Contamination of aquatic ecosystems by persistent organic pollutants (POPs) originating from landfills in Canada and the United States: A rapid scoping review.

Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are organic chemical substances that threaten human health and the planet's ecosystems due to their toxicity and their ability to remain intact for a long time, wide distribution throughout the environment, and accumulation and magnification in living organisms through the food chain. Discarded products from landfills and dumpsites are potential sources of POPs due to their persistence for several decades and constant release to surrounding environment. POPs in aquatic systems signal input predominantly from landfills, wastewater treatment plants, sewage, and urban runoff, suggesting a research gap to guide policies to address these unabated releases. This scoping review aims to rapidly identify the key concepts underpinning the containment, translation, and migration of POPs in Canadian and US landfill leachate. The review targeted multidisciplinary perspectives on the topic and spanned forensic biology, environmental sciences, chemistry, and geology. Contaminated municipal solid waste (MSW) landfill characteristics, as reported by government agencies in Canada and the US, were synthesized and harmonized to illustrate the geographical scope of MSW landfills releasing POPs into the surrounding environment. The knowledge and data gaps summarized in this study highlight the need to address the inadvertent release of POPs from Canadian and US landfills, particularly in consideration of dated and degrading landfill infrastructure, the proximity of marginalized people, and the implications of climate change on the countries' more vulnerable landscapes. This review is applicable to the development of future studies that aim to guide environmental protective policies.

A systematic review and meta analysis of measurement properties for the flexion relaxation ratio in people with and without non specific spine pain.

This review sought to identify, critically appraise, compare, and summarize the literature on the reliability, discriminative validity and responsiveness of the flexion relaxation ratio (FRR) in adults (≥ 18 years old) with or without spine pain (any duration), in either a clinical or research context. The review protocol was registered on Open Science Framework ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/27EDF ) and follows COSMIN, PRISMA, and PRESS guidelines. Six databases were searched from inception to June 1, 2022. The search string was developed by content experts and a health services librarian. Two pairs of reviewers independently completed titles/abstracts and full text screening for inclusion, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment (COSMIN RoB Toolkit). At all stages, discrepancies were resolved through consensus meetings. Data were pooled where possible with a three-level random effects meta-analyses and a modified GRADE assessment was used for the summary of findings. Following duplicate removal, 728 titles/abstracts and 219 full texts were screened with 23 included in this review. We found, with moderate certainty of evidence, that the cervical FRR has high test-retest reliability and lumbar FRR has moderate to high test-retest reliability, and with high certainty of evidence that the cervical and lumbar FRR can discriminate between healthy and clinical groups (standardized mean difference - 1.16 [95% CI - 2.00, - 0.32] and - 1.21 [- 1.84, - 0.58] respectively). There was not enough evidence to summarize findings for thoracic FRR discriminative validity or the standard error of measurement for the FRR. Several studies used FRR assuming responsiveness, but no studies were designed in a way that could confirm responsiveness. The evidence supports adequate reliability of FRR for the cervical and lumbar spine, and discriminative validity for the cervical and lumbar spine only. Improvements in study design and reporting are needed to strengthen the evidence base to determine the remaining measurement properties of this outcome.

Integration of primary care education into undergraduate nursing programs: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review is to examine and map literature related to primary care education in undergraduate nursing programs and to describe the attributes and extent of primary care education. INTRODUCTION: Primary care is a model of first-contact, continuous, comprehensive, and coordinated health care. Registered nurses are integral in successful collaborative team models of primary care. However, it is unclear how undergraduate nursing programs offer opportunities to learn about nursing practice within primary care settings. A better understanding of the attributes and extent of primary care education in undergraduate nursing programs will direct research, inform teaching-learning, and develop a stronger primary care nursing workforce. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider articles that include faculty/administrators, preceptors, or students of nursing programs that qualify graduates for entry-level registered nursing practice. Articles that report on undergraduate teaching-learning related to primary care will also be considered. Practical nursing, advanced practice, and post-licensure programs will be excluded. Teaching-learning related to settings other than primary care will also be excluded. METHODS: The Framework of Effective Teaching-Learning in Clinical Education will be the organizing framework for this scoping review. A 3-step search strategy will be followed to identify published and unpublished literature. Articles published in English or French will be included. Data extracted from eligible articles will include details on the study design/method, participants, context, type of teaching-learning activity, attributes associated with dimensions of the teaching-learning environment, and relevant outcomes. The results will be reported in tabular and/or diagrammatic format, accompanied by a narrative summary. REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/cw5r3.

Physician-reported barriers to using evidence-based antibiotic prescription guidelines in primary care: protocol for a systematic review and synthesis of qualitative studies using the Theoretical Domains Framework.

INTRODUCTION: Overprescription of antibiotics poses a significant threat to healthcare globally as it contributes to the issue of antibiotic resistance. While antibiotics should be predominately prescribed for bacterial infections, they are often inappropriately given for uncomplicated upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) and related conditions, such as the common cold. This study will involve a qualitative systematic review of physician-reported barriers to using evidence-based antibiotic prescription guidelines in primary care settings and synthesise the findings using a theoretical basis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic review of qualitative studies that assess physicians' reported barriers to following evidence-based antibiotic prescription guidelines in primary care settings for URTIs. We plan to search the following databases with no date or language restrictions: MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL, Embase, the Cochrane Library and PsycInfo. Qualitative studies that explore the barriers and enablers to following antibiotic prescription guidelines for URTIs for primary care physicians will be included. We will analyse our findings using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), which is a theoretically designed resource based on numerous behaviour change theories grouped into 14 domains. Using the TDF approach, we will be able to identify the determinants of our behaviour of interest (ie, following antibiotic prescription guidelines for URTIs) and categorise them into the 14 TDF domains. This will provide the necessary information to develop future evidence-based interventions that will target the identified issues and apply the most effective behaviour change techniques to affect change. This protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences.

The Effectiveness of Virtual Lactation Support: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization recommends lactation support to enhance the rates of exclusive breastfeeding. Access to in person lactation support may be limited due to scarcity of resources (e.g., healthcare professionals) and geography. Advances in technology have allowed lactation supports to be offered virtually through information and communication technologies (i.e., telephone, internet, and social media). RESEARCH AIMS: To (1) critically review and (2) statistically analyze the effectiveness of virtual lactation support for postpartum mothers' exclusive breastfeeding for up to 6 months. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included if they were (a) randomized controlled trials, (b) with a virtual lactation support intervention during the postpartum period, (c) reported on exclusive breastfeeding outcomes. Two reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. The prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding in each group and the total number of participants randomized for each group were entered into random-effects meta-analyses to calculate a pooled relative risk (RR) at three different time points (1, 4, and 6 months). The sample size was 19 randomized control trials. RESULTS: Of the 19 studies, 16 (84.2%) were included in the meta-analysis (n = 5,254). Virtual lactation support was found to be effective at increasing exclusive breastfeeding at 1 month (RR, 1.21; 95% CI [1.09, 1.35]; p < .001) and 6 months (RR, 1.87; 95% CI [1.30, 2.68]; p < .001). CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing virtual lactation support with other postnatal maternity care, virtual lactation support was associated with increasing exclusive breastfeeding rates at 1 month and 6 months postpartum.The study protocol was registered (CRD42021256433) with PROSPERO.

A systematic assessment of the availability and clinical drug information coverage of machine-readable clinical drug data sources for building knowledge translation products.

Objective: To identify and describe clinical drug data sources that have the potential to serve as a repository of information for developing drug knowledge translation products. Methods: Two reviewers independently screened citations from PubMed and Embase, websites from the web search engine Google, and references from selected journals. Publicly licensed or non-proprietary data sources containing clinical drug information accessible in a machine-readable format were eligible. Data sources were assessed for their coverage across 18 pre-specified domains and 74 elements of clinical drug information. Results: Of the 3369 unique citations or webpages screened, 44 drug information data sources were identified. Of these, 22 data sources met the study inclusion criteria. There was a mean of 4.5 (SD = 5.19) domains covered by each source and a mean of 10.9 (SD = 18) elements covered by each source. None of the data sources covered all domains and eight elements were not addressed by any source. All of the data sources identified by the study are government or academic databases. Conclusion: Our study demonstrated the availability of machine-readable clinical drug data that could help facilitate the creation of novel drug knowledge translation products. However, we identified clinical content gaps in the available non-proprietary drug information sources. Further evaluation of the quality of each data source would be necessary prior to incorporating these sources into any knowledge translation products intended for clinical use.