The quality of COVID-19 systematic reviews during the coronavirus 2019 pandemic: an exploratory comparison.

BACKGROUND: The unprecedented volume and speed at which COVID-19-related systematic reviews (SRs) may have been produced has raised questions regarding the quality of this evidence. It is feasible that pandemic-related factors may have led to an impairment in quality (reduced internal validity, increased risk of bias [RoB]). This may have serious implications for decision-making related to public health and individual healthcare. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to compare the quality of SRs published during the pandemic that were related to COVID-19 with SRs published during the pandemic that were unrelated to COVID-19 (all of which were fully appraised in the KSR Evidence database of SRs in healthcare). Our secondary objective was to compare the quality of SRs published during the pandemic (regardless of research topic), with SRs published pre-pandemic. METHODS: We compared all SRs related to COVID-19 to all SRs unrelated to COVID-19 that (i) were published during the pandemic (between 1st March 2020 and September 14, 2022), (ii) were included in KSR Evidence, and (iii) had been appraised using the ROBIS tool. We then compared all SRs published during the pandemic (regardless of research topic) with a pre-pandemic sample of SRs. RESULTS: For SRs published during the pandemic, we found there was no statistically significant difference in quality between those SRs tagged as being related to COVID-19 and those that were not [relative risk (RR) of low RoB for COVID-19 versus COVID-19-unrelated reviews: 0.94; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.66 to 1.34]. Generally, COVID-19 SRs and COVID-19-unrelated SRs were both of low quality with only 10% of COVID-19 reviews and 11% of COVID-19-unrelated reviews rated as low RoB. However, SRs (regardless of topic) published during the pandemic were of lower quality than those published pre-pandemic (RR for low RoB for 'during pandemic' versus 'pre-pandemic': 0.30; 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.34) with 11% of pandemic and 36% of pre-pandemic SRs rated as low RoB. CONCLUSION: These results suggest COVID-19 and COVID-19-unrelated SRs published during the pandemic are equally of low quality. SRs published during the pandemic were generally lower quality compared with SRs published pre-pandemic irrespective of COVID-19 focus. Moreover, SR quality in general is seriously lacking, and considerable efforts need to be made to substantially improve the quality and rigour of the SR process.

Protocol for the systematic review of the Pneumocystis jirovecii-associated pneumonia in non-HIV immunocompromised patients.

INTRODUCTION: Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) is a well-known and frequent opportunistic infection in HIV patients. However, there has been an increase in the number of reports of PJP in other immunosuppressed patients with autoimmune inflammatory disorders or because of chemotherapy and high doses of steroids, especially when used in combination as part of immunosuppressive therapy. OBJECTIVE: Despite the increasing importance of PJP in non-HIV patients, there is a lack of comprehensive and updated information on the epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, microbiology, treatments, and prophylaxis of this infection in this population. Therefore, the objective of this systematic review is to synthesize information on these aspects, from a perspective of evidence-based medicine. METHODS: The protocol is prepared following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA-P) guidelines. We will perform a systematic review of literature published between January 2010 and July 2023, using the databases PubMed, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science. In addition, manual searches will be carried out through related articles, and references to included articles. The main findings and clinical outcomes were extracted from all the eligible studies with a standardized instrument. Two authors will independently screen titles and abstracts, review full texts, and collect data. Disagreements will be resolved by discussion, and a third reviewer will decide if there is no consensus. We will synthesize the results using a narrative or a meta-analytic approach, depending on the heterogeneity of the studies. EXPECTED RESULTS: It is expected that this systematic review will provide a comprehensive and up-to-date overview of the state-of-the-art of PJP in non-HIV patients. Furthermore, the study will highlight possible gaps in knowledge that should be addressed through new research. CONCLUSIONS: Here, we present the protocol for a systematic review which will consider all existing evidence from peer-reviewed publication sources relevant to the primary and secondary outcomes related to diagnosing and managing PJP in non-HIV patients.

Systematic review protocol of aetiology of mechanical bowel obstruction in low-and-middle income countries: Has anything changed in the last two decades?

The aetiology of mechanical bowel obstruction exhibits significant variability based on geographical location and age. In high-income countries, postoperative adhesions and hernias are frequently cited as the primary causes, whereas in low- and middle-income countries (LMCIs), hernias take precedence. Speculation exists within the surgical community regarding whether this trend has evolved in LMCIs. To address this knowledge gap, our study aims to conduct a systematic review of existing literature, focusing on understanding the most prevalent causes of mechanical bowel obstruction in both pediatric and adult populations within LMCIs, providing valuable insights for surgical practice. This protocol was designed and written according to the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocol 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015) statement. However, the results of the systematic review will be reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. We will consider studies published in English and French between 2002 and 2022 that reported on the aetiology of mechanical bowel obstruction in any age group in low- and middle-income countries. We will conduct a literature search using Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, CINAHL on EBSCO and Web of Science databases employing relevant subject headings, keywords and synonyms, which will be combined using Boolean operators to refine the search results. A hand search of references of retrieved literature will be conducted. The retrieved articles will be imported into Zotero for de-duplication. The resulting set of titles and abstracts will be uploaded to Rayyan (an AI-assisted online systematic review tool), where they will be double-checked to identify articles eligible for inclusion. Two independent reviewers will screen articles to be included and disagreement will be resolved by discussion or by a third reviewer as a tie-breaker. Also, data extraction will be done by one reviewer and confirmed by another. Critical appraisal to assess the quality of the included studies will be carried out by two independent reviewers using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tools. We anticipate that the eligible studies will be quite heterogeneous in terms of their design, outcomes of interest, populations and comorbidities. Therefore, resmay be synthesised descriptively without meta-analysis using charts, graphs and tables. Where possible, we will conduct a sub-analysis using conceptual frameworks based on age, WHO regions and continents.

Standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation versus chest compressions only after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The 2020 American Heart Association guidelines encourage lay rescuers to provide chest compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation to simplify the process and encourage cardiopulmonary resuscitation initiation. However, recent clinical trials had contradictory results about chest compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This study will aim to compare standard and chest compressions-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will retrieve only randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials from the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science and Embase databases. Data on study design, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcomes will be extracted by a unified standard form. Primary outcomes to be assessed are hospital admission, discharge, and 30-day survival, and return of spontaneous circulation. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework will evaluate the quality of evidence. Cochrane's tool for assessing the risk of bias will evaluate risk deviation. If the I2 statistic is lower than 40%, the fixed-effects model will be used for meta-analysis. Otherwise, the random-effects model will be used. The search will be performed following the publication of this protocol (estimated to occur on 30 December 2024). DISCUSSION: This study will evaluate the effect of chest compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and provide evidence for cardiopulmonary resuscitation guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No patient or public entity will be involved in this study. Therefore, the study does not need to be ethically reviewed. The results of the study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal publications and committee conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021295507.

Interventions to promote medical student well-being: an overview of systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct an overview of systematic reviews that explore the effectiveness of interventions to enhance medical student well-being. DESIGN: Overview of systematic reviews. DATA SOURCES: The Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, APA PsychInfo, CINAHL and Scopus were searched from database inception until 31 May 2023 to identify systematic reviews of interventions to enhance medical student well-being. Ancestry searching and citation chasing were also conducted. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: The Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews V.2 tool was used to appraise the quality of the included reviews. A narrative synthesis was conducted, and the evidence of effectiveness for each intervention was rated. RESULTS: 13 reviews (with 94 independent studies and 17 616 students) were included. The reviews covered individual-level and curriculum-level interventions. Individual interventions included mindfulness (n=12), hypnosis (n=6), mental health programmes (n=7), yoga (n=4), cognitive and behavioural interventions (n=1), mind-sound technology (n=1), music-based interventions (n=1), omega-3 supplementation (n=1), electroacupuncture (n=1) and osteopathic manipulative treatment (n=1). The curriculum-level interventions included pass/fail grading (n=4), problem-based curriculum (n=2) and multicomponent curriculum reform (n=2). Most interventions were not supported by sufficient evidence to establish effectiveness. Eleven reviews were rated as having 'critically low' quality, and two reviews were rated as having 'low' quality. CONCLUSIONS: Individual-level interventions (mindfulness and mental health programmes) and curriculum-level interventions (pass/fail grading) can improve medical student well-being. These conclusions should be tempered by the low quality of the evidence. Further high-quality research is required to explore additional effective interventions to enhance medical student well-being and the most efficient ways to implement and combine these for maximum benefit.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of community-based directly observed treatment (DOT) versus health facility-based DOT of tuberculosis in Africa: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis (TB) remains a significant global health challenge, especially prevalent in the WHO African region. The WHO's End TB Strategy emphasises effective treatment approaches such as directly observed therapy (DOT), yet the optimal implementation of DOT, whether through health facility-based (HF DOT) or community-based (CB DOT) approaches, remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic comparison of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Community-Based Directly Observed Treatment (CB DOT) versus Health Facility-Based Directly Observed Treatment (HF DOT) for tuberculosis (TB) treatment in African settings. METHODS: We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. We will search PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and the Cochrane Library for articles published up to 30 March 2023, without date restrictions. Eligible studies must be full economic evaluations conducted in African countries, comparing CB DOT to HF DOT regarding treatment outcomes and costs. Exclusion criteria include non-English, non-peer-reviewed or studies lacking caregiver involvement in CB DOT, health facility-based DOT comparison, direct comparability between CB DOT and HF DOT, significant selection bias or non-economic evaluations. Data extraction will be performed independently by reviewers, and meta-analyses will use STATA software. To pool the data, a random-effect model will be applied, and quality assessment of the studies will be conducted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as the study will use previously published articles available publicly. Findings will be presented at international and national conferences and published in open-access, peer-reviewed journals. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023443260.

Personal growth initiative across the life span: a systematic review protocol of quantitative studies using the Personal Growth Initiative Scale-II.

BACKGROUND: Personal Growth Initiative (PGI) a multi-dimensional construct, conceptualised as a skill set that helps individuals to intentionally grow is considered an important construct throughout the life span. Coping with the challenges, transitions, experiences and stressors of life requires an active growth orientation. In previous empirical research, the construct has been measured by either the PGIS-I or PGIS-II, of which only the latter takes account of the theoretically established multi-dimensionality of the construct. This paper describes the protocol for conducting a systematic review of published peer-reviewed empirical research articles on the multi-dimensional construct of PGI. The aim of this review is threefold: (1) to better understand the multi-dimensional construct PGI in different contexts and populations, (2) to improve our understanding of the reliability and validity of the PGIS-II in various research populations and (3) to obtain an overview of its associations with relevant psychosocial factors. METHODS: For the development of this protocol, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) reporting guidelines were used. Four databases and one registry will be searched using a predetermined search strategy for relevant studies. Studies will be screened, by two reviewers independently, against the established inclusion criteria. During the data extraction process, the quality of the included studies will be assessed using the Quality Assessment for Survey Studies in Psychology (Q-SSP). The collected data will then be analysed and reported in both narrative and tabular form according to the PRISMA 2020 statement guidelines and flow diagram. DISCUSSION: The findings of this study will increase our understanding of the dynamics of PGI throughout the lifespan, its associations with other psychosocial factors and the psychometric properties of the PGIS-II. It will also clarify where additional research is needed. The objectives of the proposed review can provide a basis for the development of practical applications and interventions. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022377342.

A systematic review to determine the effect of strategies to sustain chronic disease prevention interventions in clinical and community settings: study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The primary purpose of this review is to synthesise the effect of strategies aiming to sustain the implementation of evidenced-based interventions (EBIs) targeting key health behaviours associated with chronic disease (i.e. physical inactivity, poor diet, harmful alcohol use, and tobacco smoking) in clinical and community settings. The field of implementation science is bereft of an evidence base of effective sustainment strategies, and as such, this review will provide important evidence to advance the field of sustainability research. METHODS: This systematic review protocol is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) checklist. Methods will follow Cochrane gold-standard review methodology. The search will be undertaken across multiple databases, adapting filters previously developed by the research team, data screening and extraction will be performed in duplicate, strategies will be coded using an adapted sustainability-explicit taxonomy, and evidence will be synthesised using appropriate methods (i.e. meta-analytic following Cochrane or non-meta-analytic following SWiM guidelines). We will include any randomised controlled study that targets any staff or volunteers delivering interventions in clinical or community settings. Studies which report on any objective or subjective measure of the sustainment of a health prevention policy, practice, or programme within any of the eligible settings will be included. Article screening, data extraction, risk of bias, and quality assessment will be performed independently by two review authors. Risk of bias will be assessed using Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2). A random-effect meta-analysis will be conducted to estimate the pooled effect of sustainment strategies separately by setting (i.e. clinical and community). Sub-group analyses will be undertaken to explore possible causes of statistical heterogeneity and may include the following: time period, single or multi-strategy, type of setting, and type of intervention. Differences between sub-groups will be statistically compared. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: This will be the first systematic review to determine the effect of strategies designed to support sustainment on sustaining the implementation of EBIs in clinical and community settings. The findings of this review will directly inform the design of future sustainability-focused implementation trials. Further, these findings will inform the development of a sustainability practice guide for public health practitioners. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022352333.

Association between clinical biomechanical metrics of cervical spine function and pain or disability in people with neuromusculoskeletal neck pain: Protocol for a systematic review and planned meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: Neck pain is a burdensome condition associated with pain, disability, and economic cost. Neck pain has been associated with observable changes in neuromuscular function and biomechanics. Prior research shows impairments in kinematic control, including reduced mobility, velocity, and smoothness of cervical motion. However, the strength of association between these impairments and patient-reported pain and disability is unclear rendering development of novel and relevant rehabilitation strategies difficult. The aim of this systematic review is to synthesize existing evidence on the strength of association between clinical biomechanical metrics of neck function (ROM, strength, acceleration, accuracy, smoothness, etc.) and patient-reported neck pain and disability. METHODS/ANALYSIS: This protocol follows Cochrane guidelines and adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P). MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science and Scopus will be searched, along with the gray literature, up to 20 November 2023, using terms and keywords derived from initial scoping searches. Observational studies, including cohorts and cross-sectional studies, that explore associations between clinical biomechanics of the neck and patient-reported outcomes of neck pain or disability will be included. Two reviewers will independently perform study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment (National Institute of Health tool). Data will be synthesized using either a random effects meta-analytic approach or qualitatively using a modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, dependent on the homogeneity of data available. DISCUSSION AND RELEVANCE: This review addresses a gap in the literature by systematically synthesizing findings on the relationship between neck function impairments and patient-reported outcomes. It will identify priorities for neck pain rehabilitation and gaps in current knowledge. DISSEMINATION: The results of this review will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication, conference presentation, and lay language summaries posted on an open-access website. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42023417317. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023417317.

Effects of different nutrition interventions on sarcopenia criteria in older people: A study protocol for a systematic review of systematic reviews with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia, a subject of extensive research, has led to numerous clinical trials and systematic reviews (SR). These reviews aid healthcare professionals by summarizing results and conducting meta-analyses, enhancing reliability. However, the abundance of reviews complicates decision-making on sarcopenia management. To address this, SR of SR have emerged, consolidating data from various sources into comprehensive documents. OBJECTIVE: To assess the isolated impact of dietary interventions on sarcopenia's diagnostic criteria for older individuals. METHODS: A study protocol for a SR of SR, following Cochrane and PRISMA recommendations. The search strategy includes the MeSH 'sarcopenia' and its subheadings; 'aged' and its subheadings; 'nutrition' and its subheadings; and filter 'systematic review', performed at main databases. Selected studies must include older adults, submitted to nutritional interventions compared to control groups. Quantitative analyses will use inverse variance statistic method (random effects); the effect measures mean difference. Heterogeneity measured with Q-Test. RESULTS: The results of this SR of SR may provide valuable information about the sarcopenia treatment, deepening the knowledge about. CONCLUSION: This protocol is reproducible, requires low cost and personnel, and may allow a higher understanding on sarcopenia treatment and management on older people.

The relationship between the price and demand of alcohol, tobacco, unhealthy food, sugar-sweetened beverages, and gambling: an umbrella review of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: The WHO highlight alcohol, tobacco, unhealthy food, and sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes as one of the most effective policies for preventing and reducing the burden of non-communicable diseases. This umbrella review aimed to identify and summarise evidence from systematic reviews that report the relationship between price and demand or price and disease/death for alcohol, tobacco, unhealthy food, and SSBs. Given the recent recognition as gambling as a public health problem, we also included gambling. METHODS: The protocol for this umbrella review was pre-registered (PROSPERO CRD42023447429). Seven electronic databases were searched between 2000-2023. Eligible systematic reviews were those published in any country, including adults or children, and which quantitatively examined the relationship between alcohol, tobacco, gambling, unhealthy food, or SSB price/tax and demand (sales/consumption) or disease/death. Two researchers undertook screening, eligibility, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment using the ROBIS tool. RESULTS: We identified 50 reviews from 5,185 records, of which 31 reported on unhealthy food or SSBs, nine reported on tobacco, nine on alcohol, and one on multiple outcomes (alcohol, tobacco, unhealthy food, and SSBs). We did not identify any reviews on gambling. Higher prices were consistently associated with lower demand, notwithstanding variation in the size of effect across commodities or populations. Reductions in demand were large enough to be considered meaningful for policy. CONCLUSIONS: Increases in the price of alcohol, tobacco, unhealthy food, and SSBs are consistently associated with decreases in demand. Moreover, increasing taxes can be expected to increase tax revenue. There may be potential in joining up approaches to taxation across the harm-causing commodities.

Optimal approach for ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks for abdominal surgeries: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks are commonly used for postoperative analgesia after various abdominal surgeries. There are several different approaches for performing TAP blocks, mainly including posterior, lateral and subcostal approaches. An increasing number of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the analgesic effects of different TAP block approaches, but the results have not been consistent. This protocol aims to determine the optimal approach of ultrasound-guided TAP blocks for postoperative analgesia after abdominal surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Four databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library will be systematically searched to identify RCTs that compared the analgesic effects of different ultrasound-guided TAP block approaches. The search interval will range from the inception of the databases to 30 July 2024. The postoperative opioid consumption over 24 hours will be defined as the primary outcome. The secondary outcomes will include the analgesia duration, postoperative pain scores at rest and during movement at different timepoints and the incidence of adverse effects. All the statistical analyses will be conducted using RevMan V.5.4. The quality of evidence will be evaluated by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval will not be needed. The results will be submitted to one peer-reviewed journal when completed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024510141.

Impacts on paediatricians testifying in cases of child maltreatment: protocol for a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Paediatricians perform medical assessments for children in cases of suspected child maltreatment. Due to their role with statutory child protection agencies and police, paediatricians may be asked to testify in court about child protection and criminal justice matters. To the authors' knowledge, there has been no previous systematic review of the literature synthesising the evidence on the impacts on paediatricians testifying in cases of child maltreatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A search strategy comprising indexed and key terms will be applied to six electronic reference databases from inception to May 2023: Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Criminal Justice Abstracts and Cochrane Library. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts and full-text articles against predefined eligibility criteria to identify studies of interest. Conflicts will be independently adjudicated by a third reviewer. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Since the systematic review methodology aims at synthesising information from available publications, this study does not require ethical approval. An article reporting the results of the systematic review will be submitted for publication in a scientific journal, presented at relevant conferences and used in subsequent stakeholder consultations.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of different exercise patterns for reducing cardiovascular events in pre-diabetes: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Exercise has been used to reverse dysglycaemic states in patients with pre-diabetes. Systematic reviews show that exercise is an effective way to reduce the incidence of diabetes, but there is conflicting evidence for reducing the occurrence of cardiovascular events. Therefore, we present a systematic review and network meta-analysis protocol designed to compare the effectiveness of different forms of exercise in reducing cardiovascular events and their tolerability in different populations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will include all randomised controlled trials and compare one exercise intervention to another. We will compare the following exercise patterns: standard endurance training, strength training, high-intensity interval training, mind-body exercise, and mixed strength and aerobic training. The primary outcomes are the occurrence of major cardiovascular events and the rate of patient attrition during the intervention. We will search major English and Chinese databases as well as trial registry websites for published and unpublished studies. All reference selection and data extraction will be conducted by at least two independent reviewers. We will conduct a random effects model to combine effect sizes and use the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and the mean ranks to rank the effectiveness of interventions. All data will be fitted at WinBUGS in a Bayesian framework and correlation graphs will be plotted using StataSE 14. We will also use the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to evaluate the quality of evidence for the study results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study does not involve a population-based intervention, and therefore, does not require ethical approval. We will publish the findings of this systematic review in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, and the dataset will be made available free of charge. The completed review will be disseminated electronically in print and on social media, where appropriate. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023422737.

COS-PPA: protocol to develop a core outcome set for primary progressive aphasia.

INTRODUCTION: The term primary progressive aphasia (PPA) describes a group of language-led dementias. Disease-modifying treatments that delay, slow or reverse progression of PPA are currently lacking, though a number of interventions to manage the symptoms of PPA have been developed in recent years. Unfortunately, studies exploring the effectiveness of these interventions have used a variety of different outcome measures, limiting comparability. There are more constructs, apart from word retrieval, that are important for people with PPA that have not received much attention in the research literature. Existing core outcome sets (COS) for dementia and non-progressive aphasia do not meet the needs of people with PPA, highlighting a need to develop a specific COS for PPA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol describes a three-stage study to identify a COS for PPA interventions in research and clinical practice. The stage 1 systematic review will identify existing speech, language and communication measures used to examine the effectiveness of interventions for PPA in the research literature. Employing a nominal group technique, stage 2 will identify the most important outcomes for people with PPA and their families. The data collected in stages 1 and 2 will be jointly analysed with the project PPI group and will inform the stage 2 modified Delphi consensus study to identify a core outcome measurement set for PPA among a range of research disciplines undertaking intervention studies for people with PPA. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for stage 2 of the study has been sought individually in each country at collaborating institutions and is stated in detail in the manuscript. Stage 3 has been granted ethical approval by the Chairs of UCL Language and Cognition Department Ethics, Project ID LCD-2023-06. Work undertaken at stages 1, 2 and 3 will be published in open-access peer-reviewed journal articles and presented at international scientific conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022367565.

Effects of dietary intervention on diabetic nephropathy: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.

Objective: To evaluate the quality of evidence, potential biases, and validity of all available studies on dietary intervention and diabetic nephropathy (DN). Methods: We conducted an umbrella review of existing meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that focused on the effects of dietary intervention on DN incidence. The literature was searched via PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. According to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), evidence of each outcome was evaluated and graded as "high", "moderate", "low" or "very low" quality to draw conclusions. Additionally, we classified evidence of outcomes into 4 categories. Results: We identified 36 meta-analyses of RCTs and 55 clinical outcomes of DN from 395 unique articles. Moderate-quality evidence suggested that probiotic supplementation could significantly improve blood urea nitrogen (BUN), total cholesterol (TC) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels in DN patients. Low-quality evidence indicated that probiotic supplementation significantly improved the serum creatinine concentration, urinary albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR), fasting blood glucose (FBG), HbA1c and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) in DN patients. In addition, low-quality evidence suggested that a salt restriction diet could significantly improve the creatinine clearance rate (CrCl) in patients with DN. Low-quality evidence suggested that vitamin D supplementation could significantly improve the UACR in patients with DN. In addition, low-quality evidence has indicated that soy isoflavone supplementation could significantly improve BUN, FBG, total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG) and LDL-C levels in patients with DN. Furthermore, low-quality evidence suggested that coenzyme Q10 supplementation could significantly improve HbA1c, TC and HDL-C in patients with DN, and dietary polyphenols also significantly improved HbA1c in patients with DN. Finally, low-quality evidence suggested that supplementation with antioxidant vitamins could significantly improve the serum creatinine concentration, systolic blood pressure, and HbA1c level in patients with DN. Given the small sample size, all significantly associated outcomes were evaluated as class IV evidence. Conclusion: Moderate to low amounts of evidence suggest that supplementation with probiotics, vitamin D, soy isoflavones, coenzyme Q10, dietary polyphenols, antioxidant vitamins, or salt-restricted diets may significantly improve clinical outcomes in patients with DN. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42024512670.

Use of digital media by adolescents for sexual and reproductive health and rights communication in sub-Saharan Africa: a protocol for systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Within the sub-Saharan African region, there is a growing concern for sexual and reproductive health and rights communication, and more particularly, for adolescents. Given the existing barriers associated with face-to-face access, the need to use digital media to access information and services has become desirable and imperative, especially so due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, in sub-Saharan Africa, a synthesis of evidence that informs adolescents' digital media engagements for sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) communication is limited. This systematic review therefore aims to examine and synthesize evidence on use of digital media for sexual and reproductive health and rights communication by adolescents in sub-Saharan Africa. METHODS: A search for peer-reviewed articles will be conducted in PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, PsychINFO and Google Scholar with emphasis on those published between 2000 and 2023. Only observational and qualitative studies will be included. Quality assessment of included articles will be done using standardized checklists from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Both descriptive and narrative summaries will be used to appraise evidence from included studies. DISCUSSION: This review will be essential in providing information on the types of digital media adolescents use, the various SRHR issues they use this platform to address and their reasons for using it and associated challenges. It will also contribute to the advocacy for the inclusion of these technologies in the teaching and learning, provision of and access to SRHR information and services by teachers, public health providers and peer educators in the subregion. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020211491. This protocol follows the PRISMA-P guidelines for reporting systematic reviews.

Mapping scoping reviews in neurosurgery: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The realm of neurosurgery is currently witnessing a surge in primary research, underscoring the importance of adopting evidence-based approaches. Scoping reviews, as a type of evidence synthesis, offer a broad perspective and have become increasingly vital for managing the ever-expanding body of research in swiftly evolving fields. Recent research has indicated a rising prevalence of scoping reviews in healthcare literature. In this context, the concept of a 'review of scoping reviews' has emerged as a means to offer a higher level synthesis of insights. However, the field of neurosurgery appears to lack a comprehensive integration of scoping reviews. Therefore, the objective of this scoping review is to identify and evaluate the extent of scoping reviews within neurosurgery, pinpointing research gaps and methodological issues to enhance evidence-based practices in this dynamic discipline. METHODS: The method framework of Arksey and O'Malley will be used to conduct the scoping review. A thorough literature search will be performed on Medline, Scopus and Web of Science to find eligible studies using the keywords related to neurosurgery, scoping review and its variants. Two reviewers will independently revise all of the full-text articles, extract data and evaluate the study extent. A narrative overview of the findings from included studies will be given. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review will involve secondary analysis of published literature, and therefore ethics approval is not required. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist will be used to guide translation of findings. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and presented in conferences via abstract and presentation.

Risk of transmission of HIV to infants during breast/chest feeding when mothers/birthing parents living with HIV are on antiretroviral therapy: a protocol for a rapid review.

INTRODUCTION: HIV is a major public health issue affecting millions globally. Women and girls account for 46% of new HIV infections in 2022 and approximately 1.3 million females become pregnant every year. Vertical transmission of HIV from persons living with HIV (PLHIV) to infants may occur through different modalities, such as through breast/chest feeding. Notably, 82% of PLHIV who chose to breast/chest feed are on antiretroviral therapy (ART) when feeding their infants. Precise estimates of the risk of postpartum transmission to infants during breast/chest feeding at varying viral load levels remain a significant gap in the literature. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A rapid systematic search of electronic databases will be conducted from January 2005 to the present, including Medline, Embase and Global Health. The objective of this rapid review is to explore and assess the available evidence on the effect of varying viral load levels on the risk of HIV transmission to infants during breast/chest feeding when the birthing or gestational parent living with HIV is on ART. Study characteristics will be summarised and reported to support the narrative summary of the findings. The focus will be on the absolute risk of HIV transmission from birthing parent to infant during chest/breast feeding. The findings will also be stratified by month, including the risk of HIV transmission for 6 months and greater than 6 months postpartum. We will ascertain the risk of bias using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2, Quality of Prognosis Studies and Downs and Black checklist for the appropriate study type. A summary score will not be calculated, rather the strengths and limitations of the studies will be narratively described. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No human subjects will be involved in the research. The findings of this rapid review will inform a future systematic review and will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, presentations and conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024499393.

Use of artificial intelligence in obstetric and gynaecological diagnostics: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Emerging developments in applications of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare offer the opportunity to improve diagnostic capabilities in obstetrics and gynaecology (O&G), ensuring early detection of pathology, optimal management and improving survival. Consensus on a robust AI healthcare framework is crucial for standardising protocols that promote data privacy and transparency, minimise bias, and ensure patient safety. Here, we describe the study protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate current applications of AI in O&G diagnostics with consideration of reporting standards used and their ethical implications. This protocol is written following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 checklist. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study objective is to explore the current application of AI in O&G diagnostics and assess the reporting standards used in these studies. Electronic bibliographic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane will be searched. Study selection, data extraction and subsequent narrative synthesis and meta-analyses will be carried out following the PRISMA-P guidelines. Included papers will be English-language full-text articles from May 2015 to March 2024, which provide original data, as AI has been redefined in recent literature. Papers must use AI as the predictive method, focusing on improving O&G diagnostic outcomes.We will evaluate the reporting standards including the risk of bias, lack of transparency and consider the ethical implications and potential harm to patients. Outcome measures will involve assessing the included studies against gold-standard criteria for robustness of model development (Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis, model predictive performance, model risk of bias and applicability (Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool and study reporting (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-AI) guidance. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this systematic review. Findings will be shared through peer-reviewed publications. There will be no patient or public involvement in this study. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022357024 .