Conectar
The number of risk prediction models for sarcopenia in patients undergoing maintenance haemodialysis (MHD) is increasing. However, the quality, applicability, and reporting adherence of these models in clinical practice and future research remain unknown.
To systematically review published studies on risk prediction models for sarcopenia in patients undergoing MHD.
Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.
This systematic review adhered to the PRISMA guidelines. Search relevant domestic and international databases, which were searched from the inception of the databases until November 2023. The Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS) checklist was used to extract data. The Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) checklist was used to assess the risk of bias and applicability. The Transparent Reporting of a Multivariate Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) was used to assess the reporting adherence.
A total of 478 articles were retrieved, and 12 prediction models from 11 articles were included after the screening process. The incidence of sarcopenia in patients undergoing MHD was 16.38%–37.29%. The reported area under the curve (AUC) ranged from 0.73 to 0.955. All studies had a high risk of bias, mainly because of inappropriate data sources and poor reporting in the field of analysis. The combined AUC value of the six validation models was 0.91 (95% confidence interval: 0.87–0.94), indicating that the model had a high discrimination.
Although the included studies reported to some extent the discrimination of predictive models for sarcopenia in patients undergoing MHD, all studies were assessed to have a high risk of bias according to the PROBAST checklist, following the reporting guidelines outlined in the TRIPOD statement, and adherence was incomplete in all studies.
CRD42023476067.
To identify available instruments for assessing cancer patients' spiritual needs and to examine their psychometric properties using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology.
Cancer patients frequently have significant spiritual needs. The nurse plays an integral role in assessing the patient's spiritual needs as part of providing holistic care. It is crucial to assess these needs using appropriate and reliable instruments.
A systematic review based on COSMIN methodology.
Seven electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, ProQuest, CNKI and WANFANG) were systematically searched from inception until 14 February 2023. Two authors independently screened eligible literature, extracted data and evaluated methodological and psychometric quality. This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA checklist.
Sixteen studies have reported 16 different versions of the instruments. None of the instruments were properly assessed for all psychometric properties, nor were measurement error, responsiveness and cross-cultural validity/measurement invariance reported. All of the instruments failed to meet the COSMIN quality criteria for content validity. The quality of evidence for structural validity and/or internal consistency in five instruments did not meet the COSMIN criteria. Eventually, five instruments were not recommended, and 11 were only weakly recommended.
Instruments to assess spiritual needs exhibited limited reliability and validity. The Spiritual Care Needs Scale is provisionally recommended for research and clinical settings, but its limitations regarding content validity and cross-cultural application must be considered in practice. Future research should further revise the content of available instruments and comprehensively and correctly test their psychometric properties.
The review findings will provide evidence for healthcare professionals to select instruments for recognising spiritual needs in cancer patients.
This study is a systematic review with no patient or public participation.
FreshRSS 