Adherence to the Guideline for Reporting Evidence-based practice Educational interventions and Teaching (GREET) of studies on evidence-based healthcare e-learning: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study are to assess reporting of evidence-based healthcare (EBHC) e-learning interventions using the Guideline for Reporting Evidence-based practice Educational interventions and Teaching (GREET) checklist and explore factors associated with compliant reporting. DESIGN: Methodological cross-sectional study. METHODS: Based on the criteria used in an earlier systematic review, we included studies comparing EBHC e-learning and any other form of EBHC training or no EBHC training. We searched Medline, Embase, ERIC, CINAHL, CENTRAL, SCOPUS, Web of Knowledge, PsycInfo, ProQuest and Best Evidence Medical Education up to 4 January 2023. Screening of titles, abstracts, full-text articles and data extraction was done independently by two authors. For each study, we assessed adherence to each of the 17 GREET items and extracted information on possible predictors. Adequacy of reporting for each item of the GREET checklist was judged with yes (provided complete information), no (provided no information), unclear (when insufficient information was provided), or not applicable, when the item was clearly of no relevance to the intervention described (such as for item 8-details about the instructors-in the studies which used electronic, self-paced intervention, without any tutoring). Studies' adherence to the GREET checklist was presented as percentages and absolute numbers. We performed univariate analysis to assess the association of potential adherence predictors with the GREET checklist. We summarised results descriptively. RESULTS: We included 40 studies, the majority of which assessed e-learning or blended learning and mostly involved medical and other healthcare students. None of the studies fully reported all the GREET items. Overall, the median number of GREET items met (received yes) per study was 8 and third quartile (Q3) of GREET items met per study was 9 (min. 4 max. 14). When we used Q3 of the number of items met as cut-off point, adherence to the GREET reporting checklist was poor with 7 out of 40 studies (17.5%) reporting items of the checklist on acceptable level (adhered to at least 10 items out of 17). None of the studies reported on all 17 GREET items. For 3 items, 80% of included studies well reported information (received yes for these items): item 1 (brief description of intervention), item 4 (evidence-based practice content) and item 6 (educational strategies). Items for which 50% of included studies reported complete information (received yes for these items) included: item 9 (modes of delivery), item 11 (schedule) and 12 (time spent on learning). The items for which 70% or more of included studies did not provide information (received no for these items) included: item 7 (incentives) and item 13 (adaptations; for both items 70% of studies received no for them), item 14 (modifications of educational interventions-95% of studies received no for this item), item 16 (any processes to determine whether the materials and the educational strategies used in the educational intervention were delivered as originally planned-93% of studies received no for this item) and 17 (intervention delivery according to schedule-100% of studies received no for this item). Studies published after September 2016 showed slight improvements in nine reporting items. In the logistic regression models, using the cut-off point of Q3 (10 points or above) the odds of acceptable adherence to GREET guidelines were 7.5 times higher if adherence to other guideline (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials, Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology, etc) was reported for a given study type (p=0.039), also higher number of study authors increased the odds of adherence to GREET guidance by 18% (p=0.037). CONCLUSIONS: Studies assessing educational interventions on EBHC e-learning still poorly adhere to the GREET checklist. Using other reporting guidelines increased the odds of better GREET reporting. Journals should call for the use of appropriate use of reporting guidelines of future studies on teaching EBHC to increase transparency of reporting, decrease unnecessary research duplication and facilitate uptake of research evidence or result. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER: The Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/V86FR).

Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System: Content and Criterion Validity Across Evidence-Based Voice Therapies for Muscle Tension Dysphonia.

PURPOSE: Systematically improving voice therapy outcomes is challenging as the clinician actions (i.e., active ingredients) responsible for improved patient functioning (i.e., targets) are relatively unknown. The theory-driven Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS) and standard, voice-specific terminology based on the RTSS (RTSS-Voice) may help address this problem. This qualitative study evaluated if the RTSS and RTSS-Voice can describe four evidence-based voice therapies for muscle tension dysphonia without missing critical aspects (content validity) and identify commonalities and differences across them (criterion validity). METHOD: Qualitative interviews were completed between the clinicians (protocol experts) who developed and/or popularized the vocal function exercises, laryngeal reposturing, circumlaryngeal massage, and conversation training therapies as well as RTSS experts to produce RTSS specifications that met two consensus criteria: (a) The protocol expert agreed that the specification represented their treatment theory, and (b) the RTSS experts agreed that the specifications correctly adhered to both the RTSS framework and the RTSS-Voice's standard terminology. RESULTS: The RTSS and RTSS-Voice comprehensively described voice therapy variations across and within the four diverse treatment programs, needing only the addition of one new target: overall auditory-perceptual severity. CONCLUSIONS: The RTSS and RTSS-Voice exhibited strong content validity. The standard RTSS-Voice terminology helped identify, for the first time, commonalities and differences in treatment ingredients, targets, and mechanisms of action across four treatments developed for the same patient population. In the long term, the RTSS and RTSS-Voice could provide the framework for an ever-growing collection of clinically meaningful and evidence-based therapy algorithms with potential to improve research, education, and clinical care. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.25537624.

A compendium of evidence-based practice instruments for nursing education, practice and research.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based practice (EBP) is a cornerstone for safe, high-quality care. Implementation science recognizes that many factors influence the successful use of EBP, from attitudes and beliefs, self-efficacy, and knowledge and skills to contextual factors related to unit and organizational culture. This integrative review aimed to identify valid and reliable instruments measuring critical EBP domains with nursing professionals. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was conducted. CINAHL, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Joanna Briggs were searched to identify original research publications testing the reliability and validity of EBP nursing instruments. RESULTS: Of 347 records, 48 studies representing 50 instruments were identified as having undergone psychometric testing, thus meeting the inclusion criteria. Most instruments were validated in English-speaking countries. Content validity, construct validity, and internal consistency standards were met for 70%, 62%, and 94% of instruments, respectively. Limited testing was found for other types of validity, test-retest reliability, acceptability, feasibility, or responsivity and sensitivity, thus representing gaps in psychometric validation. Less than 20% of instruments have been translated to other languages limiting their use to advance EBP worldwide. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: Eighty-two percent of instruments met minimal psychometric standards and are sound for education, practice, and research. Expanding psychometric testing and utilizing validated EBP instruments will further the EBP movement to improve global population health.

Cultural adaptations and cultural factors in EBI implementation with Latinx communities.

Introduction: Cultural factors are constructs that capture important life experiences of Latinx/Hispanic individuals, families, and communities. Despite their importance for Latinx communities, Latinx cultural factors have yet to be fully incorporated into the literature of many social, behavioral science, and health service fields, including implementation science. This significant gap in the literature has limited in-depth assessments and a more complete understanding of the cultural life experiences of diverse Latinx community residents. This gap has also stifled the cultural adaptation, dissemination, and implementation of evidence based interventions (EBIs). Addressing this gap can inform the design, dissemination, adoption, implementation, and sustainability of EBIs developed to serve Latinx and other ethnocultural groups. Methods: Based on a prior Framework Synthesis systematic review of Latinx stress-coping research for the years 2000-2020, our research team conducted a thematic analysis to identify salient Latinx cultural factors in this research field. This thematic analysis examined the Discussion sections of 60 quality empirical journal articles previously included into this prior Framework Synthesis literature review. In Part 1, our team conducted an exploratory analysis of potential Latinx cultural factors mentioned in these Discussion sections. In Part 2 we conducted a confirmatory analysis using NVivo 12 for a rigorous confirmatory thematic analysis. Results: This procedure identified 13 salient Latinx cultural factors mentioned frequently in quality empirical research within the field of Latinx stress-coping research during the years 2000-2020. Discussion: We defined and examined how these salient Latinx cultural factors can be incorporated into intervention implementation strategies and can be expanded to facilitate EBI implementation within diverse Latinx community settings.

Is It Time to Expand Our Definition of "Clinical Utility"?

Currently, genetic tests that predict cancer risk or risk of recurrence in patients who have had their cancer treated with curative intent must have proven "clinical utility" to be recommended by the organizations responsible for publishing the standard-of-care guidelines for cancer care.Based on the current definition of clinical utility, most patients are denied testing for cancer-predisposing genes or pathogenic germline variants even though germline testing has been proven as highly accurate in identifying pathogenic germline variant carriers, there are measures recommended to prevent and diagnose early cancers associated with particular PGVs, and disparities in patient access to genetic tests are well described.Similarly, despite dozens of studies demonstrating that detected circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) after curative intention therapy of different cancer types is a highly accurate biomarker that predicts recurrence, the major organizations that publish guidelines for cancer monitoring after curative intention therapy recommend against using ctDNA assays to detect minimal residual disease and thereby predict recurrence for all solid tumor malignancies.Here, the primary reasons that these genetic tests are considered to lack proven clinical utility and the primary evidence suggesting that a broader definition of clinical utility should be considered are discussed. By expanding the definition of clinical utility, many patients will benefit from the information gained from having these genetic tests.

Translating and Validating the Vietnamese Version of the Health Sciences Evidence-Based Practice Questionnaire.

No validated instrument is available for assessing the evidence-based practice capacity of Vietnamese health professionals. This study aimed to translate and validate the Health Sciences Evidence-Based Practice questionnaire (HS-EBP) from English to Vietnamese and ascertain its psychometric properties. Data were collected from two obstetric hospitals in Vietnam. Participants: A total of 343 midwives were randomly selected. The HS-EBP questionnaire was translated by a group of bilingual experts into Vietnamese (HS-EBP-V). Content validity was assessed by two experts. Internal consistency and test-retest reliabilities were assessed using Cronbach's α and intraclass correlation (ICC), respectively. Construct validity was assessed using the contrasted groups approach. As a result, the content validity index of the HS-EBP-V reached 1.0. For the individual subscales, Cronbach's α was 0.92-0.97 and ICC was between 0.45 and 0.66. The validity of the contrasted-groups approach showed discrimination by a significant difference in the subscale scores among diploma holders compared with bachelor's degree holders (p < 0.001). The validation of the HS-EBP questionnaire indicated satisfactory psychometric properties. The results indicate that the HS-EBP is a reliable and valid instrument which assesses the competencies of as well as facilitators of and barriers to the five steps of EBP among midwives. The HS-EBP-V was deemed a reliable and validated tool for assessing the competency and application of EBP among Vietnamese healthcare professionals.

Translation and validation of the Alberta Context Tool for use in Norwegian nursing homes.

PURPOSE: Organizational context is recognized as important for facilitating evidence-based practice and improving patient outcomes. Organizational context is a complex construct to measure and appropriate instruments that can quantify and measure context are needed. The aim of this study was to translate and cross-culturally adapt the Alberta Context Tool (ACT) to Norwegian, and to test the reliability and structural validity among registered nurses (RNs) and licenced practice nurses (LPNs) working in nursing homes. METHODS: This study was a validation study utilizing a cross-sectional design. The sample consisted of n = 956 healthcare personnel from 28 nursing homes from a municipality in Norway. In the first stage, the ACT was translated before being administered in 28 nursing homes. In the second stage, internal consistency and structural validity were explored using Cronbach's alpha and confirmatory factor analysis. RESULTS: A rigorous forward-and-back translation process was performed including a team of academics, experts, professional translators and the copyright holders, before an acceptable version of the ACT was piloted and finalized. The Norwegian version of the ACT showed good internal consistency with Chronbachs alpha above .75 for all concepts except for Formal interactions where the alpha was .69. Structural validity was acceptable for both RNs and LPNs with factors loadings more than .4 for most items. CONCLUSIONS: The Norwegian version of the ACT is a valid measure of organizational context in Norwegian nursing homes among RNs and LPNs.

Pediatric Hospital Medicine and Global Health: A Fitting Niche for an Emerging Subspecialty.

As North American hospitals serve increasingly diverse patient populations, including recent immigrants, refugees, and returned travelers, all pediatric hospitalists (PHs) require foundational competency in global health, and a subset of PHs are carving out niches focused in global health. Pediatric hospitalists are uniquely positioned to collaborate with low- and middle-income country clinicians and child health advocates to improve the health of hospitalized children worldwide. Using the 2018 WHO standards for improving the quality of care for children and adolescents worldwide, we describe how PHs' skills align closely with what the WHO and others have identified as essential elements to bring high-quality, sustainable care to children in low- and middle-income countries. Furthermore, North American global health hospitalists bring home expertise that reciprocally benefits their home institutions.

Evidence-Based Guidelines for Drug Interaction Studies: Model-Informed Time Course of Intestinal and Hepatic CYP3A4 Inhibition by Clarithromycin.

Drug-drug interaction (DDI) studies are mandated in drug development; however, protocols for evaluating the impact of cytochrome P450 (CYP) inhibition on new molecular entities are currently inconsistent. This study utilised validated physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) software to define the optimal dose, frequency, and duration of clarithromycin to achieve optimal characterisation of CYP3A4 inhibition in a study population. The Simcyp® Simulator (Version 19.0) was used to simulate clarithromycin-mediated CYP3A4 inhibition in healthy virtual cohorts. Between trial variability in magnitude and time course of CYP3A4 activity was assessed following clarithromycin dosing strategies obtained from the University of Washington Drug Interaction Database. Heterogeneity in CYP3A4 inhibition was evaluated across sex, race, and age. Literature review identified 500 mg twice daily for 5 days as the most common clarithromycin dosing protocol for CYP3A4 inhibition studies. On simulation, clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily resulted in the largest steady-state inhibition of hepatic (percent mean inhibition [95%CI] = 80 [77-83]) and small intestine (94 [94-95]) CYP3A4 activity (as compared to 500 mg once daily, 400 mg once/twice daily, or 250 mg once/twice daily). Additionally, 500 mg twice daily was associated with the shortest time for 90% of individuals to reach 90% of their minimum hepatic (4 days) and small intestine (1 days) CYP3A4 activity. The study presented herein supports that clarithromycin dosing protocol of 500 mg twice daily for 5 days is sufficient to achieve maximal hepatic and small intestine CYP3A4 inhibition. These findings were consistent between sex, race, and age differences.

Impact of COVID-19 infection on the cardiovascular system: An evidence-based analysis of risk factors and outcomes.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), also known as COVID-19, emerged in late 2019 in Wuhan, China. The World Health Organization declared the virus a pandemic on March 11, 2020. Disease progression from COVID-19 infection has shown significant symptom manifestations within organ systems beyond the respiratory system. The literature has shown increasing evidence of cardiovascular involvement during disease course and an associated increase in mortality among infected patients. Although the understanding of this novel virus is continually evolving, it is currently proposed that the mechanism by which the SARS-CoV-2 virus contributes to cardiovascular manifestations involves the ACE2 transmembrane protein. The protein ACE2 is highly expressed in blood vessel pericytes, and infection can result in microvascular dysfunction and subsequent acute coronary syndromes. Complications involving the cardiovascular system include myocardial infarction, arrhythmias, shock, and heart failure. In this evidence-based review, we discuss risk factors of cardiovascular involvement in COVID-19 infection, pathophysiology of COVID-19-related cardiovascular infection, and injury, COVID-19 effects on the cardiovascular system and corresponding treatments, and hematologic effects of COVID-19 and COVID-19 in heart transplant patients. Clinicians managing COVID-19 patients should appreciate the potential cardiovascular effects related to the disease process.

Implementation of evidence-based practice: The experience of nurses and midwives.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of evidence-based practice in clinical practice is crucial. Nurses and midwives play a vital role in using updated evidence. However, limited support and barriers to implementing evidence-based practice hamper the use of up-to-date evidence in clinical decision-making practice. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the implementation of evidence-based practice of nurses and midwives working in public hospitals. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive study was conducted to explore the experience of implementing evidence-based practice among nurses and midwives working in public hospitals. A total of 86 participants, of which, 25 in-depth interviews, 5 FGDs having 47 participants and 14 participants were involved during observations, were considered in Amhara Region public hospitals from November 17, 2019 to April 25, 2020. The observational data, interview and FGD transcripts were imported into NVivo 12 plus to manage and analyze the data using the Computer-Assisted Data Analysis Software Program (CAQDAS). The data were analyzed through thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Nurses and midwives perceived that implementation of evidence-based practice is the use of research findings, guidelines, hospital protocols, books, and expert experience in clinical decision-making practice. However, there was limited support for the implementation of evidence-based practice by nurses and midwives. The lack of knowledge and skill to use evidence like research findings, time mismanagement, the lack of motivation, the lack of resources and training were the perceived barriers to the implementation of evidence-based practice. Stick to the traditional practice due to lack of incentive and unclear job description between diploma and BSc nurses and midwives were the perceived causes of the lack of motivation. CONCLUSIONS: The experience of evidence-based practice of nurses and midwives indicated that there was limited support for the implementation of evidence-based practice. However, research findings were rarely used in clinical decision-making practice The Knowledge, attitude towards implementing evidence-based practice, lack of resources and training, time mismanagement and lack of motivation were the barriers to the implementation of evidence-based practice. Therefore, the promotion of adopting the implementation of evidence-based practice and training on the identified barriers are mandatory.

Health technology assessment applied to emergency preparedness: a new perspective.

Emergency preparedness is a continuous quality improvement process through which roles and responsibilities are defined to effectively anticipate, respond to, and recover from the impact of emergencies. This process results in documented plans that provide a backbone structure for developing the core capacities to address health threats. Nevertheless, several barriers can impair an effective preparedness planning, as it needs a 360° perspective to address each component according to the best evidence and practice. Preparedness planning shares common principles with health technology assessment (HTA) as both encompass a multidisciplinary and multistakeholder approach, follow an iterative cycle, adopt a 360° perspective on the impact of intervention measures, and conclude with decision-making support. Our "Perspective" illustrates how each HTA domain can address different component(s) of a preparedness plan that can indeed be seen as a container of multiple HTAs, which can then be used to populate the entire plan itself. This approach can allow one to overcome preparedness barriers, providing an independent, systematic, and robust tool to address the components and ensuring a comprehensive evaluation of their value in the mitigation of the impact of emergencies.

Evidence-Based Competency Training Program for Blood Product Administration.

BACKGROUND: Health care in deployed military environments requires robust clinical nursing skills to care for patients with traumatic injuries. Blood product administration is a critical skill in which nurses should be competent. However, in non-deployed environments, blood transfusions are performed less frequently, resulting in skill competency loss. AIMS: Our clinical inquiry focused on maintaining competency for infrequently performed nursing skills, specifically blood product administration. METHODS: A literature review and critical appraisal were executed, followed by an evidence-based practice change. A knowledge test, objective and subjective assessment, and training satisfaction evaluation were performed to measure the practice change outcomes. Both inpatient and outpatient nurses were included. RESULTS: Sixteen articles were identified and appraised. The evidence recommended a blended education approach, that is, lecture plus hands-on practice. Thus, a classroom lecture and simulation scenario were put into practice with an existing computer-based training for blood administration. The nurses met knowledge test standards (≥ 90%) before and after implementation, while skill performance improved by 13% and improved self-competence scores by 7%. Nurses in outpatient settings improved performance scores by 18.4% compared to inpatient nurses, whose scores improved by 9.4%. The simulation scenario completion time decreased by 8.3 minutes post-implementation, and the training program earned a 90% satisfactory rating. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: A blended education program improves clinical skill performance and enhances confidence in performing critical interventions. Blended education provides a safe learning environment for nurses to be prepared for the management of low-volume patient care emergencies.

Methodological Issues in Rehabilitation Research: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify, synthesize, and categorize the methodological issues faced by the rehabilitation field. DATA SOURCES: A scoping review was conducted using studies identified in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and Google Scholar up to August 2018. STUDY SELECTION: We included all type of publications describing methodological issues in rehabilitation research where rehabilitation is described as a multimodal process. The methodological issues have been categorized and classified. DATA EXTRACTION: The synthesis included qualitative and quantitative analysis. To focus the attention on rehabilitation, we post hoc divided in "specific issues" (highly related to, even if not exclusive of, rehabilitation research) and "generic issues" (common in biomedical research). DATA SYNTHESIS: Seventy-one publications were included: 68% were narrative reviews, 15% systematic reviews, 7% editorials, 4% meta-epidemiologic studies, and 5% others. Specific methodological issues include the following: problematic application of randomized controlled trials (32%), absent definition of core outcome sets (28%), poor interventions description (22%), weak methodological (conducting) and reporting quality (21%), scarce clinical practice applicability (14%), lack of blinding assessor (10%), inadequate randomization methods or inadequate allocation concealment (8%), and inadequate participants description and recruitment (8%). "Generic" issues included the following: data and statistical description (31%), authors' methodological training (7%), peer review process (6%, n=4), funding declaration (6%), ethical statement (3%), protocol registration (3%), and conflict of interest declaration (1%). CONCLUSIONS: Methodological and reporting issues might influence the quality of the evidence produced in rehabilitation research. The next steps to move forward in the field of rehabilitation could be to evaluate the influence of all these issues on the validity of trial results through meta-epidemiologic studies and to develop specific checklists to provide guidance to authors to improve the reporting and conduct of trials in this field.

The road from evidence to policies and the erosion of the standards of democratic scrutiny in the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic poses extraordinary public health challenges. In order to respond to such challenges, most democracies have relied on so-called 'evidence-based' policies, which supposedly devolve to science the burden of their justification. However, the biomedical sciences can only provide a theory-laden evidential basis, while reliable statistical data for policy support is often scarce. Therefore, scientific evidence alone cannot legitimise COVID-19 public health policies, which are ultimately based on political decisions. Given this inevitable input on policy-making, the risk of arbitrariness is ubiquitous and democratic scrutiny becomes essential to counter it. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the standards of scientific and democratic scrutiny have been, as a matter of fact, substantially lowered. This erosion potentially damages democracy.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for inflammatory bowel disease 2020.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a general term for chronic or remitting/relapsing inflammatory diseases of the intestinal tract and generally refers to ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). Since 1950, the number of patients with IBD in Japan has been increasing. The etiology of IBD remains unclear; however, recent research data indicate that the pathophysiology of IBD involves abnormalities in disease susceptibility genes, environmental factors and intestinal bacteria. The elucidation of the mechanism of IBD has facilitated therapeutic development. UC and CD display heterogeneity in inflammatory and symptomatic burden between patients and within individuals over time. Optimal management depends on the understanding and tailoring of evidence-based interventions by physicians. In 2020, seventeen IBD experts of the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology revised the previous guidelines for IBD management published in 2016. This English version was produced and modified based on the existing updated guidelines in Japanese. The Clinical Questions (CQs) of the previous guidelines were completely revised and categorized as follows: Background Questions (BQs), CQs, and Future Research Questions (FRQs). The guideline was composed of a total of 69 questions: 39 BQs, 15 CQs, and 15 FRQs. The overall quality of the evidence for each CQ was determined by assessing it with reference to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach, and the strength of the recommendation was determined by the Delphi consensus process. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance for on-site physicians is provided regarding indications for proceeding with the diagnosis and treatment.

The efficacy of reduced-visit prenatal care model during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: While this reduced-visit prenatal care model during the COVID-19 pandemic is well-intentioned, there is still a lack of relevant evidence to prove its effectiveness. Therefore, in order to provide new evidence-based medical evidence for clinical treatment, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of reduced-visit prenatal care model during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The online literature will be searched using the following combination of medical subject heading terms: "prenatal care" OR "prenatal nursing" AND "reduced-visit" OR "reduce visit" OR "virtual visit." MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science will be searched without any language restrictions. A standard data extraction form is used independently by 2 reviewers to retrieve the relevant data from the articles. The outcome measures are as following: pregnancy-related stress, satisfaction with care, quality of care. The present study will be performed by Review Manager Software (RevMan Version 5.3, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark). P < .05 is set as the significance level. RESULTS: It is hypothesized that reduced-visit prenatal care model will provide similar outcomes compared with traditional care model. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our review will be reported strictly following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria and the review will add to the existing literature by showing compelling evidence and improved guidance in clinic settings. OSF REGISTRATION NUMBER: 10.17605/OSF.IO/WYMB7.