JBI evidence synthesis最新文献

{"title":"Cost and cost-effectiveness of treatments for rheumatic heart disease in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review protocol.","authors":"Mona Thangamma Ag, Bhavya Vidyadharan, Roshan P Daniel, Andria Sirur, Praveen Kumar, Girish Thunga P, Pooja Gopal Poojari, Muhammed Rashid, Nirmalya Mukherjee, Paramita Bhattacharya, Denny John","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00246","DOIUrl":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00246","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This review will synthesize studies on costs, the impact of these costs, and the cost-effectiveness of treatments for rheumatic heart disease (RHD) in low- and middle-income countries.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>RHD incurs high costs owing to its clinical complexity, surgical treatments, and prolonged hospital stays. Thus, the disease has a substantial economic impact on the health system, patients, and their families. No systematic review on economic evidence of treatments for RHD has been published to date.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>This review will consider all cost and cost-effectiveness studies on RHD treatments for children and young adults (5─30 years) residing in low- and middle-income countries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The review will follow the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of economic evaluation evidence. The search strategy will locate published and unpublished studies in English. Systematic searches will be conducted in MEDLINE (PubMed), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Scopus, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), National Health Service Economic Evaluation Databases, Pediatric Economic Database Evaluation, and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry. Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts, followed by a full-text review based on the inclusion criteria. Data will be extracted using a modified JBI data extraction form for economic evaluations. JBI's Dominance Ranking Matrix for economic evaluations will be used to summarize and compare the results of cost and cost-effectiveness studies. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach will be used to assess the certainty of economic evidence for outcomes related to resource use.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023425850.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":"1886-1897"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141459754","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":"Intervention combinations within multimodal prehabilitation and their effect on health-related quality of life, fatigue, and adherence in the adult cancer population: an umbrella review protocol.","authors":"Judit Csontos, Deborah Edwards, Elizabeth Gillen, Lenira Ferreira Semedo, Jane Hopkinson","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00253","DOIUrl":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00253","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This umbrella review will investigate intervention combinations that are provided as multimodal prehabilitation and their effect on health-related quality of life, fatigue, and adherence in the adult cancer population.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Cancer and treatment-related long-term and late effects are a significant source of impairment worldwide. Multimodal prehabilitation has been the subject of intense research in recent years due to its potential to improve cancer treatment and surgical outcomes. Prehabilitation has been provided in different combinations of exercise, nutrition, and psychological support, although evidence of effectiveness varies in the literature.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>The review will consider quantitative and mixed methods (segregated approach) systematic reviews investigating the effectiveness of multimodal prehabilitation compared with any other or no intervention for adults with cancer (≥18 years). Systematic reviews focusing solely on unimodal prehabilitation or rehabilitation during or after cancer treatment will be excluded.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review will follow the JBI methodology for umbrella reviews. The following databases will be searched from 2001 onwards: MEDLINE, Emcare, PsycINFO, and AMED (Ovid); CINAHL (EBSCOhost); PEDro; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; and Epistemonikos. Backchaining and forward citation tracking will also be performed. Organizational websites will be searched for relevant gray literature. Two reviewers will perform title/abstract and full-text screening against the inclusion criteria, and disagreements will be resolved via discussion or a third reviewer. Relevant population, intervention, and outcome data will be extracted from included full-text documents, and the quality of reports will be determined using the JBI checklist for systematic reviews. The results will be presented in tabular and narrative format.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42024511601.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":"1914-1925"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11382826/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141749216","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Methodological components, structure and quality assessment tools for evidence summaries: a scoping review.","authors":"Ashley Whitehorn, Craig Lockwood, Yan Hu, Weijie Xing, Zheng Zhu, Kylie Porritt","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00557","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-23-00557","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective: &lt;/strong&gt;The objective of this review was to identify and map the available information related to the definition, structure, and core methodological components of evidence summaries, as well as to identify any indicators of quality.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction: &lt;/strong&gt;Evidence summaries offer a practical solution to overcoming some of the barriers present in evidence-based health care, such as lack of access to evidence at the point of care, and the knowledge and expertise to evaluate the quality and translate the evidence into clinical decision-making. However, lack of transparency in reporting and inconsistencies in the methodology of evidence summary development have previously been cited and pose problems for end-users (eg, clinicians, policymakers).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Inclusion criteria: &lt;/strong&gt;Any English-language resource that described the methodological development or appraisal of an evidence summary was included.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods: &lt;/strong&gt;PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL (EBSCOhost) were systematically searched in November 2019, with no limits on the search. The search was updated in June 2021 and January 2023. Gray literature searches and pearling of references of included sources were also conducted at the same time as the database searches. All resources (ie, articles, papers, books, dissertations, reports, and websites) were eligible for inclusion in the review if they evaluated or described the development or appraisal of an evidence summary methodology within a point-of-care context and were published in English. Literature reviews (eg, systematic reviews, rapid reviews), including summaries of evidence on interventions or health care activities that either measure effects, a phenomena of interest, or where the objective was the development, description or evaluation of methods without a clear point-of-care target, were excluded from the review.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;A total of 76 resources (n=56 articles from databases and n=20 reports from gray literature sources) were included in the review. The most common type/name included critically appraised topic (n=18) and evidence summary (n=17). A total of 25 resources provided a definition of an evidence summary: commonalities included a clinical question; a structured, systematic literature search; a description of literature selection; and appraisal of evidence. Of these 25, 16 included descriptors such as brief, concise, rapid, short, succinct and snapshot. The reported methodological components closely reflected the definition results, with the most reported methodological components being a systematic, multi-database search, and critical appraisal. Evidence summary examples were mostly presented as narrative summaries and usually included a reference list, background or clinical context, and recommendations or implications for practice or policy. Four quality assessment tools and a systematic review of tools were included.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions:","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142082059","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":"The revised JBI critical appraisal tool for the assessment of risk of bias for cohort studies.","authors":"Timothy H Barker, Sabira Hasanoff, Edoardo Aromataris, Jennifer Stone, Jo Leonardi-Bee, Kim Sears, Nahal Habibi, Miloslav Klugar, Catalin Tufanaru, Sandeep Moola, Xian-Liang Liu, Zachary Munn","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-24-00103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00103","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cohort studies are a robust analytical observational study design that explore the difference between two different cohorts on an outcome, differentiated by their exposure status. Despite being observational in nature, they are often included in systematic reviews of effectiveness, particularly when randomized controlled trials are limited or not feasible. Like all studies included in a systematic review, cohort studies must undergo a critical appraisal process to assess the extent to which a study has considered potential bias in its design, conduct, or analysis. Critical appraisal tools facilitate this evaluation. This paper introduces the revised critical appraisal tool for cohort studies, completed by the JBI Effectiveness Methodology Group (EMG), who are currently revising the suite of JBI critical appraisal tools for quantitative study designs. The revised tool responds to updates in methodological guidance from the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group and reporting guidance from PRISMA 2020, providing a robust framework for evaluating risk of bias in a cohort study. Transparent and rigorous assessment using this tool will assist reviewers in understanding the validity and relevance of the results and conclusions drawn from a systematic review that includes cohort studies. This may contribute to better evidence-based decision-making in health care. This paper discusses the key changes made to the tool, justifications for these changes, and provides practical guidance on how this tool should be interpreted and applied by systematic reviewers.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142037276","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":"Economic evaluations of neglected tropical disease interventions in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review protocol.","authors":"Biswajit Mahapatra, Nirmalya Mukherjee, Sajda Khatoon, Paramita Bhattacharya, Pritha Das, Omesh Bharti, Denny John","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00339","DOIUrl":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00339","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this systematic review is to provide an overview of economic evaluation studies of interventions for neglected tropical diseases in low- and/or middle-income countries.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The majority of people most susceptible to neglected tropical diseases reside in low- and middle-income countries and suffer significant economic impact due to these diseases. The World Health Organization suggests utilizing a systematic and cross-cutting approach with multiple interventions to lessen the neglected tropical disease burden.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>Studies will be eligible for inclusion if they include economic evaluations of interventions for neglected tropical diseases and are conducted in low- and/or middle-income country settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A preliminary search of MEDLINE (PubMed) was undertaken using MeSH terms, such as neglected tropical disease, economic evaluation, therapeutics, low- and/or middle-income countries . Two reviewers will screen titles and abstracts independently, followed by a full-text review against the inclusion criteria. Disagreements will be resolved by discussion or with a third reviewer. To assess methodological quality, the JBI checklist for economic evaluations will be used. For economic evaluations, data will be extracted using the standardized JBI data extraction form. The Dominance Ranking Matrix will be used to summarize and compare the results of different types of economic evaluations. Cost per quality adjusted life year gained and cost per disability adjusted life year averted will be measures for economic evaluation. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach will be used to assess the certainty of economic evidence, such as resource use and costs.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42017070386.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":"1582-1593"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140094808","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 and safety of enhanced postoperative care units for non-cardiac, non-neurological surgery: a systematic review protocol.","authors":"Liem Tran, Cindy Stern, Philip Harford, Guy Ludbrook, Ashley Whitehorn","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00439","DOIUrl":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00439","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The proposed systematic review will evaluate the evidence on the effectiveness and safety of enhanced post-operative care (EPC) units on patient and health service outcomes in adult patients following non-cardiac, non-neurological surgery.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The increase in surgical procedures globally has placed a significant economic and societal burden on health care systems. Recognizing this challenge, EPC units have emerged as a model of care, bridging the gap between traditional, ward-level care and intensive care. EPC offers benefits such as higher staff-to-patient ratios, close patient monitoring (eg, invasive monitoring), and access to critical interventions (eg, vasopressor support). However, there is a lack of well-established guidelines and empirical evidence regarding the safety and effectiveness of EPC units for adult patients following surgery.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>This review will include studies involving adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing any elective or emergency non-cardiac, non-neurological surgery, who have been admitted to an EPC unit. Experimental, quasi-experimental, and observational study designs will be eligible.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review will follow the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of effectiveness. The search strategy will identify published and unpublished studies from the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and Scopus, as well as gray literature sources, from 2010 to the present. Two independent reviewers will screen studies, extract data, and critically appraise selected studies using standardized JBI assessment tools. Where feasible, a statistical meta-analysis will be performed to combine study findings. The certainty of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023455269.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":"1626-1635"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140120985","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 home residents' experiences with socially assistive technologies and the effectiveness of these technologies: a mixed methods systematic review.","authors":"Marilyn Macdonald, Allyson Gallant, Lori Weeks, Alannah Delahunty-Pike, Elaine Moody, Damilola Iduye, Melissa Rothfus, Chelsa States, Ruth Martin-Misener, Melissa Ignaczak, Julie Caruso, Janet Simm, Andrea Mayo","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00021","DOIUrl":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00021","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective: &lt;/strong&gt;The objectives of this review were to determine the effectiveness of socially assistive technologies for improving depression, loneliness, and social interaction among residents of long-term care (LTC) homes, and to explore the experiences of residents of LTC homes with socially assistive technologies.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction: &lt;/strong&gt;Globally, the number of older adults (≥ 65 years) and the demand for LTC services are expected to increase over the next 30 years. Individuals within this population are at increased risk of experiencing depression, loneliness, and social isolation. The exploration of the extent to which socially assistive technologies may aid in improving loneliness and depression while supporting social interactions is essential to supporting a sustainable LTC sector.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Inclusion criteria: &lt;/strong&gt;This mixed methods systematic review included studies on the experiences of older adults in LTC homes using socially assistive technologies, as well as studies on the effectiveness of these technologies for improving depression, loneliness, and social interaction. Older adults were defined as people 65 years of age and older. We considered studies examining socially assistive technologies, such as computers, smart phones, tablets, and associated applications.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods: &lt;/strong&gt;A JBI mixed methods convergent, segregated approach was used. CINAHL (EBSCOhost), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, APA PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), and Scopus databases were searched on January 18, 2022, to identify published studies. The search for unpublished studies and gray literature included ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, Open Access Theses and Dissertations, Google, and the websites of professional organizations associated with LTC. No language or geographical restrictions were placed on the search. Titles, abstracts, and full texts of included studies were screened by 2 reviewers independently. Included studies underwent quality appraisal and data extraction. Quantitative and qualitative data findings were analyzed separately and then integrated. Where possible, quantitative data were synthesized using comparative meta-analyses with a fixed-effects model.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;From 12,536 records identified through the search, 14 studies were included. Quantitative (n=8), mixed methods (n=3), and qualitative (n=3) approaches were used in the included studies, with half (n=7) using quasi-experimental designs. All studies received moderate to high-quality appraisal scores. Comparative meta-analyses for depression and loneliness scores did not find any significant differences, and narrative findings were mixed. Qualitative meta-aggregation identified 1 synthesized finding (Matching technology functionality to user for enhanced well-being) derived from 2 categories (Enhanced sense of well-being, and Mismatch between technology and resident ability).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions: &lt;/strong&gt;Residents'","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":"1410-1459"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141443474","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":"Nursing-sensitive outcomes for the provision of pain management in pediatric populations with intellectual disabilities: a scoping review protocol.","authors":"Morgan MacNeil, Helen McCord, Lynsey Alcock, Amy Mireault, Melissa Rothfus, Marsha Campbell-Yeo","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00133","DOIUrl":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00133","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this review is to identify and map nursing-sensitive outcomes for the provision of pain management in pediatric populations with intellectual disabilities that are currently reported in the literature.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The experience of pain is highly individualized and subjective, with physiological, biochemical, and psychological differences contributing to pain perception. Pediatric populations with intellectual disabilities are at increased risk of ubiquitous pain exposure. Pain management effectiveness can be determined through the measurement of nursing-sensitive outcomes, which have not been mapped in the context of pediatric populations with intellectual disabilities.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, and gray literature discussing nursing pain management in pediatric populations with intellectual disabilities will be included. No date limits will be applied. Only studies published in English will be considered.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review will be guided by the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. The search strategy will aim to locate published and unpublished literature using the databases CINAHL (EBSCOhost), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Scopus, PsycINFO (ProQuest), LILACS, SciELO, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. Titles and abstracts, and then full-text studies, will be selected and reviewed by 2 independent researchers against the inclusion criteria. Content analysis using the NNQR-C, C-HOBIC, NDNQI, and Donabedian model frameworks will be used for data extraction and organization, accompanied by charted results and narrative summaries, as appropriate.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":"1645-1653"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140892179","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":"Nurses' perceptions of reasons for missed nursing care in hospitals: a qualitative systematic review protocol.","authors":"Sara Mandahl Ellehave, Siri Lygum Voldbjerg, Philippa Rasmussen, Britt Laugesen","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00367","DOIUrl":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00367","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this review is to identify and synthesize the best available evidence on nurses' perceptions of the reasons for missed nursing care in hospitals.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Missed nursing care in hospitals is a complex and global problem affecting patients, nurses, and the health care system. An in-depth understanding of reasons for missed nursing care is essential to prevent it from happening in hospitals. Nurses' perceptions of reasons for missed nursing care in hospitals are related to the care environment, such as staff levels, nurses' workload, levels of experience and competencies, incomplete communication, and poor teamwork. The reasons are multifaceted, and there is a need to synthesize qualitative evidence on nurses' perceptions of the reasons for missed nursing care in hospitals.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>The phenomenon of interest is nurses' perceptions of reasons for missed nursing care, which is defined as care that is either delayed or partially or entirely missed. Studies of nurses with any level of experience, training, or education will be eligible for inclusion. This systematic review will consider qualitative studies that include the perceptions of nurses working in hospital settings, either inpatient or outpatient settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following an initial search in PubMed, a full search strategy will be conducted in CINAHL (EBSCOhost), PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and GreyNet International. The JBI approach will inform study selection, critical appraisal, data extraction, and meta-aggregation. Confidence in the findings will be assessed in accordance with the ConQual approach.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023438198.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":"1594-1600"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140120987","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":"The time to act is now! The imperative of resident quality of life in long-term care.","authors":"Matthias Hoben, Charlotte Berendonk","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-24-00359","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00359","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":"22 8","pages":"1408-1409"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141976844","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}