Clinical manifestations and diagnostic methods in pulmonary angiosarcoma: protocol for a scoping review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lim R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5504651 | biostudies-other | 2017 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionClinical staging models in psychiatry assert that there are earlier, less severe or more malleable forms of illness that are distinguishable from later, more chronic forms of illness, and that these stages may have different prognostic and treatment implications. Previous reviews on clinical staging in eating disorders (EDs) suggest a staging heuristic could be useful for anorexia nervosa, but less research is available on how this applies to other EDs. An up-to-date review is required to synthesise new and heterogenous avenues of research. This scoping review aims to explore the extent and types of evidence in relation to illness staging for EDs and how these concepts are associated with treatment response and outcomes.Methods and analysisThis protocol was developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol extension for Scoping Reviews checklist and the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer's Manual. We will consider any documents providing evidence for clinical staging such as those which describe full or partial staging models, for all EDs, across various domains of assessment and functioning. Participants will include clinical or non-clinical population samples with full-syndrome EDs or disordered eating behaviour. PubMed, PsycINFO, MEDLINE and Web of Science databases will be systematically searched for relevant literature. Two authors will export documents and screen titles, abstracts and full texts. Data will be extracted into a charting form drafted by the authors. A narrative summary of the documents will be conducted in line with the study aims. Finally, clinical and research recommendations will be outlined.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval will not be required to synthesise published and unpublished literature. The study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and shared at conferences, via social media, and in other communications.
| S-EPMC10668169 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been recently identified as the culprit of the highly infectious, outbreak named coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China. Now declared a public health emergency, this pandemic is present in more than 200 countries with over 14 million cases and 600,000 deaths as of July 18, 2020. Primarily transmitted through the respiratory tract, the most common clinical presentations of symptomatic individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 include fever, dyspnea, cough, fatigue, and sore throat. In advanced cases, patients may rapidly develop respiratory failure with acute respiratory distress syndrome, and even progress to death. While it is known that COVID-19 manifests similarly to the 2003 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and the 2012 Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), primarily affecting the pulmonary system, the impact of the disease extends far beyond the respiratory system and affects other organs of the body. The literature regarding the extrapulmonary manifestations (cardiovascular, renal, hepatic, gastrointestinal, ocular, dermatologic, and neurological) of COVID-19 is scant. Herein, we provide a comprehensive review of the organ-specific clinical manifestations of COVID-19, to increase awareness about the various organs affected by SARS-CoV-2 and to provide a brief insight into the similarities and differences in the clinical manifestations of COVID-19 and the earlier SARS and MERS.
| S-EPMC7438449 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Diagnostic errors are common and costly, but difficult to detect. "Trigger" tools have promise to facilitate detection, but have not been applied specifically for inpatient diagnostic error. We performed a scoping review to collate all individual "trigger" criteria that have been developed or validated that may indicate that an inpatient diagnostic error has occurred. We searched three databases and screened 8568 titles and abstracts to ultimately include 33 articles. We also developed a conceptual framework of diagnostic error outcomes using real clinical scenarios, and used it to categorize the extracted criteria. Of the multiple criteria we found related to inpatient diagnostic error and amenable to automated detection, the most common were death, transfer to a higher level of care, arrest or "code", and prolonged length of hospital stay. Several others, such as abrupt stoppage of multiple medications or change in procedure, may also be useful. Validation for general adverse event detection was done in 15 studies, but only one performed validation for diagnostic error specifically. Automated detection was used in only two studies. These criteria may be useful for developing diagnostic error detection tools.
| S-EPMC4474234 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionFalls remain one of the most prevalent adverse events in hospitals and are associated with substantial negative health impacts and costs. Approaches to assess patients' fall risk have been implemented in hospitals internationally, ranging from brief screening questions to multifactorial risk assessments and complex prediction models, despite a lack of clear evidence of effect in reducing falls in acute hospital environments. The increasing digitisation of hospital systems provides new opportunities to understand and predict falls using routinely recorded data, with potential to integrate fall prediction models into real-time or near-real-time computerised decision support for clinical teams seeking to mitigate fall risk. However, the use of non-traditional approaches to fall risk prediction, including machine learning using integrated electronic medical records, has not yet been reviewed relative to more traditional fall prediction models. This scoping review will summarise methodologies used to develop existing hospital fall prediction models, including reporting quality assessment.Methods and analysisThis scoping review will follow the Arksey and O'Malley framework and its recent advances, and will be reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews recommendations. Four electronic databases (CINAHL via EBSCOhost, PubMed, IEEE Xplore and Embase) will be initially searched for studies up to 12 November 2020, and searches may be updated prior to final reporting. Additional studies will be identified by reference list review and citation analysis of included studies. No restriction will be placed on the date or language of identified studies. Screening of search results and extraction of data will be performed by two independent reviewers. Reporting quality will be assessed by the adherence to the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this study. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and scientific conferences.
| S-EPMC8438847 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPatients, families and clinicians rely on published research to help inform treatment decisions. Without complete reporting of the outcomes studied, evidence-based clinical and policy decisions are limited and researchers cannot synthesise, replicate or build on existing research findings. To facilitate harmonised reporting of outcomes in published trial protocols and reports, the Instrument for reporting Planned Endpoints in Clinical Trials (InsPECT) is under development. As one of the initial steps in the development of InsPECT, a scoping review will identify and synthesise existing guidance on the reporting of trial outcomes.Methods and analysisWe will apply methods based on the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methods manual. Documents that provide explicit guidance on trial outcome reporting will be searched for using: (1) an electronic bibliographic database search; (2) a grey literature search; and (3) solicitation of colleagues for guidance documents using a snowballing approach. Reference list screening will be performed for included documents. Search results will be divided between two trained reviewers who will complete title and abstract screening, full-text screening and data charting. Captured trial outcome reporting guidance will be compared with candidate InsPECT items to support, refute or refine InsPECT content and to assess the need for the development of additional items. Data analysis will explore common features of guidance and use quantitative measures (eg, frequencies) to characterise guidance and its sources.Ethics and disseminationA paper describing the review findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. The results will be used to inform the InsPECT development process, helping to ensure that InsPECT provides an evidence-based tool for standardising trial outcome reporting.
| S-EPMC6377514 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCodesign is an emerging research method to enhance intervention development by actively engaging non-researchers (eg, people who have had a stroke, caregivers and clinicians) in research. The involvement of non-researchers in research is becoming increasingly popular within health studies as it may produce more relevant and effective findings. The stroke population commonly exhibits challenges such as aphasia and cognitive changes that may limit their participation in codesign. However, the use of codesign within the stroke literature has not been comprehensively reviewed. This scoping review will determine: (1) what is the extent, range and nature of stroke research that has used codesign methods? (2) What codesign methods have been used to develop stroke interventions? (3) What considerations for codesigning interventions with people who have stroke are not captured in the findings?Methods and analysisThis is a protocol for a scoping review to identify the literature relating to stroke, and codesign will be conducted on OVID Medline, OVID Embase, OVID PsychINFO, EBSCO CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, PEDro-Physiotherapy Evidence Database and Global Index Medicus. Studies of any design and publication date will be included. Title and abstract and full-text review will be conducted independently by two reviewers. Data will be extracted, collated and then summarised descriptively using quantitative (eg, numerical descriptions) and qualitative (eg, textual descriptions) methods. Numerical summaries will map the extent (eg, number of studies), range (eg, types of studies) and nature (eg, types of interventions developed) of the literature on this topic. A thematic analysis will provide insights into the codesign methods (eg, activities, non-researchers), including heterogeneity across and within studies.Ethics and disseminationThis review protocol does not require ethics approval as data has not been collected/analysed. The findings will highlight opportunities and recommendations to inform future codesign research in stroke and other populations who exhibit similar challenges/disabilities, and they will be disseminated via publications, presentations and stakeholder meetings.Trial registration numberregistrationOpen Science Framework: 10.17605/OSF.IO/NSD2W.
| S-EPMC9680189 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionNeonatal sepsis is responsible for significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Diagnosis is often difficult due to non-specific clinical features and the unavailability of laboratory tests in many low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Clinical prediction models have the potential to improve diagnostic accuracy and rationalise antibiotic usage in neonatal units, which may result in reduced antimicrobial resistance and improved neonatal outcomes. In this paper, we outline our scoping review protocol to map the literature concerning clinical prediction models to diagnose neonatal sepsis. We aim to provide an overview of existing models and evidence underlying their use and compare prediction models between high-income countries and LMICs.Methods and analysisThe protocol was developed with reference to recommendations by the Joanna Briggs Institute. Searches will include six electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Global Index Medicus and the Cochrane Library) supplemented by hand searching of reference lists and citation analysis on included studies. No time period restrictions will be applied but only studies published in English or Spanish will be included. Screening and data extraction will be performed independently by two reviewers, with a third reviewer used to resolve conflicts. The results will be reported by narrative synthesis in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines.Ethics and disseminationThe nature of the scoping review methodology means that this study does not require ethical approval. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations, as well as through engagement with peers and relevant stakeholders.
| S-EPMC7440696 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPreventable injuries lead to 200 000 hospital stays, 60 000 disabilities, and 13 000 deaths per year in Canada with direct costs of $20 billion. Overall, potentially unnecessary medical interventions are estimated to consume up to 30% of healthcare resources and may expose patients to avoidable harm. However, little is known about overuse for acute injury care. We aim to identify low-value clinical practices in injury care.Methods and analysisWe will perform a scoping review of peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed literature to identify research articles, reviews, recommendations and guidelines that identify at least one low-value clinical practice specific to injury populations. We will search Medline, EMBASE, COCHRANE central, and BIOSIS/Web of Knowledge databases, websites of government agencies, professional societies and patient advocacy organisations, thesis holdings and conference proceedings. Pairs of independent reviewers will evaluate studies for eligibility and extract data from included articles using a prepiloted and standardised electronic data abstraction form. Low-value clinical practices will be categorised using an extension of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality conceptual framework and data will be presented using narrative synthesis.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required as original data will not be collected. This study will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal, international scientific meetings, and to knowledge users through clinical and healthcare quality associations. This review will contribute new knowledge on low-value clinical practices in acute injury care. Our results will support the development indicators to measure resource overuse and inform policy makers on potential targets for deadoption in injury care.
| S-EPMC5726053 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionKnowledge translation platforms (KTPs) are intermediary organisations, initiatives or networks whose intent is to bridge the evidence into action divide. Strategies and tools include collaborative knowledge production, capacity building, information exchange and dialogue to facilitate relevant and timely engagement between researchers and decision-makers and other relevant stakeholders. With the wide range of definitions and descriptions of KTPs, there is a need to (1) provide a nuanced understanding of characteristics of KTPs and (2) assess and consolidate research methods used in mapping and evaluating KTPs to inform standardised process and impact evaluation.Methods and analysisThis scoping review will follow the recommended and accepted methods for scoping reviews and reporting guidelines. Eligibility for inclusion is any conceptual or empirical health-related qualitative, quantitative and/or mixed method studies including (1) definitions, descriptions and models or frameworks of KTPs (including those that do not self-identify as KTPs, eg, university research centres) and (2) research methods for mapping and/or evaluating KTPs. Searches will be carried out in PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Embase, Global Health and Web of Science using a predetermined search strategy, without any date, language or geographical restrictions. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts. One reviewer will complete data extraction for all included studies, and another will check a sample of 50% of the included studies. The analysis and synthesis will provide (1) an understanding of the various characteristics of KTPs; (2) insight into characteristics or factors that make them resilient and/or adaptive to facilitate impact (ie, influence policy and practice); and (3) an overview of the various methods for mapping and evaluating KTPs. We will explore enhancing an existing framework for classifying KTPs, or perhaps even developing a new framework for identifying and monitoring KTPs if necessary and relevant.Ethics and disseminationThis scoping review does not require ethics approval, as we will only include information from previously conducted studies and we will not involve human participants. The results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed scientific journal for publication and as conference presentations.
| S-EPMC9204454 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionEvery year, more than 800 000 people die from suicides of which an estimated 20% are from pesticide ingestion. Multiple studies have estimated that around 77%-80% of these pesticide suicides occur in low/middle-income countries. The full burden of pesticide suicides in African countries remains poorly documented, one reason being the lack of systematic data collection. It is essential to know the number of pesticide suicide cases to guide prevention of further cases occurring. This can be done by informing policy and legislation, and the implementation of targeted bans, as well as raising community awareness around the use of these pesticides, training of healthcare personnel, and influencing the type and level of clinical facility investments into this area of healthcare. The scoping review aims to investigate how pesticide suicide deaths in Africa are recorded by exploring the various surveillance systems in place, as well as highlighting key limitations and data collection barriers.Methods and analysisA scoping review will be carried out with the five-stage methodological frameworks set out by Arksey and O'Malley and the Joanna Briggs Institute. Studies in English that looked at pesticide suicide in African countries will be extracted and screened independently by two reviewers against the inclusion and exclusion criteria of this review. Studies' data will be extracted, and a descriptive synthesis developed of their main findings, as guided by the approach of Levac and colleagues.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this review as no human participants will be involved. The study findings will be distributed in a peer-reviewed publication.Registration detailsThis protocol has been submitted for publication to BMJ Open.
| S-EPMC9394204 | biostudies-literature