Dataset Information

Quality appraisal of workers' wellbeing measures: a systematic review protocol.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Measuring wellbeing has never been so important. With the rapid growth of workplace wellbeing interventions, determining their effectiveness is not only good science but also good practice. A wide variety of wellbeing measures exist in the literature but it is not always clear what they are measuring, nor which measures best meet study objectives. This study seeks to identify the most valid and reliable measure/s of workers' wellbeing. METHODS:Measures will be included if they were (1) designed for measuring workers' wellbeing and (2) available in English. We will use a three-staged electronic search strategy to identify studies that include measures that meet the inclusion criteria: (1) electronic bibliographic databases for published work, (2) reference lists of studies with included measures, and (3) the reference list of previously published reviews. The following electronic bibliographic databases will be searched: OVID: psycINFO, psycTESTS, Cochrane library, AMED, Health and Psychosocial instruments; PubMed; PubPsych; Europe PMC; Scopus and Google Scholar. Database key search terms will include [wellbeing OR "well-being"] AND [employee* OR worker* OR staff OR personnel], and a validated search filter will be applied for the measurement properties. The methodological quality of the included studies will be assessed and rated. Then, this quality assessment of the included studies will be considered in the quality assessment of the measurement instruments. Finally, recommendations for the most appropriate instrument to measure workers' wellbeing will be reported. DISCUSSION:This systematic review will evaluate the quality of instruments that measure workers' wellbeing. The findings of this review will improve clarity for researchers and clinicians in the appropriate instrument selection in the measurement of workers' wellbeing. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42018079044.

SUBMITTER: Jarden RJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6300880 | biostudies-other | 2018 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Quality appraisal of workers' wellbeing measures: a systematic review protocol.

Jarden Rebecca J RJ Sandham Margaret M Siegert Richard J RJ Koziol-McLain Jane J

Systematic reviews 20181220 1

<h4>Background</h4>Measuring wellbeing has never been so important. With the rapid growth of workplace wellbeing interventions, determining their effectiveness is not only good science but also good practice. A wide variety of wellbeing measures exist in the literature but it is not always clear what they are measuring, nor which measures best meet study objectives. This study seeks to identify the most valid and reliable measure/s of workers' wellbeing.<h4>Methods</h4>Measures will be included ...[more]

PMID: 30572952

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundChildren's oral health-related quality of life (COHQoL) measures are well known and widely used. However, rigorous systematic reviews of these measures and analyses of their quality are in absence.ObjectivesTo systematically review and quantitatively assess the quality of COHQoL measures through a scoping review.Data sourcesSystematic literature search of PubMed, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), EMBASE (Excerpta Medica database), HaPI (Health and Psychosocial Instruments), and DOSS (Dentistry and Oral Sciences Source).Study eligibilityThe measure's focus was COHQoL; the child age ranged from 5 to 14 years; the publication was either a research article or a systematic review and related to caries; and it was written in English or had an English abstract. Two authors independently selected the studies. Disagreements were reconciled by group discussions with a third author.AppraisalThe International Society for Quality of Life Research minimum standards for patient-reported outcome measures were used for quality appraisal.SynthesisDescriptive analysis.ResultsWe identified 18 measures. Their quality scores ranged from 9.5 to 15.0 on a scale of 16. The quality appeared to bear no relationship to the citation and use of these measures. However, elements of these measures might be more useful than others, depending on the age-specific use and primary quality concerns.LimitationsSome of the information on the minimum standards of the 18 measures cannot be found in the existing literature. Measures published without English abstract were not searched.ConclusionsThe quality of these measures is suboptimal. Researchers and practitioners in this field should exercise caution when choosing and using these measures. Efforts at improving the quality of the COHQoL measures, such as refining existing ones or developing new measures, are warranted.Knowledge transfer statementResearchers, clinician scientists, and clinicians can use the results of this study when deciding which oral health-related quality of life measure they wish to use in children.

Project description:BackgroundSpatial planning affects the built environment, which in turn has the potential to have a significant impact on health, for good or ill. One way of ensuring that spatial plans take due account of health is through the inclusion of health considerations in the statutory and non statutory appraisal processes linked to plan-making processes.MethodsA systematic review to identify evaluation studies of appraisals or assessments of plans where health issues were considered from 1987 to 2010.ResultsA total of 6161 citations were identified: 6069 from electronic databases, 57 fromwebsite searches, with a further 35 citations from grey literature, of which 20 met the inclusion criteria. These 20 citations reported on a total of 135 different case studies: 11 UK HIA; 11 non UK high income countries HIA, 5 UK SEA or other integrated appraisal; 108 non UK high income SEA or other integrated appraisal. All studies were in English. No relevant studies were identified reporting on low or middle income countries.The studies were limited by potential bias (no independent evaluation, with those undertaking the appraisal also responsible for reporting outcomes), lack of detail and a lack of triangulation of results. Health impact assessments generally covered the four specified health domains (physical activity, mental health and wellbeing, environmental health issues such as pollution and noise, injury) more comprehensively than SEA or other integrated appraisals, although mental health and wellbeing was an underdeveloped area. There was no evidence available on the incorporation of health in Sustainability Appraisal, limited evidence that the recommendations from any type of appraisal were implemented, and almost no evidence that the recommendations had led to the anticipated outcomes or improvements in health postulated.ConclusionResearch is needed to assess (i) the degree to which statutory plan appraisal processes (SA in the UK) incorporate health; (ii) whether recommendations arising from health appraisal translate into the development process and (iii) whether outcomes are as anticipated.

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare professionals throughout the developed world report higher levels of sickness absence, dissatisfaction, distress, and "burnout" at work than staff in other sectors. There is a growing call for the 'triple aim' of healthcare delivery (improving patient experience and outcomes and reducing costs; to include a fourth aim: improving healthcare staff experience of healthcare delivery. A systematic review commissioned by the United Kingdom's (UK) Department of Health reviewed a large number of international healthy workplace interventions and recommended five whole-system changes to improve healthcare staff health and wellbeing: identification and response to local need, engagement of staff at all levels, and the involvement, visible leadership from, and up-skilling of, management and board-level staff.ObjectivesThis systematic review aims to identify whole-system healthy workplace interventions in healthcare settings that incorporate (combinations of) these recommendations and determine whether they improve staff health and wellbeing.MethodsA comprehensive and systematic search of medical, education, exercise science, and social science databases was undertaken. Studies were included if they reported the results of interventions that included all healthcare staff within a healthcare setting (e.g. whole hospital; whole unit, e.g. ward) in collective activities to improve physical or mental health or promote healthy behaviours.ResultsEleven studies were identified which incorporated at least one of the whole-system recommendations. Interventions that incorporated recommendations to address local need and engage the whole workforce fell in to four broad types: 1) pre-determined (one-size-fits-all) and no choice of activities (two studies); or 2) pre-determined and some choice of activities (one study); 3) A wide choice of a range of activities and some adaptation to local needs (five studies); or, 3) a participatory approach to creating programmes responsive and adaptive to local staff needs that have extensive choice of activities to participate in (three studies). Only five of the interventions included substantial involvement and engagement of leadership and efforts aimed at up-skilling the leadership of staff to support staff health and wellbeing. Incorporation of more of the recommendations did not appear to be related to effectiveness. The heterogeneity of study designs, populations and outcomes excluded a meta-analysis. All studies were deemed by their authors to be at least partly effective. Two studies reported statistically significant improvement in objectively measured physical health (BMI) and eight in subjective mental health. Six studies reported statistically significant positive changes in subjectively assessed health behaviours.ConclusionsThis systematic review identified 11 studies which incorporate at least one of the Boorman recommendations and provides evidence that whole-system healthy workplace interventions can improve health and wellbeing and promote healthier behaviours in healthcare staff.

Project description:BackgroundSurgical site infections (SSI) occur in up to 10% of surgeries. Wound care practices to prevent infections are guided by Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs), yet their contribution to improving patient outcomes relies on their quality and adoption in practice. We critically evaluated the quality of CPGs for SSI prevention during pre-, intra- and post-operative phases of care.MethodsWe systematically reviewed the literature from 1990-2018 using the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, ProQuest databases and five guidelines repositories. We extracted characteristics of each guideline using purposely-developed data collection tools. We assessed overall quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool.ResultsCombined searches of databases and repositories yielded 5,910 citations. Of these, we reviewed 215 full text documents. The final sample included 15 documents: 6 complete CPGs, 3 CPG updates, and 6 supplementary documents. The overall %mean scores across AGREE II domains for CPGs were: 1) scope and purpose (%mean ± SD = 86.3±23.5); 2) stakeholder involvement (%mean ± SD = 64±31.0); 3) rigour of development (%mean ± SD = 68.7±30.6); 4) clarity and presentation (%mean ± SD = 88.5±16.7); 5) applicability (%mean ± SD = 44±30.2); and, 5) editorial independence (%mean ± SD = 61±37.6). Based on individual AGREE II domains and overall scores, we appraised 4 out of 6 CPGs (inclusive of updates) as "recommended" for use in practice. Overall agreement among appraisers was excellent (ICC 0.86 [95%CI 0.73-0.94] - 0.98 [95%CI 0.96-0.99]; p <0.001).DiscussionInternational interest in CPG development has resulted in refinements to methodologies, which has led to improvements in the overall quality of the product.Implications for translationGiven the domains that received the lowest scores, it is clear that we need more consumer involvement and better consideration of the implementation challenges with CPG uptake and sustainability.

Project description:BackgroundAdult scoliosis represents a distinct subgroup of scoliosis patients for whom the diagnosis can have a large impact on their health-related quality of life (HR-QOL). Therefore, HR-QOL patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential to assess disease progression and the impact of interventions. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the measurement properties of HR-QOL PROMs in adult scoliosis patients.MethodsWe will conduct a literature search, from their inception onwards, of multiple electronic databases including AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, PsychINFO and PubMed. The searches will be performed in two stages. For both stages of the search, participants will be aged 18 and over with a diagnosis of scoliosis. The primary outcome of interest in the stage one searches will be studies which use PROMs to investigate HR-QOL as defined by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) taxonomy, the secondary outcome will be to assess the frequency of use of the various PROMs. In stage two, the primary outcome of interest will be studies which assess the measurement properties of the HR-QOL PROMs identified in stage one. No specific measurement property will be given priority. No planned secondary outcomes have been identified but will be reported if discovered. In stage one, the only restriction on study design will be the exclusion of systematic reviews. In Stage two the only restriction on study design will be the exclusion of full-text articles not available in the English language. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations and abstract data. Potential conflicts will be resolved through discussion. The study methodological quality (or risk of bias) will be appraised using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. The overall strength of the body of evidence will then be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. A narrative synthesis will be provided with information presented in the main text and tables to summarise and explain the characteristics and findings of the included studies. The narrative synthesis will explore the evidence for currently used PROMs in adult scoliosis patients and any areas that require further study.DiscussionThe review will help clinicians and researchers identify a HR-QOL PROM for use in patients with adult scoliosis. Findings from the review will be published and disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal and conference presentations.Systematic review registrationThis systematic review has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), reference number: CRD42020219437.

Project description:BackgroundHealth economic evaluation identifies, measures, values, and compares alternative strategies to efficiently allocate scarce resources. The validity, methodological quality, and generalizability of economic evaluations must be assessed, as poorly designed studies can lead to incorrect conclusions. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the quality and characteristics of published economic evaluations done in Ethiopia, using the Quality of Health Economics Studies (QHES) and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) instruments.MethodologyVarious electronic databases were searched using different keywords. We included only original studies conducted in Ethiopia that evaluated the cost and consequences of at least two health interventions. Abstracts, treatment guidelines, reviews, expert opinions, and studies that included other countries were excluded. Two reviewers independently evaluated each study using the QHES and CHEERS instruments and any disagreements were then resolved by a third reviewer.ResultThe study included 21 studies published between 2002 and 2021. HIV was the most frequently evaluated medical condition, examined in four (19.06%) of the 21 studies. Seventeen of the studies (80.95%) compared healthcare services or programs, while the other four examined pharmaceutical products. Cost-utility analysis was the economic evaluation technique used in 14 studies (66.67%). Of the studies that disclosed their funding sources, foreign institutions were involved in funding 71.43% of them. Disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) was an outcome metric used in nine (42.86%) studies. The average QHES score of the studies was 82%. Fourteen studies had QHES scores of ≥75% and two had scores of <50%. The studies evaluated using the CHEERS instrument ranged in quality from 42.9% to 92.9%, with an average of 78.23%.ConclusionOur study revealed that Ethiopia lacks health economic evaluations, particularly on non-communicable diseases. This indicates that the economic evaluation of healthcare interventions in Ethiopia is still in its early stages. Additionally, Ethiopian institutions have played a very limited role in funding research, highlighting the importance of active participation from local institutions.

Dataset Information

Quality appraisal of workers' wellbeing measures: a systematic review protocol.

Publications

Quality appraisal of workers' wellbeing measures: a systematic review protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets