The link between immigrant status, a key social determinant of health, and kidney disease remains uncertain. To evaluate this, we compared incident adverse kidney outcomes between immigrants and non-immigrants using C...
详细信息
Objectives Despite global efforts, pneumococcal vaccination uptake among older adults remains significantly low. Previous literature suggests that vaccine promotion by healthcare workers plays an essential role in upt...
详细信息
Objectives Despite global efforts, pneumococcal vaccination uptake among older adults remains significantly low. Previous literature suggests that vaccine promotion by healthcare workers plays an essential role in uptake. We conducted a systematic review to examine healthcare workers' current practices, and to identify capability, opportunity, and motivation factors regarding pneumococcal vaccination for older adults. Methods A search of both quantitative and qualitative studies was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Global Health, AgeLine, and Scopus databases and in the grey literature to identify relevant published studies from inception to November 2, 2023, with no language restrictions. The Joanna-Briggs Institute methodology for mixed-methods systematic reviews was used (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023480576). Studies conducted on healthcare workers related to pneumococcal vaccination in older adults (65 years and older) were included. The quality of studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool for the quantitative and mixed-methods studies and the Critical Appraisal Skills programme Tool for qualitative studies. In addition, we used the convergent integrated and segregated approach to synthesize proportions and relevant themes. Results We included 42 studies (38 quantitative and four qualitative), of which 20 evaluated factors related to current practice, 27 capability, 24 opportunity, and 28 motivations. Our review findings suggest that practices varied considerably. However, most health providers knew about pneumococcal vaccination and had a positive attitude/perception toward it. Common barriers to pneumococcal vaccination in older adults included finances (e.g., high cost to patients/system), logistics (e.g., insufficient time/information), availability of information (e.g., insufficient education/campaigns), patient-related (e.g., hesitancy/refusal), and system factors (e.g., unclear guidelines/recommendations). Conclusions As the aging populatio
Objectives: To update SPIRIT 2013 and CONSORT 2010 reporting guidelines. Methods: For SPIRIT 2025, a comprehensive review process incorporating scoping reviews, expert consultations, and a Delphi survey led to a revis...
详细信息
Objectives: To update SPIRIT 2013 and CONSORT 2010 reporting guidelines. Methods: For SPIRIT 2025, a comprehensive review process incorporating scoping reviews, expert consultations, and a Delphi survey led to a revised checklist. CONSORT 2025 underwent a similar update, addressing methodological advancements and user feedback gathered through scoping reviews, expert consultations, and a Delphi survey. Results: Key changes include the addition of two new items, revisions to five, and the deletion or merging of five, alongside a new Open Science section. Emphasis on harm assessment, intervention description, and patient/public involvement has also been strengthened. The SPIRIT 2025 statement provides a 34-item checklist, a schedule diagram, and an expanded checklist with explanations. Similarly, seven new items were added, three revised, and one deleted, with content integrated from existing CONSORT extensions. A new Open Science section was also incorporated. The CONSORT 2025 statement offers a 30-item checklist, a flow diagram, and a detailed explanatory checklist. Conclusion: Both updated statements and explanatory articles aim to enhance transparency and completeness in trial protocols and reporting. Widespread adoption by investigators, funders, ethics committees, journals, and regulators should improve the quality and usability of research, ultimately benefiting patients and others. Plain Language Summary: We have updated two important guidelines, SPIRIT and CONSORT, to make research studies easier to understand and more reliable. We did this by carefully reviewing existing research and getting feedback from experts around the world. The new SPIRIT 2025 guideline has 34 items to help researchers report their study plans clearly. It includes new sections on how to assess potential risks, describe the treatment, and involve patients in the research. We also added a new section about sharing data openly. The new CONSORT 2025 guideline has 30 items to help research
The uptake of formalized prior elicitation from experts in Bayesian clinical trials has been limited, largely due to the challenges associated with complex statistical modeling, the lack of practical tools, and the co...
详细信息
OBJECTIVE:Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) are frequently used to evaluate interventions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Robust execution and transparent reporting of randomization procedures are essentia...
详细信息
OBJECTIVE:Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) are frequently used to evaluate interventions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Robust execution and transparent reporting of randomization procedures are essential for successful implementation and accurate interpretation of CRTs. Our objectives were to review the quality of reporting and implementation of randomization procedures in a sample of parallel-arm CRTs conducted in LMICs.
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING:We selected a random sample of 300 primary reports of parallel-arm CRTs from a database of 800 CRTs conducted in LMICs between 2017-2022. Data were extracted by two reviewers per trial and summarized using descriptive statistics.
RESULTS:Among 300 trials, 192 (64%) reported the method of sequence generation, 213 (71%) reported the type of randomization procedure used, 146 (49%) reported who generated the sequence, 136 (45%) reported whether randomization was implemented by an independent person, and 75 (25%) reported a method of allocation concealment. Among those reporting the methods used, suboptimal methods of randomization were common: 28% did not use a computer, 21% did not use restricted randomization, 58% did not use a statistician to generate the sequence, in 53% the person was not independent from the trial, and 80% did not use central randomization. Public randomization ceremonies were used in 10% of trials as an alternative method of allocation concealment and to reassure participants of fair allocation procedures.
CONCLUSION:The conduct and reporting of randomization procedures of CRTs in LMICs is suboptimal. Dissemination of guidance to promote robust implementation of randomization in LMICs is required and future research on the implementation of public randomization ceremonies is warranted.
暂无评论