Experiences and Challenges Updating a Living Evidence-Based Review of Randomized Controlled Trials on Mental Health and Behavioral Disorders in Individuals With Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-10 DOI:10.1097/HTR.0000000000000969
Robert Teasell, Heather M MacKenzie, Cecilia Flores-Sandoval, Amanda McIntyre, Ujjoyinee Barua, Swati Mehta, Mark Bayley, Emma A Bateman
{"title":"Experiences and Challenges Updating a Living Evidence-Based Review of Randomized Controlled Trials on Mental Health and Behavioral Disorders in Individuals With Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.","authors":"Robert Teasell, Heather M MacKenzie, Cecilia Flores-Sandoval, Amanda McIntyre, Ujjoyinee Barua, Swati Mehta, Mark Bayley, Emma A Bateman","doi":"10.1097/HTR.0000000000000969","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To describe experiences and challenges when updating a living evidence-based review database of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on mental health and behavioral disorders in moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (MSTBI).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This commentary derives from our experience developing an extensive database of RCTs on MSTBI that has been conceptualized as a living evidence-based review. Our working group focused on mental health and behavior RCTs and reflected upon their experiences and challenges using the living systematic approach. We discuss challenges associated with metrics of study quality, injury etiology and severity, time post-injury, country of origin, and variability in outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>RCTs were conducted almost solely in high income countries, with smaller sample sizes, and most conducted in the chronic phase post-TBI. Issues related to lack of transparency, unclear and incomplete reporting of injury severity, etiology, and time post-injury remain a concern and can lead to challenges associated with interpretation of results, validity, and reliability of the data. There was significant heterogeneity regarding the use of outcome measures and constructs, underscoring the need for standardization.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Lack of standardization and incomplete reporting of injury characteristics makes it difficult to compare data between RCTs of MSTBI, perform meta-analyses, and generate evidence-based clinical recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":15901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation","volume":"39 5","pages":"329-334"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HTR.0000000000000969","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To describe experiences and challenges when updating a living evidence-based review database of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on mental health and behavioral disorders in moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (MSTBI).

Method: This commentary derives from our experience developing an extensive database of RCTs on MSTBI that has been conceptualized as a living evidence-based review. Our working group focused on mental health and behavior RCTs and reflected upon their experiences and challenges using the living systematic approach. We discuss challenges associated with metrics of study quality, injury etiology and severity, time post-injury, country of origin, and variability in outcome measures.

Results: RCTs were conducted almost solely in high income countries, with smaller sample sizes, and most conducted in the chronic phase post-TBI. Issues related to lack of transparency, unclear and incomplete reporting of injury severity, etiology, and time post-injury remain a concern and can lead to challenges associated with interpretation of results, validity, and reliability of the data. There was significant heterogeneity regarding the use of outcome measures and constructs, underscoring the need for standardization.

Conclusion: Lack of standardization and incomplete reporting of injury characteristics makes it difficult to compare data between RCTs of MSTBI, perform meta-analyses, and generate evidence-based clinical recommendations.

更新关于中重度脑损伤患者心理健康和行为障碍的随机对照试验的活体循证综述的经验和挑战。
摘要描述更新中重度创伤性脑损伤(MSTBI)心理健康和行为障碍随机对照试验(RCT)活证据综述数据库时的经验和挑战:本评论源于我们开发中度和重度脑损伤随机对照试验(RCT)数据库的经验,该数据库已被概念化为 "活证据综述"。我们的工作组重点关注心理健康和行为方面的 RCT,并反思了他们使用活系统方法的经验和挑战。我们讨论了与研究质量指标、损伤病因和严重程度、损伤后时间、原籍国和结果测量的可变性相关的挑战:结果:研究性临床试验几乎都是在高收入国家进行的,样本量较小,而且大多数都是在创伤后的慢性阶段进行的。与缺乏透明度、对受伤严重程度、病因和受伤后时间的报告不明确和不完整有关的问题仍然令人担忧,并可能导致与结果解释、有效性和数据可靠性有关的挑战。在结果测量和结构的使用方面存在明显的异质性,这突出表明了标准化的必要性:结论:由于缺乏标准化以及对损伤特征的报告不完整,因此很难对MSTBI的RCT数据进行比较、进行荟萃分析以及提出循证临床建议。
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
4.80
自引率
4.20%
发文量
153
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation is a leading, peer-reviewed resource that provides up-to-date information on the clinical management and rehabilitation of persons with traumatic brain injuries. Six issues each year aspire to the vision of “knowledge informing care” and include a wide range of articles, topical issues, commentaries and special features. It is the official journal of the Brain Injury Association of America (BIAA).
×
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