The interviews were evaluated using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

The benefits of scientific findings are emphasized by the interviewees, but a lack of resources in combination with a flood of information, high complexity, and technical jargon complicate their application. There is a need for tailored preparation in the form of summaries, filter functions, elaboration of practice-relevant elements, and ways of provision.

CONCLUSIONS

To achieve successful knowledge translation, collaboration and interactive exchange between researchers, policymakers, and practice as well as a demand-oriented processing of scientific findings are central. Networking and bundling of knowledge on a platform are important tasks for the future.

'Evidence' within local authority decision making

Michael Cook looks at the role of an embedded Public Health Information Specialist highlighting the ways the core evidence, information and knowledge skills are used to progress Public Health activity in local government settings. Acknowledging the current pandemic, he explores how COVID-19 has dominated all aspects of health and social care, and outlines how evidence services have work within these complex Public Health systems to lead the local response and recovery efforts.