PROTOCOL: Barriers and Facilitators to the Adoption of Speech-Based Cognitive Screening Tools: A Protocol for Systematic Review of Qualitative Evidence.

IF 3.8 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Campbell Systematic Reviews Pub Date : 2026-06-11 eCollection Date: 2026-06-01 DOI:10.1177/18911803261460855
Ravi Shankar, Vahul Sundar, Karen Sui Geok Chua
{"title":"PROTOCOL: Barriers and Facilitators to the Adoption of Speech-Based Cognitive Screening Tools: A Protocol for Systematic Review of Qualitative Evidence.","authors":"Ravi Shankar, Vahul Sundar, Karen Sui Geok Chua","doi":"10.1177/18911803261460855","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cognitive impairment, including conditions like dementia, is a growing public health concern as the global population ages. Early detection and diagnosis are critical for optimal management and support. Speech-based cognitive screening tools have emerged as a promising alternative to traditional methods, leveraging advances in natural language processing and machine learning to analyze speech samples for signs of cognitive decline. Despite their potential, the adoption of speech-based screening tools in clinical practice has been slow. This systematic review protocol outlines a plan to synthesize qualitative evidence on the barriers and facilitators to the adoption of speech-based cognitive screening tools. The review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research (ENTREQ) statement. Eleven electronic databases will be searched: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, MEDLINE (via Ovid), The Cochrane Library, Campbell Collaboration Library, PsycINFO, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library. Two reviewers will independently screen studies using Covidence software, extract data, assess methodological quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) qualitative checklist, and evaluate confidence in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (GRADE-CERQual) approach. Thematic synthesis will be used to analyze the evidence. The results will provide insights to inform the development, evaluation, and implementation of speech-based cognitive screening tools, ultimately improving early detection and care for individuals with cognitive impairment.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"22 2","pages":"18911803261460855"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13270038/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18911803261460855","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cognitive impairment, including conditions like dementia, is a growing public health concern as the global population ages. Early detection and diagnosis are critical for optimal management and support. Speech-based cognitive screening tools have emerged as a promising alternative to traditional methods, leveraging advances in natural language processing and machine learning to analyze speech samples for signs of cognitive decline. Despite their potential, the adoption of speech-based screening tools in clinical practice has been slow. This systematic review protocol outlines a plan to synthesize qualitative evidence on the barriers and facilitators to the adoption of speech-based cognitive screening tools. The review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research (ENTREQ) statement. Eleven electronic databases will be searched: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, MEDLINE (via Ovid), The Cochrane Library, Campbell Collaboration Library, PsycINFO, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library. Two reviewers will independently screen studies using Covidence software, extract data, assess methodological quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) qualitative checklist, and evaluate confidence in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (GRADE-CERQual) approach. Thematic synthesis will be used to analyze the evidence. The results will provide insights to inform the development, evaluation, and implementation of speech-based cognitive screening tools, ultimately improving early detection and care for individuals with cognitive impairment.

协议:采用基于语音的认知筛选工具的障碍和促进因素:定性证据的系统审查协议。
随着全球人口老龄化,认知障碍,包括痴呆症等疾病,是一个日益严重的公共卫生问题。早期发现和诊断对于优化管理和支持至关重要。基于语音的认知筛选工具已经成为传统方法的一个有前途的替代方案,利用自然语言处理和机器学习的进步来分析语音样本,以寻找认知能力下降的迹象。尽管有潜力,但在临床实践中采用基于语音的筛查工具的速度很慢。本系统审查协议概述了一项计划,以综合关于采用基于语音的认知筛选工具的障碍和促进因素的定性证据。评审将遵循“系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目”(PRISMA)指南和“提高定性研究综合报告透明度”(ENTREQ)声明。11个电子数据库将被检索:PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, MEDLINE(通过Ovid), The Cochrane Library, Campbell Collaboration Library, PsycINFO, Scopus, IEEE Xplore和ACM Digital Library。两名审稿人将使用covid - ence软件独立筛选研究,提取数据,使用关键评估技能计划(CASP)定性检查表评估方法学质量,并使用建议分级评估、开发和评估-定性研究综述证据的置信度(GRADE-CERQual)方法评估证据的置信度。专题综合将用于分析证据。研究结果将为基于语音的认知筛查工具的开发、评估和实施提供见解,最终改善对认知障碍患者的早期发现和护理。
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
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Campbell Systematic Reviews Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
21.90%
发文量
80
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书