Dataset Information

Assessing the format and content of journal published and non-journal published rapid review reports: A comparative study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:As production of rapid reviews (RRs) increases in healthcare, knowing how to efficiently convey RR evidence to various end-users is important given they are often intended to directly inform decision-making. Little is known about how often RRs are produced in the published or unpublished domains, and what and how information is structured. OBJECTIVES:To compare and contrast report format and content features of journal-published (JP) and non-journal published (NJP) RRs. METHODS:JP RRs were identified from key databases, and NJP RRs were identified from a grey literature search of 148 RR producing organizations and were sampled proportionate to cluster size by organization and product type to match the JP RR group. We extracted and formally compared 'how' (i.e., visual arrangement) and 'what' information was presented. RESULTS:We identified 103 RRs (52 JP and 51 NJP) from 2016. A higher percentage of certain features were observed in JP RRs compared to NJP RRs (e.g., reporting authors; use of a traditional journal article structure; section headers including abstract, methods, discussion, conclusions, acknowledgments, conflict of interests, and author contributions; and use of figures (e.g., Study Flow Diagram) in the main document). For NJP RRs, a higher percentage of features were observed (e.g., use non-traditional report structures; bannering of executive summary sections and appendices; use of typographic cues; and including outcome tables). NJP RRs were more than double in length versus JP RRs. Including key messages was uncommon in both groups. CONCLUSIONS:This comparative study highlights differences between JP and NJP RRs. Both groups may benefit from better use of plain language, and more clear and concise design. Alternative innovative formats and end-user preferences for content and layout should be studied further with thought given to other considerations to ensure better packaging of RR results to facilitate uptake into policy and practice. STUDY REGISTRATION:The full protocol is available at: https://osf.io/29xvk/.

SUBMITTER: Garritty C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7449464 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessing the format and content of journal published and non-journal published rapid review reports: A comparative study.

Garritty Chantelle C Hersi Mona M Hamel Candyce C Stevens Adrienne A Monfaredi Zarah Z Butler Claire C Tricco Andrea C AC Hartling Lisa L Stewart Lesley A LA Welch Vivian V Thavorn Kednapa K Cheng Wei W Moher David D

PloS one 20200826 8

<h4>Background</h4>As production of rapid reviews (RRs) increases in healthcare, knowing how to efficiently convey RR evidence to various end-users is important given they are often intended to directly inform decision-making. Little is known about how often RRs are produced in the published or unpublished domains, and what and how information is structured.<h4>Objectives</h4>To compare and contrast report format and content features of journal-published (JP) and non-journal published (NJP) RRs. ...[more]

PMID: 32845906

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe availability of reliable point-of-care tests for malaria has heralded a paradigm shift in the management of febrile illnesses away from presumptive antimalarial therapy. In the absence of a definitive diagnosis, health care providers are more likely to prescribe empirical antimicrobials to those who test negative for malaria. To improve management and guide further test development, better understanding is needed of the true causative agents and their geographic variability.MethodsA systematic review of published literature was undertaken to characterise the spectrum of pathogens causing non-malaria febrile illness in Africa (1980-2015). Literature searches were conducted in English and French languages in six databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health (CABI), WHO Global Health Library, PASCAL, and Bulletin de la Société Française de Parasitologie (BDSP). Selection criteria included reporting on an infection or infections with a confirmed diagnosis, defined as pathogens detected in or cultured from samples from normally sterile sites, or serological evidence of current or past infection. A number of published articles (rather than incidence or prevalence) reporting a given pathogen were presented.ResultsA total of 16,523 records from 48 African countries were screened, of which 1065 (6.4%) met selection criteria. Bacterial infections were reported in 564 (53.0%) records, viral infections in 374 (35.1%), parasitic infections in 47 (4.4%), fungal infections in nine (0.8%), and 71 (6.7%) publications reported more than one pathogen group. Age range of the study population was not specified in 233 (21.9%) publications. Staphylococcus aureus (18.2%), non-typhoidal Salmonella (17.3%), and Escherichia coli (15.4%) were the commonly reported bacterial infections whereas Rift Valley fever virus (7.4%), yellow fever virus (7.0%), and Ebola virus (6.7%) were the most commonly reported viral infections. Dengue virus infection, previously not thought to be widespread in Africa, was reported in 54 (5.1%) of articles.ConclusionsThis review summarises the published reports of non-malaria pathogens that may cause febrile illness in Africa. As the threat of antimicrobial resistance looms, knowledge of the distribution of infectious agents causing fever should facilitate priority setting in the development of new diagnostic tools and improved antimicrobial stewardship.Trial registrationPROSPERO, CRD42016049281.

Project description:Background: Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES) is a rare clinical and radiological entity characterized by a typical brain edema. Although several case reports have described PRES in a context of poisoning, to our knowledge, a comprehensive assessment has not been performed. The aim of this systematic review was to raise awareness on poisoning-specific PRES features and to encourage consistent and detailed reporting of substance abuse-and drug overdose-associated PRES. Methods: Medline/PubMed, Web of Science, and PsycINFO were screened through May 31, 2019, to systematically identify case reports and case series describing PRES associated with poisoning (i.e., alcohol, drugs, illicit drugs, natural toxins, chemical substances) in accidental context, intentional overdose, and substance abuse. The methodological quality of eligible case reports/series was assessed. Patients and exposure characteristics were recorded; relevant toxicological, radiological, and clinical data were extracted. Results: Forty-one case reports and one case series reporting 42 unique cases were included. The median time to PRES onset from the start of exposure was 3 days (IQR 2-10). Acute high blood pressure, visual disturbance, and seizure were reported in 70, 55, and 50% of patients, respectively. The initial clinical presentation was alertness disorders in 64% of patients. Nine patients (21%) required mechanical ventilation. One-third of patients had at least one risk factor for PRES such as chronic hypertension (17%) or acute/chronic kidney failure (24%). The main imaging pattern (67%) was the combination of classical parieto-occipital edema with another anatomical region (e.g., frontal, basal ganglia, posterior fossa involvement). Vasogenic edema was found in 86% of patients. Intracranial hemorrhage occurred in 14% of patients. Both brain infarction and reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome were diagnosed in 5% of patients. Three patients (12%, 3/25) had non-reversible lesions on follow-up magnetic resonance imaging. The median time required to hospital discharge was 14 days (IQR 7-18). Mortality and neurological recurrence rate were null. Conclusions: Comorbidities such as chronic hypertension and kidney failure were less frequent than in patients with other PRES etiologies. Imaging analysis did not highlight a specific pattern for poisoning-induced PRES. Although less described, PRES in the context of poisoning, which shares most of the clinical and radiological characteristics of other etiologies, is not to be ignored.

Project description:BackgroundIn the absence of definitive diagnosis, healthcare providers are likely to prescribe empirical antibacterials to those who test negative for malaria. This problem is of critical importance in Southern Asia (SA) and South-eastern Asia (SEA) where high levels of antimicrobial consumption and high prevalence of antimicrobial resistance have been reported. To improve management and guide further diagnostic test development, better understanding is needed of the true causative agents of fever and their geographical variability.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of published literature (1980-2015) to characterise the spectrum of pathogens causing non-malarial febrile illness in SA and SEA. We searched six databases in English and French languages: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health (CABI) database, WHO Global Health Library, PASCAL, and Bulletin de la Société Française de Parasitologie (BDSP). Selection criteria included reporting on an infection or infections with a confirmed diagnosis, defined as pathogens detected in or cultured from samples from normally sterile sites, or serological evidence of current or past infection.ResultsA total of 29,558 records from 19 countries in SA and SEA were screened, of which 2410 (8.1%) met the selection criteria. Bacterial aetiologies were reported in 1235 (51.2%) articles, viral in 846 (35.1%), parasitic in 132 (5.5%), and fungal in 54 (2.2%), and 143 (6.0%) articles reported more than one pathogen group. In descending order of frequency, Salmonella Typhi, Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and coagulase negative Staphylococcus were the commonly reported bacteria, while dengue virus, chikungunya virus, Japanese encephalitis virus, hepatitis B virus, and hepatitis C virus were common viral pathogens reported. Reports of rarely reported or emerging pathogens included a case report of Borrelia burgdorferi (Lyme disease) in India in 2010 and reports of Nipah virus in Singapore and India.ConclusionsThis review summarises the reported non-malaria pathogens that may cause febrile illness in SA and SEA. The findings emphasise the need of standardising the reporting of aetiological studies to develop effective, evidence-based fever management and improved surveillance. Research and development of diagnostic tools would benefit from up-to-date epidemiological reporting of the regional diversities of non-malaria fever aetiologies.Trial registrationPROSPERO registration, CRD42016049281.

Dataset Information

Assessing the format and content of journal published and non-journal published rapid review reports: A comparative study.

Publications

Assessing the format and content of journal published and non-journal published rapid review reports: A comparative study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure