JBI evidence synthesis最新文献

{"title":"Global status of chiropractic education research and scholarly publications: a scoping review.","authors":"Claire D Johnson, Bart N Green, Lyndon G Amorin-Woods, Ilija Arar, Kara D Burnham, David C Byfield, Joel P Carmichael, Waleska Crespo, Philip Dewhurst, Chantal Doucet, Andrew S Dunn, Marina Fox, Navine Haworth, Adrian G W Hunnisett, Russ Iwami, Amanda Jones-Harris, Carolina Kolberg, Charmaine M Korporaal, Craig S Little, Celia P Maguire, Kevin S Mathers, Daniel Moore, John P Mrozek, Sharné Naidoo, Robert M Rowell, Gary Schultz, Gregory J Snow, Stephanie G B Sullivan, Krista L Ward, Stephney Whillier, David Wickes, Yi Kai Wong, Christopher Yelverton","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-24-00122","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00122","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This scoping review aimed to map the volume (number of studies) and nature (topics and designs) of chiropractic education research and scholarly publications on chiropractic learners and programs worldwide.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Despite the expansion of the chiropractic profession and its recognition by entities such as the World Health Organization, a gap exists in comprehending the international landscape of chiropractic education. No prior studies have systematically mapped the volume and nature of chiropractic education research and scholarly publications. A scoping review of chiropractic education research and scholarly publications is needed to guide future policy development, research agendas, and educational initiatives within the chiropractic profession.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>Publications in the indexed literature on chiropractic students, graduates, academics, and programs in any chiropractic education setting were included. Studies focused on chiropractic programs and education for chiropractic students or chiropractors worldwide. All research designs, literature reviews, descriptive studies, and commentaries were included.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This scoping review was conducted according to JBI methodology for scoping reviews and was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). The databases PubMed (NLM), Scopus, CINAHL via EBSCOhost, Index to Chiropractic Literature, Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde, and Educational Resources Information Center were searched from their inception to November 5 and 6, 2023, with no language limits. Data were extracted for primary topics, study designs, and regions of the included documents and entered in Covidence by paired independent reviewers. The findings were organized into figures and tables with a narrative description.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search identified 7494 documents. After deduplication, 5041 were screened for relevance, of which 667 were selected for full-text review. From these, 598 were selected for data extraction. The chiropractic education topics included values/ethical competence (n=3), personal/behavioral competence (n=34), knowledge and cognitive competence (n=49), functional and clinical competence (n=93), and program-relevant research (n=419). Most designs were quantitative (n=391), followed by descriptive reports (n=91), qualitative (n=43), mixed methods (n=40), commentaries (n=22), and literature reviews (n=11). Chiropractic education was most studied in the United States (n=359), Australia (n=116), and Canada (n=106).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This scoping review reports the volume and nature of indexed publications relating to chiropractic learners and programs worldwide. This body of literature contains learner competencies in knowledge, skills, and attitudes, as well as studies about ch","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143365773","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Textual evidence systematic reviews series paper 2: challenges and strategies in developing a search strategy for systematic reviews of textual evidence.","authors":"Deborah Edwards, Adam Cooper, Alexa McArthur, Brittany V Barber, Emily Gregg, Lori E Weeks, Zoe Jordan","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-24-00292","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00292","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this paper is to highlight and address challenges as well as provide strategies for developing searches for systematic reviews of textual evidence.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>When conducting a JBI review of textual evidence, it is important to consider different sources of published and unpublished material. While systematic search methodologies have been well-established for searching traditional peer-reviewed literature, applying those same rigorous methods to literature outside of academic journals can be more challenging. This paper highlights and addresses the challenges of developing searches for systematic reviews of textual evidence and provides strategies on how to conduct these. It takes into consideration the unique complexities of locating published material outside of academic journals and presents guidance for developing more robust searches incorporating textual evidence.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Researchers should acknowledge the value of textual evidence, including opinions, narratives, and policies, as crucial for informing health care practices. It is also essential to clearly define the types of textual evidence needed and establish comprehensive search parameters to ensure thorough coverage. To enhance the search process, researchers should follow a structured 3-phase approach: first, identify relevant keywords; second, conduct tailored searches in bibliographic databases; and third, perform supplementary searches. Furthermore, it is recommended they collaborate with information specialists and experts to refine and strengthen their search techniques. Researchers should also explore a variety of sources, including dedicated databases, conference proceedings, theses, dissertations, and media reports, to gather valuable textual evidence. Finally, it is important to systematically document all search processes to support transparency and reproducibility in the review.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Searching broadly across bibliographic databases and including textual evidence from non-academic journals may provide the best available and most appropriate evidence to address specific questions.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143190791","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Textual evidence systematic reviews series paper 3: critical appraisal of evidence from narrative, opinion, and policy.","authors":"Alexa McArthur, Adam Cooper, Deborah Edwards, Jitka Klugarova, Hu Yan, Brittany V Barber, Emily E Gregg, Lori E Weeks, Zoe Jordan","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-24-00293","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00293","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>JBI has long held the view that an inclusive approach to the conceptualization of what counts as evidence is important to the evidence-based movement. JBI's approach for appraising textual evidence had encompassed all forms of text (narrative, opinion, and policy), with one general tool used to guide critical appraisal. The proliferation of textual evidence and increase in textual evidence reviews demonstrate the need to reconceptualize JBI's methodological approach to critically appraising textual evidence. The objective of this paper is to outline the updated methodological approach to systematic reviews of textual evidence, especially in relation to the development of 3 separate critical appraisal tools for narrative, expert opinion, and policy text. Using an adapted Delphi approach, the JBI Textual Evidence Methodology Group convened over several rounds of meetings and discussions with international experts to reach consensus toward the reconceptualization of critical appraisal tools for textual evidence sources. Strategies to effectively interrogate the legitimacy and authenticity of sources were found to be dependent upon the type of textual evidence under review. Therefore, 3 separate critical appraisal tools for narrative, expert opinion, and policy text were developed. This paper provides an overview of the development of 3 separate critical appraisal tools, highlighting the complex nature of textual evidence data sources.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143190794","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Textual evidence systematic reviews series paper 1: introduction to the revised JBI methodology and overview of recent changes.","authors":"Alexa McArthur, Adam Cooper, Deborah Edwards, Jitka Klugarova, Hu Yan, Brittany V Barber, Emily E Gregg, Lori E Weeks, Zoe Jordan","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-24-00291","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00291","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>It is now widely recognized that an inclusive approach to evidence to inform policy and practice is necessary. Although methodologies for the synthesis of qualitative and quantitative evidence are well established, the synthesis of non-research evidence remains relatively new. In 2004, JBI developed a methodological approach to synthesize this type of evidence, advocating for the unique role of textual evidence when research to inform decision-making is limited. The JBI approach has recently been revised to reflect significant changes and advances in thinking and conceptualization of conducting textual evidence systematic reviews. The evolution of this methodology and the recent changes that have been made are articulated in this paper.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143123819","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Long-term care insurance and implementation for older people in China: a systematic review of textual evidence protocol.","authors":"Xiaoman Yang, Shuqi Yuan, Yan Hu","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00315","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-23-00315","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this systematic review is to synthesize and compare policies and implementation strategies on long-term care insurance for older people in China.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Current information about China's long-term care insurance from a textual perspective is limited. Due to late inception and fragmented management, textual evidence on this topic will offer a unique perspective on the structure and implementation strategies of long-term care insurance policies in China.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>The population of this review will be adults aged 60 years or over. The phenomena of interest will be long-term care insurance policies and implementation strategies in China. Published sources and gray literature in English and Chinese since 2016 will be included. Exclusions will apply to hospitalized individuals as well as those under 60 years of age, who are permanently disabled due to illness or disability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The proposed systematic review will be conducted in line with the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of textual evidence. Databases to be searched will include PubMed, Embase, (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). For gray literature, we will conduct an advanced Google search as well as searching ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. Additionally, we will search the websites of local governments in pilot cities. The JBI critical appraisal checklist for textual evidence will be used to evaluate the quality of textual sources. All identified sources will be retrieved and assessed in detail by 2 independent reviewers. Data extraction and synthesis will be conducted using the JBI System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information. A meta-aggregative approach will be employed to synthesize data and conclusions, which will be graded using ConQual. A recommendation will be issued as a Good Practice Statement.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration number: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023414967.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143081447","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Factors affecting decisions to use antibiotic-sparing treatment approaches in women with uncomplicated urinary tract infections: a scoping review protocol.","authors":"Stefania Di Gangi, Stefan Neuner-Jehle, Robin Baumann, Andreas Plate","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-24-00159","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00159","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This scoping review will explore the evidence on factors influencing the decisions to use antibiotic-sparing treatments in women with uncomplicated urinary tract infection.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Overuse and misuse of antibiotics are the main drivers of antimicrobial resistance. Antibiotic-sparing treatments, such as symptomatic treatment with analgesics and delayed prescriptions, have considerable potential to reduce antibiotic consumption, but the majority of patients still receive antibiotics without delay. The reasons for the poor implementation of these alternative approaches are unknown. A better understanding of the factors influencing treatment decisions is needed.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>This review will consider the experiences and attitudes of health care professionals and women, in outpatient settings in high-income countries, regarding the use of antibiotic-sparing treatments for the diagnosis or suspected diagnosis of uncomplicated urinary tract infections (ie, healthy women aged 18-64 years who are not pregnant, immunosuppressed, and have no functional or structural urinary tract abnormalities).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review will follow the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, and the Cochrane Library will be searched to identify peer-reviewed articles: original research (quantitative or qualitative studies, experimental or observational), reviews, case reports, and case series. Gray literature will also be searched for. Sources in any language from 2000 to 2024 will be included. Three reviewers will screen the sources and extract data using a tool developed by the reviewers. The analysis will use counts and descriptive qualitative content analysis. The results will be presented in visual, tabular, and narrative formats.</p><p><strong>Details of this review project can be found in open science framework: </strong>https://osf.io/t8y5e/.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143025155","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Effectiveness of Combined Physical and Psychological Interventions on Anxiety and Depression Symptoms in Adult Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: a Systematic Review Protocol.","authors":"Sílvia Ramos, Aramid Gomes, Ana Rosinhas, Rosa Silva, Margarida Goes, Francisco Sampaio","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-24-00335","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00335","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this review is to evaluate the effectiveness of combined physical and psychological interventions on anxiety and depression symptoms in adult patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>By 2030, COPD is expected to be the third-leading cause of death and the seventh in terms of overall health impact, measured in disability-adjusted life years. As with other comorbidities, anxiety and depression disorders influence the prognosis. Combined physical and psychological interventions may have better results than isolated interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>Studies with adult patients with COPD and anxiety and depression symptoms who have undergone combined physical and psychological interventions will be considered for inclusion. This review will primarily include randomized clinical trials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Articles will be searched in CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Academic Search Complete, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection (via EBSCOhost), APA PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science Core Collection, and Scopus. Two independent reviewers will select the studies and apply the JBI tools for critical appraisal and data extraction. Studies will be pooled in a meta-analysis whenever possible. The χ2 test and I2 statistics will be the standard tools for assessing heterogeneity. Statistical analyses will be carried out using the random effects model. The fixed effects model will be applied if there is low heterogeneity between included studies (I2 < 50, or P ≥ 0.5). The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach will be used to grade the certainty of the evidence, and a Summary of Findings will be presented.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42024550523.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143025060","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Conducting Pairwise and Network Meta-analyses in Updated and Living Systematic Reviews: a Scoping Review Protocol.","authors":"Menelaos Konstantinidis, Catherine Stratton, Sofia Tsokani, Julian Elliott, Mark Simmonds, Jessie McGowan, David Moher, Andrea C Tricco, Areti-Angeliki Veroniki","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-24-00279","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00279","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this scoping review will be to describe existing guidance documents or studies reporting on the conduct of meta-analyses in updated systematic reviews (USRs) or living systematic reviews (LSRs).</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The rapid increase in the medical literature poses a substantial challenge in keeping systematic reviews up to date. In LSRs, a review is updated with a pre-specified frequency or when some other signalling criterion is triggered. While the LSR framework is well-established, there is uncertainty regarding the most appropriate methods for conducting repeated meta-analyses over time, which may result in sub-optimal decision-making.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>Studies of any design (including commentaries, books, manuals) providing guidance on conducting meta-analysis in USRs or LSRs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We will use the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. We will search multiple medical bibliographic databases (Cochrane Library, Embase, ERIC, MEDLINE, JBI Evidence Synthesis, and PsycINFO), statistical and mathematics databases (COBRA, Current Index to Statistics, MathSciNet, Project Euclid Complete, and zbMATH), pre-print archives (Arvix, BioRxiv, and MedRxiv), as well as difficult to locate/unpublished (or gray) literature. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts, and full-text documents, and extract data. Characteristics of recommendations for meta-analysis in USRs and LSRs will be presented using descriptive statistics and categorized concepts.Details of this review project can be found in Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/9c27g.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143025059","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Parent and Carer Experiences of Health Care Professionals' Communications About a Child's Higher Weight: a Qualitative Systematic Review.","authors":"Terhi Koivumäki, Maria Kääriäinen, Anna-Maria Tuomikoski, Marja Kaunonen","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-24-00056","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00056","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective: &lt;/strong&gt;The objective of this systematic review was to identify, critically appraise, and synthesize the best available qualitative evidence on parent and carer experiences of communications by health care professionals (HCPs) concerning children's higher weight.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction: &lt;/strong&gt;A child's higher weight can be a sensitive issue to discuss in health care, but successful communication with parents can increase parental compliance with treatment and improve overall family welfare. Public discourse on obesity has shifted in recent years and created pressure to change the way that weight is discussed in health care. It is, therefore, important to explore how parents and carers experience the communication about children's higher weight to ensure an effective, up-to-date, and ethical counseling on childhood obesity.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Inclusion criteria: &lt;/strong&gt;This qualitative review included studies that focused on the experiences of parents or carers of children (birth to 12 years) with a higher weight who received a verbal or written communication from HCPs about their child's weight.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods: &lt;/strong&gt;The following databases were systematically searched from 2010 onward: MEDLINE (EBSCOhost), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), PsycINFO (Ovid), Scopus, LILACS, and the Finnish health sciences database MEDIC. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (ProQuest) were searched for unpublished articles. The search was conducted in July 2022 and updated in October 2023. No country or language limits were applied. A manual search was used to supplement the database searches. Study selection including title and abstract screening, full-text screening, and critical appraisal and data extraction were performed by 2 reviewers. The research findings were categorized and aggregated into synthesized findings. The synthesized findings were assigned confidence scores and categories and finalized synthesized findings were agreed upon by all reviewers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;The 33 studies included varied in qualitative study design and methodological quality. There were over 900 eligible participants (parents and carers) and 147 unequivocal and credible research findings. The research findings yielded 8 categories and 3 synthesized findings with low confidence scores. The synthesized findings were: i) Parents receiving communication on a child's higher weight experience strong feelings that can affect their parenting, ii) A health care professional's active and individual communication, with the sensitive use of words, creates a good communication experience for parents; and iii) Parents want to receive information about the child's higher weight that is useful to them and is based on an acceptable weight estimation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion: &lt;/strong&gt;Although confidence in the synthesized findings is low, the results of this review indicate that communication on a child's higher weight in health care should meet the parents' ","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143025159","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Methods for data extraction and data transformation in convergent integrated mixed methods systematic reviews.","authors":"Lucylynn Lizarondo, Cindy Stern, Susan Salmond, Judith Carrier, Kay Cooper, Christina Godfrey, Manda Vandyk, Danielle Pollock, Kendra Rieger, Joao Apostolo, Pamela Kirkpatrick, Kelli Borges Dos Santos, Heather Loveday","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-24-00331","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00331","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective: &lt;/strong&gt;The objective of this guidance paper is to describe data transformation involving qualitization, including when and how to undertake this process, and to clarify how it aligns with data extraction in order to expand on the current guidance for JBI convergent integrated mixed methods systematic reviews (MMSRs).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction: &lt;/strong&gt;The convergent integrated approach to MMSRs involves combining extracted data from both quantitative studies (including the quantitative components of mixed methods studies) and qualitative studies (including the qualitative components of mixed methods studies). This process requires data transformation, which can occur either by converting qualitative data into quantitative data (ie, quantitizing) or converting quantitative data into qualitative data (ie, qualitizing). Data transformation involving qualitization is poorly understood in the context of MMSRs, and there is confusion regarding how to undertake this process, with much of the literature specific to primary mixed methods studies. There is a need to expand current guidance and provide more practical advice to reviewers on how to undertake this process.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods: &lt;/strong&gt;The JBI MMSR Methodology Group took a multipronged approach to update its guidance. First, a structured search of the literature was conducted to determine what is known about data transformation, followed by analysis of a sample of systematic reviews that claimed to use the JBI convergent integrated approach to MMSRs. Approaches were summarized and used to inform the development of draft guidance. This guidance was iteratively revised following a series of online meetings, as well as presented to evidence synthesis experts at an international conference. Finally, the guidance was submitted to the JBI International Scientific Committee for discussion, feedback, and ratification.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;There is uncertainty in the literature regarding the process of data transformation within the context of MMSRs, with ill-defined approaches provided and variation in practice. In JBI convergent integrated MMSRs, it is recommended that data extraction from quantitative studies (or mixed method studies reporting quantitative findings) stays as close as possible to the data reported in the primary studies. Where data are absent or insufficient to meet the needs of the MMSR, systematic reviewers may need to construct the narrative representation using relevant data from the primary studies. Following data extraction, the process of qualitization occurs where extracted data (both quantitative and qualitative) are assembled, and reviewers are required to conduct detailed examination across data to identify likenesses and create categories based on similarities in meaning.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion: &lt;/strong&gt;To our knowledge, this is the most comprehensive guidance currently available for data extraction and qualitization for MMSRs. Ho","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143013257","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}