Conectar
Scoping reviews, mapping reviews and evidence and gap maps (collectively known as ‘big picture reviews’) in health continue to gain popularity within the evidence ecosystem. These big-picture reviews are beneficial for policy-makers, guideline developers and researchers within the field of health for understanding the available evidence, characteristics, concepts and research gaps, which are often needed to support the development of policies, guidelines and practice. However, these reviews often face criticism related to poor and inconsistent methodological conduct and reporting. There is a need to understand which areas of these reviews require further methodological clarification and exploration. The aim of this project is to develop a research agenda for scoping reviews, mapping reviews and evidence and gap maps in health by identifying and prioritising specific research questions related to methodological uncertainties.
A modified e-Delphi process will be adopted. Participants (anticipated N=100) will include patients, clinicians, the public, researchers and others invested in creating a strategic research agenda for these reviews. This Delphi will be completed in four consecutive stages, including a survey collecting the methodological uncertainties for each of the big picture reviews, the development of research questions based on that survey and two further surveys and four workshops to prioritise the research questions.
This study was approved by the University of Adelaide Human Research Ethics Committee (H-2024-188). The results will be communicated through open-access peer-reviewed publications and conferences. Videos and infographics will be developed and placed on the JBI (previously Joanna Briggs Institute) Scoping Review Network webpage.
by Ana Paula Cândido Oliveira, Daniela Alencar Vieira, Cristiane Wanderley Cardoso, Tereza Magalhães, Rosangela Oliveira Anjos, Eduardo José Farias Borges Reis, Kionna Oliveira Bernardes Santos, Guilherme Sousa Ribeiro
Work ability is a subjective concept that reflects the balance between an individual’s perception of the physical, mental, and social demands of work and their competence and resources to meet those demands. The COVID-19 crisis significantly impacted health, work, and socioeconomic conditions worldwide. However, few studies have examined work ability in disadvantaged urban communities during this period. To analyze factors associated with work ability within the context of social vulnerability during the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted a cross-sectional study in a low-income neighborhood in Salvador, Brazil, between February and June 2022. Sociodemographic, health, and labor data were collected, and work ability was assessed using the Work Ability Index (WAI), a widely used tool for evaluating work ability. Multivariable analyses based on a hierarchical model were run to investigate factors associated with low WAI scores. The study included 292 workers aged ≥16 years (59.6% women; median age 41 years). Most workers (84.6%) were classified as having adequate work ability based on their WAI scores. Multivariable analyses found that inadequate work ability was more frequent among women (prevalence ratio [PR]: 1.89, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-3.48), individuals who self-rated their health as moderate/good (PR: 5.91; 95% CI: 1.45-24.05) or poor/very poor (PR: 21.62; 95% CI: 5.14-90.91) compared to those with excellent/very good health, and those reporting diabetes (PR: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.13-3.9). Working >40 hours per week (PR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.28-0.96) was negatively associated with inadequate work ability, suggesting that individuals with adequate work ability may be selected for longer working hours. A history of COVID-19 was not associated with inadequate work ability. These findings suggest that targeted interventions to improve work ability in low-income communities should prioritize women and workers with chronic health conditions, such as diabetes.To describe a synthesis of the experience related to the spirituality of those living a bereavement journey in primary qualitative studies.
A systematic review of qualitative studies.
A systematic review was carried out in March 2019 and was updated in January 2023. Searching was accomplished by an online database, such as CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, MedicLatina, LILACS, SciELO and Academic Search Complete. The search strategy did not consider a timeline as an eligibility criterion. The quality of the studies was assessed, and a thematic synthesis was performed in this review.
A systematic review of qualitative studies was conducted according to Saini and Shlonsky's methodology.
PRISMA checklist.
The review included 33 articles. Most of the studies were phenomenological and focused on parents' and family experiences of bereavement. Seven significant categories emerged, which match unmet spiritual needs during the grieving process. Two major categories were identified regarding the role of spirituality in bereavement: Spirituality as a process and spirituality as an outcome.
In clinical practice, attention to spirituality and providing spiritual care is critical to guarantee a holistic approach for those experiencing bereavement.
The findings of our study could foster awareness that healthcare professionals should include the spiritual dimension in their clinical practice to provide holistic care to individuals, enhancing the healing process in bereavement.
This is a systematic review.
To present the pooled estimated prevalence of adverse events in pronated intubated adult COVID-19 patients.
A systematic review and meta-analysis.
This study used the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Embase, LILACS, Livivo, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases as data sources.
The studies were meta-analysed using JAMOVI 1.6.15 software. A random-effects model was used to identify the global prevalence of adverse events, confidence intervals and the heterogeneity data. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute tool, and the certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.
Of the 7904 studies identified, 169 were included for full reading, and 10 were included in the review. The most prevalent adverse events were pressure injuries (59%), haemodynamic instability (23%), death (17%) and device loss or traction (9%).
The most prevalent adverse events in mechanically ventilated pronated patients with COVID-19 are pressure injuries, presence of haemodynamic instability, death and device loss or traction.
The evidence identified in this review can help improve the quality and safety of patient care by helping to design care protocols to avoid the development of adverse events that can cause permanent sequelae in these patients.
This systematic review addressed the adverse events related to prone position in intubated adult COVID-19 patients. We identified that the most prevalent adverse events in these patients were pressure injuries, haemodynamic instability, device loss or traction and death. The results of this review may influence the clinical practice of nurses who work in intensive care units and, consequently, the nursing care provided not only to COVID-19 patients but for all intubated patients due to other reasons in intensive care units.
This systematic review adhered to the PRISMA reporting guideline.
As this is a systematic review, we analysed data from primary studies conducted by many researchers. Thus, there was no patient or public contribution in this review.
This study aimed to describe the process of construction, validation, and usability of the chatbot ESTOMABOT to assist in the self-care of patients with intestinal ostomies. Methodological research was conducted in three phases: construction, validation, and usability. The first stage corresponded to the elaboration of a script through a literature review, and the second stage corresponded to face and content validation through a panel of enterostomal therapy nurses. In the third phase, the usability of ESTOMABOT was assessed with the participation of surgical clinic nurses, patients with intestinal elimination ostomies, and information technology professionals, using the System Usability Scale. The ESTOMABOT content reached excellent criteria of adequacy, with percentages of agreement equal to or greater than 90%, which were considered adequate, relevant, and representative. The evaluation of the content validity of the script using the scale content validity index/average proportion method reached a result above 0.90, and the Fleiss κ was excellent (P 
FreshRSS 