Randomized controlled trials in nursing conducted by Latin American research teams: A scoping review

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Melixa Medina-Aedo RN, MSc, Cristian Segura-Carrillo MSW, PhD, Elena Torralba-Martinez RN, MSc, Diana Buitrago-García RN, MSc, Ivan Solà BSc, Hector Pardo-Hernandez BA, MPH, PhD, Xavier Bonfill MD, MPH, PhD
{"title":"Randomized controlled trials in nursing conducted by Latin American research teams: A scoping review","authors":"Melixa Medina-Aedo RN, MSc,&nbsp;Cristian Segura-Carrillo MSW, PhD,&nbsp;Elena Torralba-Martinez RN, MSc,&nbsp;Diana Buitrago-García RN, MSc,&nbsp;Ivan Solà BSc,&nbsp;Hector Pardo-Hernandez BA, MPH, PhD,&nbsp;Xavier Bonfill MD, MPH, PhD","doi":"10.1111/jnu.12943","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the cornerstone of systematic reviews and other evidence synthesis. RCT identification remains challenging because of limitations in their indexation in major databases and potential language bias. Scientific production in Latin American nursing is steadily increasing, but little is known about its design or main features. We aimed to identify the extent of evidence from RCTs in nursing conducted by Latin American research teams and evaluate their main characteristics, including potential risk of bias.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design</h3>\n \n <p>Scoping review with risk of bias assessment.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a scoping review including a comprehensive electronic search in five relevant databases. We completed a descriptive data analysis and a risk of bias assessment of eligible studies using Cochrane's guidance.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>We identified 1784 references of which 47 were RCTs published in 40 journals. Twenty (42.6%) RCTs were published in journals in English. Chronic diseases were the most common health conditions studied (29.7%). Fifteen (31.9%) RCTs had a high risk of bias. Thirty (75%) journals were included in the Journal Citation Report (JCR) catalog and 5 (16.7%) were journals classified under nursing category. Twenty-one (52.5%) journals explicitly required CONSORT checklist recommendations for RCTs reporting.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Publication of RCTs in nursing by Latin American authors has increased. Most journals where RCTs are published are in English and not specific to nursing. Searches in journals of other disciplines may be necessary to facilitate identification of RCTs in nursing. CONSORT statements need to be actively promoted to facilitate rigorous methodology and reporting of RCTs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Clinical Relevance Statement</h3>\n \n <p>This study highlights the need for an increased research focus on RCTs in nursing in Latin America, and the importance of enhancing the reporting quality of these studies to support evidence-based nursing practice.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51091,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nursing Scholarship","volume":"56 2","pages":"331-340"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jnu.12943","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nursing Scholarship","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jnu.12943","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the cornerstone of systematic reviews and other evidence synthesis. RCT identification remains challenging because of limitations in their indexation in major databases and potential language bias. Scientific production in Latin American nursing is steadily increasing, but little is known about its design or main features. We aimed to identify the extent of evidence from RCTs in nursing conducted by Latin American research teams and evaluate their main characteristics, including potential risk of bias.

Design

Scoping review with risk of bias assessment.

Methods

We conducted a scoping review including a comprehensive electronic search in five relevant databases. We completed a descriptive data analysis and a risk of bias assessment of eligible studies using Cochrane's guidance.

Results

We identified 1784 references of which 47 were RCTs published in 40 journals. Twenty (42.6%) RCTs were published in journals in English. Chronic diseases were the most common health conditions studied (29.7%). Fifteen (31.9%) RCTs had a high risk of bias. Thirty (75%) journals were included in the Journal Citation Report (JCR) catalog and 5 (16.7%) were journals classified under nursing category. Twenty-one (52.5%) journals explicitly required CONSORT checklist recommendations for RCTs reporting.

Conclusion

Publication of RCTs in nursing by Latin American authors has increased. Most journals where RCTs are published are in English and not specific to nursing. Searches in journals of other disciplines may be necessary to facilitate identification of RCTs in nursing. CONSORT statements need to be actively promoted to facilitate rigorous methodology and reporting of RCTs.

Clinical Relevance Statement

This study highlights the need for an increased research focus on RCTs in nursing in Latin America, and the importance of enhancing the reporting quality of these studies to support evidence-based nursing practice.

Abstract Image

拉丁美洲研究小组进行的护理随机对照试验:范围综述。
随机对照试验(RCTs)是系统评价和其他证据合成的基础。由于在主要数据库中索引的局限性和潜在的语言偏倚,RCT鉴定仍然具有挑战性。拉丁美洲护理领域的科学成果正在稳步增长,但人们对其设计或主要特征知之甚少。我们的目的是确定拉丁美洲研究团队在护理方面进行的随机对照试验的证据程度,并评估其主要特征,包括潜在的偏倚风险。设计:范围评估和偏倚风险评估。方法:我们进行了范围综述,包括在五个相关数据库中进行全面的电子检索。我们在Cochrane的指导下完成了描述性数据分析和对符合条件的研究的偏倚风险评估。结果:共检索到文献1784篇,其中47篇为随机对照试验。20例(42.6%)随机对照试验发表在英文期刊上。慢性病是最常见的健康状况(29.7%)。15项(31.9%)随机对照试验存在高偏倚风险。30种(75%)期刊被纳入期刊引文报告(JCR)目录,5种(16.7%)期刊被归入护理类。21份(52.5%)期刊明确要求CONSORT清单推荐RCTs报告。结论:拉丁美洲作者发表的关于护理的随机对照试验有所增加。发表随机对照试验的大多数期刊都是英文的,并不是专门针对护理的。在其他学科的期刊中搜索可能是必要的,以便于识别护理方面的随机对照试验。需要积极推广CONSORT声明,以促进严格的随机对照试验方法和报告。临床相关性声明:本研究强调了对拉丁美洲护理领域的随机对照试验进行更多研究的必要性,以及提高这些研究报告质量以支持循证护理实践的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
85
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: This widely read and respected journal features peer-reviewed, thought-provoking articles representing research by some of the world’s leading nurse researchers. Reaching health professionals, faculty and students in 103 countries, the Journal of Nursing Scholarship is focused on health of people throughout the world. It is the official journal of Sigma Theta Tau International and it reflects the society’s dedication to providing the tools necessary to improve nursing care around the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信