Project description:This is the protocol for an evidence and gap map. The objectives are as follows: To map available randomized control trials, economic evaluations, and systematic reviews that assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for older people with a diagnosis of depression and identify any existing gaps in the evidence that can inform future research.
Project description:IntroductionGlobally, 8%-14% of children and young people (CYP) have a diagnosable mental health condition, many of whom receive no formal interventions. Parents/carers of CYP experience stress and distress owing to the mental health difficulties encountered by their CYP due to the lack of resources and support. Currently, little is known about (1) the content of interventions developed to support parents/carers nor (2) how effective interventions are at improving parents'/carers' well-being. The planned review aims to address these two gaps.Method and analysisA systematic review will be conducted to identify any study that describes an intervention aiming at least in part to support parents/carers with the impact of CYP (5-18 years) mental health difficulties, and to review any randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of these interventions. The following databases will be searched: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, AMED, EMBASE, Web of Science Core Collection and Cochrane Library CENTRAL, without any limitations applied. Analysis of the content of interventions will be structured using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist as a framework. The effect of any RCTs on parents'/carers' outcomes (including well-being, satisfaction with parenting, mental health) will be extracted and assessed using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool. Data will be synthesised narratively, with meta-analysis of RCT results, if appropriate.Ethical consideration and disseminationThe protocol is approved by Coventry University Ethical Committee (reference number: P139611). Results will be shared in academic publications and in accessible formats using social media and public webinars.Prospero registration numberCRD42022344453.
Project description:This is the protocol for a Campbell Evidence Gap Map. The main objectives of the EGM are: establish the nature and extent of the primary empirical evidence on informal social support interventions, identify interventions and clusters of evidence suitable for systematic review/evidence synthesis and identify gaps in the evidence on informal social support interventions.
Project description:PurposeSkeletal dysplasias are rare genetic disorders that are characterized by abnormal development of bone and cartilage. There are multiple medical and non-medical treatments for specific symptoms of skeletal dysplasias e.g. pain, as well as corrective surgical procedures to improve physical functioning. The aim of this paper was to develop an evidence-gap map of treatment options for skeletal dysplasias, and their impact on patient outcomes.MethodsWe conducted an evidence-gap map to identify the available evidence on the impact of treatment options on people with skeletal dysplasias on clinical outcomes (such as increase in height), and dimensions of health-related quality of life. A structured search strategy was applied to five databases. Two reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion in two stages: titles and abstracts (stage 1), and full text of studies retained at stage 2.Results58 studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The included studies covered 12 types of skeletal dysplasia that are non-lethal with severe limb deformities that could result in significant pain and numerous orthopaedic interventions. Most studies reported on the effect of surgical interventions (n = 40, 69%), followed by the effect of treatments on dimensions of health quality-of-life (n = 4, 6.8%) and psychosocial functioning (n = 8, 13.8%).ConclusionMost studies reported on clinical outcomes from surgery for people living with Achondroplasia. Consequently, there are gaps in the literature on the full range of treatment options (including no active treatment), outcomes and the lived experience of people living with other skeletal dysplasias. More research is warranted to examine the impact of treatments on health-related quality-of-life of people living with skeletal dysplasias, including their relatives to enable them to make preference- and valued based decisions about treatment.
Project description:BackgroundPublic health palliative care views communities as an integral part of care delivery at the end of life. This community-provider partnership approach has the potential to improve end-of-life care for people who are dying and their carers.ObjectiveTo identify and appraise the current literature related to public health interventions that enable communities to support people who are dying and their carers.MethodsA scoping review was conducted, applying Arksey and O'Malley's methods. Data was extracted and synthesized using narrative techniques, and results are reported using PRISMA guidelines.ResultsThe search yielded 2,902 results. Eighteen met inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Interventions were categorized according to their target population: people with life-limiting illness (ex. facilitated social interaction, helplines and guided discussions about death and dying); carers (ex. social support mapping, psychoeducation, and community resource identification and facilitation); or dyads (ex. reminiscence activities, practical and emotional support from volunteers, online modules to bolster coping mechanisms). Public health palliative care approaches were delivered by key community stakeholders such as community health workers, volunteers, peer mentors, and pre-established support groups. Despite reported challenges in identifying appropriate tools to measure effectiveness, studies report improvement in quality of life, loneliness, social support, stress and self-efficacy.ConclusionWe found that community-engaged palliative care interventions can lead to appreciable changes in various outcomes, though it was difficult to determine in which contexts this approach works best because of the dearth of contextual information reported. Based on the varied design and implementation strategies, it is clear that no one method for enhancing end of life care will benefit all communities and it is crucial to engage community members at all stages of the design and implementation process. Future research should be grounded in appropriate theory, describe contextual differences in these communities, and should specifically examine how demographics, resource availability, and social capital might impact the design, implementation, and results of public health palliative care interventions.
Project description:Originally part of the private domain of families, care of the older people is now the concern of public policy. Yet, in the European context of cost containment, it is not easy to make a case for increasing public support and the caring function of families remains prominent in social policy. In this paper, the authors question public policies around care of the older people in relation to both the needs of old people, but also those of adult children, mainly women, who work and provide care for their old parents. We investigate the interactions between public support in long-term care and the caring function of families. The paper presents some results of a comparative research study based on the identification of the policy measures which have been implemented in different European countries in the sector of care of the older people, and on the detailed analysis of care arrangements set up by a sample of 86 family carers in these various national contexts. We argue that in a context of cost containment, whatever the usual patterns of care and the role given to the family and public authorities, the policy measures which have been introduced since the 90s aim to support family carers in various ways with the common objective of giving them the flexibility they need in the organisation of care arrangements, combining various resources (formal professional care, unpaid informal care, semi-formal care). Different patterns of flexibility can be identified according to the regulation of the policy measures.
Project description:BackgroundWhile there is a clear need for psychosocial interventions that promote the well-being of carers of patients with cancer, the corresponding evidence base is disparate, complex, and difficult for end users to navigate and interpret. Carers remain undersupported with a lack of dedicated, effective, evidence-based programs. We will conduct a meta-review to synthesize this evidence and determine the state of science in this field.ObjectiveThis study aims to address the question, "what psychosocial interventions are available to promote the well-being of carers for people with cancer?"MethodsA meta-review will synthesize the relevant reviews of psychosocial interventions that have been developed and evaluated with carers for people with cancer. A total of 4 electronic databases (PsycInfo, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) will be searched for reviews published between January 2013 and December 2023. A team-based approach will be taken for screening and assessment of the returned records against the eligibility criteria to determine inclusion. Included reviews will be critically appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses. Relevant data on study characteristics, carer and patient populations, intervention details, and psychosocial outcomes will be extracted, synthesized, and the findings will be presented in a narrative format.ResultsIt is anticipated that the study will be completed by October 2024.ConclusionsEnsuring that carers have access to evidence-based programs that promote their well-being as they care for loved ones is critical. This meta-review will contribute to program development and translation efforts by providing a clear picture of the intervention evidence base of carers of patients with cancer and identifying notable strengths, weaknesses, and gaps across the literature. The findings are anticipated to offer future directions to advance research in the field.Trial registrationPROSPERO (CRD42023403219); https://tinyurl.com/4tnzv49s.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/56403.
Project description:This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: identify, appraise and bring together the evidence on the use of intergenerational practice.
Project description:BackgroundSocial isolation and loneliness are more common in older adults and are associated with a serious impact on their well-being, mental health, physical health, and longevity. They are a public health concern highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, hence the need for digital technology tools to enable remotely delivered interventions to alleviate the impact of social isolation and loneliness during the COVID-19 restrictions.ObjectivesTo map available evidence on the effects of digital interventions to mitigate social isolation and/or loneliness in older adults in all settings except hospital settings.Search methodsWe searched the following databases from inception to May 16, 2021, with no language restrictions. Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo via Ovid, CINAHL via EBSCO, Web of Science via Clarivate, ProQuest (all databases), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS) via ProQuest, EBSCO (all databases except CINAHL), Global Index Medicus, and Epistemonikos.Selection criteriaTitles and abstracts and full text of potentially eligible articles were independently screened in duplicate following the eligibility criteria.Data collection and analysisWe developed and pilot tested a data extraction code set in Eppi-Reviewer and data were individually extracted and coded based on an intervention-outcome framework which was also used to define the dimensions of the evidence and gap map.Main resultsWe included 200 articles (103 primary studies and 97 systematic reviews) that assessed the effects of digital interventions to reduce social isolation and/or loneliness in older adults. Most of the systematic reviews (72%) were classified as critically low quality, only 2% as high quality and 25% were published since the COVID-19 pandemic. The evidence is unevenly distributed with clusters predominantly in high-income countries and none in low-income countries. The most common interventions identified are digital interventions to enhance social interactions with family and friends and the community via videoconferencing and telephone calls. Digital interventions to enhance social support, particularly socially assistive robots, and virtual pets were also common. Most interventions focused on reducing loneliness and depression and improving quality of life of older adults. Major gaps were identified in community level outcomes and process indicators. No included studies or reviews assessed affordability or digital divide although the value of accessibility and barriers caused by digital divide were discussed in three primary studies and three reviews. Adverse effects were reported in only two studies and six reviews. No study or review included participants from the LGBTQIA2S+ community and only one study restricted participants to 80 years and older. Very few described how at-risk populations were recruited or conducted any equity analysis to assess differences in effects for populations experiencing inequities across PROGRESS-Plus categories.Authors' conclusionsThe restrictions placed on people during the pandemic have shone a spotlight onto social isolation and loneliness, particularly for older adults. This evidence and gap map shows available evidence on the effectiveness of digital interventions for reducing social isolation or loneliness in older adults. Although the evidence is relatively large and recent, it is unevenly distributed and there is need for more high-quality research. This map can guide researchers and funders to consider areas of major gaps as priorities for further research.