Effects of Experimental Interventions to Improve the Biomedical Peer-Review Process: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gaudino M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8475712 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:We aimed to determine the best study designs for assessing interventions to improve the peer review process according to experts' opinions. Furthermore, for interventions previously evaluated, we determined whether the study designs actually used were rated as the best study designs. METHODS:Study design: A series of six vignette-based surveys exploring the best study designs for six different interventions (training peer reviewers, adding an expert to the peer review process, use of reporting guidelines checklists, blinding peer reviewers to the results (i.e., results-free peer review), giving incentives to peer reviewers, and post-publication peer review). Vignette construction: Vignettes were case scenarios of trials assessing interventions aimed at improving the quality of peer review. For each intervention, the vignette included the study type (e.g., randomized controlled trial [RCT]), setting (e.g., single biomedical journal), and type of manuscript assessed (e.g., actual manuscripts received by the journal); each of these three features varied between vignettes. PARTICIPANTS:Researchers with expertise in peer review or methodology of clinical trials. OUTCOME:Participants were proposed two vignettes describing two different study designs to assess the same intervention and had to indicate which study design they preferred on a scale, from -?5 (preference for study A) to 5 (preference for study B), 0 indicating no preference between the suggested designs (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes were trust in the results and feasibility of the designs. RESULTS:A total of 204 experts assessed 1044 paired comparisons. The preferred study type was RCTs with randomization of manuscripts for four interventions (adding an expert, use of reporting guidelines checklist, results-free peer review, post-publication peer review) and RCTs with randomization of peer reviewers for two interventions (training peer reviewers and using incentives). The preferred setting was mainly several biomedical journals from different publishers, and the preferred type of manuscript was actual manuscripts submitted to journals. However, the most feasible designs were often cluster RCTs and interrupted time series analysis set in a single biomedical journal, with the assessment of a fabricated manuscript. Three interventions were previously assessed: none used the design rated first in preference by experts. CONCLUSION:The vignette-based survey allowed us to identify the best study designs for assessing different interventions to improve peer review according to experts' opinion. There is gap between the preferred study designs and the designs actually used.
| S-EPMC6192007 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Behavioral interventions to prevent HIV or assist HIV-positive persons often incorporate peers, yet empirical support for their efficacy is only recently accumulating. We describe the results of a review of the global literature, identifying 117 studies evaluating the efficacy of peer-based interventions in the area of HIV/AIDS. About half were conducted in the developing world and half in Western nations. Across a range of populations and intervention modalities, the majority of studies provided some support for peer interventions according to outcome indicators in the domains of sexual risk behavior, attitudes and cognitions, HIV knowledge, and substance use. However, outcomes assessed using biomarkers and other non-self-report variables were less likely to indicate intervention efficacy. Overall, findings suggest that we can have some confidence in peer interventions, yet more data are needed demonstrating an effect in the most rigorous study designs and with outcomes that are not potentially affected by respondent bias.
| S-EPMC3607378 | biostudies-other
Project description:To assess the effectiveness of peer inclusion in interventions to improve the social functioning of children with ADHD.We searched four electronic databases for randomized controlled trials and controlled quasi-experimental studies that investigated peer inclusion interventions alone or combined with pharmacological treatment. Data were collected from the included studies and methodologically assessed. Meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model.Seventeen studies met eligibility criteria. Studies investigated interventions consisting of peer involvement and peer proximity; no study included peer mediation. Most included studies had an unclear or high risk of bias regarding inadequate reporting of randomization, blinding, and control for confounders. Meta-analyses indicated improvements in pre-post measures of social functioning for participants in peer-inclusive treatment groups. Peer inclusion was advantageous compared to treatment as usual. The benefits of peer inclusion over other therapies or medication only could not be determined. Using parents as raters for outcome measurement significantly mediated the intervention effect.The evidence to support or contest the efficacy of peer inclusion interventions for children with ADHD is lacking. Future studies need to reduce risks of bias, use appropriate sample sizes, and provide detailed results to investigate the efficacy of peer inclusion interventions for children with ADHD.
| S-EPMC5878915 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOral vaccines underperform in low-income and middle-income countries compared with in high-income countries. Whether interventions can improve oral vaccine performance is uncertain.MethodsWe did a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions designed to increase oral vaccine efficacy or immunogenicity. We searched Ovid-MEDLINE and Embase for trials published until Oct 23, 2017. Inclusion criteria for meta-analysis were two or more studies per intervention category and available seroconversion data. We did random-effects meta-analyses to produce summary relative risk (RR) estimates. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017060608).FindingsOf 2843 studies identified, 87 were eligible for qualitative synthesis and 66 for meta-analysis. 22 different interventions were assessed for oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV), oral rotavirus vaccine (RVV), oral cholera vaccine (OCV), and oral typhoid vaccines. There was generally high heterogeneity. Seroconversion to RVV was significantly increased by delaying the first RVV dose by 4 weeks (RR 1·37, 95% CI 1·16-1·62) and OPV seroconversion was increased with monovalent or bivalent OPV compared with trivalent OPV (RR 1·51, 95% CI 1·20-1·91). There was some evidence that separating RVV and OPV increased RVV seroconversion (RR 1·21, 95% CI 1·00-1·47) and that higher vaccine inoculum improved OCV seroconversion (RR 1·12, 95% CI 1·00-1·26). There was no evidence of effect for anthelmintics, antibiotics, probiotics, zinc, vitamin A, withholding breastfeeding, extra doses, or vaccine buffering.InterpretationMost strategies did not improve oral vaccine performance. Delaying RVV and reducing OPV valence should be considered within immunisation programmes to reduce global enteric disease. New strategies to address the gap in oral vaccine efficacy are urgently required.FundingWellcome Trust, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, UK Medical Research Council, and WHO Polio Research Committee.
| S-EPMC6353819 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pedestrian injuries represent a pediatric public health challenge. This systematic review/meta-analysis evaluated behavioral interventions to teach children pedestrian safety.Multiple strategies derived eligible manuscripts (published before April 1, 2013, randomized design, evaluated behavioral child pedestrian safety interventions). Screening 1,951 abstracts yielded 125 full-text retrievals. 25 were retained for data extraction, and 6 were later omitted due to insufficient data. In all, 19 articles reporting 25 studies were included. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed.Behavioral interventions generally improve children's pedestrian safety, both immediately after training and at follow-up several months later. Quality of the evidence was low to moderate. Available evidence suggested interventions targeting dash-out prevention, crossing at parked cars, and selecting safe routes across intersections were effective. Individualized/small-group training for children was the most effective training strategy based on available evidence.Behaviorally based interventions improve children's pedestrian safety. Efforts should continue to develop creative, cost-efficient, and effective interventions.
| S-EPMC4138804 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the effectiveness of interventions to improve the microbial quality of drinking water for preventing diarrhoea.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesCochrane Infectious Diseases Group's trials register, CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, LILACS; hand searching; and correspondence with experts and relevant organisations.Study selectionRandomised and quasirandomised controlled trials of interventions to improve the microbial quality of drinking water for preventing diarrhoea in adults and in children in settings with endemic disease.Data extractionAllocation concealment, blinding, losses to follow-up, type of intervention, outcome measures, and measures of effect. Pooled effect estimates were calculated within the appropriate subgroups.Data synthesis33 reports from 21 countries documenting 42 comparisons were included. Variations in design, setting, and type and point of intervention, and variations in defining, assessing, calculating, and reporting outcomes limited the comparability of study results and pooling of results by meta-analysis. In general, interventions to improve the microbial quality of drinking water are effective in preventing diarrhoea. Effectiveness was not conditioned on the presence of improved water supplies or sanitation in the study setting and was not enhanced by combining the intervention with instructions on basic hygiene, a water storage vessel, or improved sanitation or water supplies--other common environmental interventions intended to prevent diarrhoea.ConclusionInterventions to improve water quality are generally effective for preventing diarrhoea in all ages and in under 5s. Significant heterogeneity among the trials suggests that the level of effectiveness may depend on a variety of conditions that research to date cannot fully explain.
| S-EPMC1851994 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Despite dealing with scientific output and potentially having an impact on the quality of research published, the manuscript peer-review process itself has at times been criticised for being 'unscientific'. Research indicates that there are social and subjective dimensions of the peer-review process that contribute to this perception, including how key stakeholders-namely authors, editors and peer reviewers-communicate. In particular, it has been suggested that the expected roles and tasks of stakeholders need to be more clearly defined and communicated if the manuscript review process is to be improved. Disentangling current communication practices, and outlining the specific roles and tasks of the main actors, might be a first step towards establishing the design of interventions that counterbalance social influences on the peer-review process.The purpose of this article is to present a methodological design for a qualitative study exploring the communication practices within the manuscript review process of biomedical journals from the journal editors' point of view. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:Semi-structured interviews will be carried out with editors of biomedical journals between October 2017 and February 2018. A heterogeneous sample of participants representing a wide range of biomedical journals will be sought through purposive maximum variation sampling, drawing from a professional network of contacts, publishers, conference participants and snowballing.Interviews will be thematically analysed following the method outlined by Braun and Clarke. The qualitative data analysis software NVivo V.11 will be used to aid data management and analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This research project was evaluated and approved by the University of Split, Medical School Ethics Committee (2181-198-03-04-17-0029) in May 2017. Findings will be disseminated through a publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentations during conferences.
| S-EPMC6196803 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundDigital mental health interventions are increasingly prevalent in the current context of rapidly evolving technology, and research indicates that they yield effectiveness outcomes comparable to in-person treatment. Integrating professionals (ie, psychologists and physicians) into digital mental health interventions has become common, and the inclusion of guidance within programs can increase adherence to interventions. However, employing professionals to enhance mental health programs may undermine the scalability of digital interventions. Therefore, delegating guidance tasks to paraprofessionals (peer supporters, technicians, lay counsellors, or other nonclinicians) can help reduce costs and increase accessibility.ObjectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the effectiveness, adherence, and other process outcomes of nonclinician-guided digital mental health interventions.MethodsFour databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) were searched for randomized controlled trials published between 2010 and 2020 examining digital mental health interventions. Three journals that focus on digital intervention were hand searched; gray literature was searched using ProQuest and the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL). Two researchers independently assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool version 2. Data were collected on effectiveness, adherence, and other process outcomes, and meta-analyses were conducted for effectiveness and adherence outcomes. Nonclinician-guided interventions were compared with treatment as usual, clinician-guided interventions, and unguided interventions.ResultsThirteen studies qualified for inclusion. Nonclinician-guided interventions yielded higher posttreatment effectiveness outcomes when compared to conditions involving control programs (eg, online psychoeducation and monitored attention control) or wait-list controls (k=7, Hedges g=-0.73; 95% CI -1.08 to -0.38). There were also significant differences between nonclinician-guided interventions and unguided interventions (k=6, Hedges g=-0.17; 95% CI -0.23 to -0.11). In addition, nonclinician-guided interventions did not differ in effectiveness from clinician-guided interventions (k=3, Hedges g=0.08; 95% CI -0.01 to 0.17). These results suggest that guided digital mental health interventions are helpful to improve mental health outcomes regardless of the qualifications of the individual performing the intervention, and that the presence of a nonclinician guide improves effectiveness outcomes compared to having no guide. Nonclinician-guided interventions did not yield significantly different adherence outcomes when compared with unguided interventions (k=3, odds ratio 1.58; 95% CI 0.51 to 4.92), although a general trend of improved adherence was observed within nonclinician-guided interventions.ConclusionsIntegrating paraprofessionals and nonclinicians appears to improve the outcomes of digital mental health interventions, and may also enhance adherence outcomes (though this trend was nonsignificant). Further research should focus on the specific types of tasks these paraprofessionals can successfully provide (ie, psychosocial support, therapeutic alliance, and technical augmentation) and their associated outcomes.Trial registrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020191226; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=191226.
| S-EPMC9244656 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Family interventions for psychosis (FIp) are effective in reducing service user relapse and carer distress in people with schizophrenia-spectrum conditions. Several treatment and best practice guidelines recommend FIp for all people with schizophrenia. However, outcome findings in relation to early psychosis groups have been inconsistent. The current paper reports a systematic review and meta-analyses of articles that evaluated FIp in early psychosis with a clearly defined comparison group. A combination of electronic database searches (using PsychINFO, Medline, and CENTRAL), citation searches and hand searches of key journals and reviews was conducted. Peer-reviewed articles published in English from database inception to June 2016 were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool (EPHPP). Seventeen papers from 14 studies met inclusion criteria for review, the overall quality of which was moderate. Meta-analytic synthesis showed that FIp improved service user functioning and reduced the likelihood of relapse by the end of treatment. Psychotic symptoms were significantly reduced in the FIp group at follow up, but this was not evident at end of treatment. In terms of FIp target mechanisms, carers receiving FIp were more likely to shift from high to low expressed emotion and less likely to report patient focused criticism or engage in conflict communication than carers randomized to standard care. Carer burden and well-being were improved by the end of treatment but gains were not sustained at follow up. FIp had no impact on carer emotional over-involvement. The findings indicate that FIp is an effective intervention for early psychosis service users and their relatives. However, further research is required to establish which key therapeutic components of FIp are most effective for whom, in addition to understanding the mechanisms by which FIp might affect positive change.
| S-EPMC5366348 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Dietary recommendations have been proposed as a way of impacting current and future mental health. There exists a limited body of conflicting literature related to pediatric nutritional interventions and depression. This meta-analysis aims to determine the efficacy of child and adolescent dietary interventions on depression. Systematic searches in electronic databases and gray literature were conducted. After screening 6725 citations, 17 studies were included in this systematic review. Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool for Quasi-Experimental Studies. A meta-analysis of Hedges g values was calculated using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method. Publication bias was assessed with funnel plots and the Egger test. The results of the meta-analysis of the RCTs (k = 7) demonstrated a nonsignificant effect of dietary intervention (g = 0.05; 95% CI: -0.25, 0.35; P = 0.70) whereas the results of the pre-post intervention studies (k = 9) demonstrated a significant small-to-medium effect favoring dietary intervention for reducing depression (g = -0.45; 95% CI: -0.64, -0.27; P = 0.001). Publication bias was not detected by the Egger test or by funnel plot asymmetry. The current meta-analysis demonstrates that "healthy" dietary interventions for children or adolescents in the community have little impact on nonclinical depression. Confusion will persist until better-designed studies in pediatric nutritional psychiatry research focusing on adolescents with depressive illness are conducted.
| S-EPMC8634309 | biostudies-literature