Campbell Systematic Reviews最新文献

{"title":"Protocol: Proactive resilience programmes for improving resilience and psychological adaptation in employees in high-risk occupations: A systematic review","authors":"Trine Filges,&nbsp;Anja Bondebjerg Mølgaard,&nbsp;Geir Smedslund,&nbsp;Malene W. Kildemoes,&nbsp;Elizabeth Bengtsen","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70007","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: What are the effects of proactive resilience programmes offered to employees in high-risk occupations on resilience and psychological adaptation?</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70007","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142708315","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":"SHOW ME the evidence: Features of an approach to reliably deliver research evidence to those who need it","authors":"John N. Lavis,&nbsp;Jeremy M. Grimshaw,&nbsp;Ruth Stewart,&nbsp;Julian Elliott,&nbsp;Will Moy,&nbsp;Joerg J. Meerpohl","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70010","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.70010","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;The world is poised for a step-change improvement in how we use evidence to address societal challenges.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Given the speed at which plans are being made to support this once-in-a-generation transformation, the Implementation Council of the Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges developed a working version of the features of an approach to reliably getting research evidence to those who need it and achieved consensus among leaders from the Implementation Council, as well as the Alliance for Living Evidence (Alive) Council and Evidence Synthesis International (ESI).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The 100+ contributing authors from across the ‘evidence synthesis and support’ world want to ensure that our future plans are firmly rooted in an agreed-upon summary of all we have learned together over these past four or so years, and to signal a mutual accountability among many of the key players involved in providing evidence support that we will each do our part in delivering on the promise that motivates these plans.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Given that much of the momentum for transformation is currently focused on living evidence syntheses and the infrastructure needed to support them, we give this form of evidence disproportionate focus here.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Actions speak louder than words. If we are to deliver on the promise of a step-change improvement in how we use evidence to address societal challenges, then each of us needs to do our part to put in place the features of an approach to reliably getting research evidence to those who need it. Funding can enable it. Coordination can facilitate it. Reporting can celebrate it (and shame a go-it-alone ethos). Evaluation of our approaches can support continuous improvement. But only our actions can make it happen.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;You may already be doing great work. Please keep it up.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you want to embrace a new approach and don't know where you can best fit in, check out the Global Evidence Commission's work in formalizing and strengthening national (and subnational) evidence support systems, enhancing and leveraging the global evidence architecture, and putting evidence at the centre of everyday life. Or approach one of the Implementation Council members who you see doing exemplary work in your part of the world, in your type of role, in your sector, with your form of evidence, or with an innovation like AI-powered living evidence synthesis or storytelling that draws on both research evidence and Indigenous ways of knowing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;JL and JG are co-leads of the Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges. All authors are members of its Implementation Council. JL is council chair, RS is director, JE is treasurer and founder of the host entity, and WM is council member at the Alliance for Living Evidence (Alive). JG is cochair and RS and WM are members of the executive committee of Evidence Synthesis International. All authors are affiliated with its partner organizations. RS is a Fiduciary Officer for the South ","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11562649/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142629905","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":"PROTOCOL: Effectiveness of social accountability interventions in low- and middle-income countries: An evidence and gap map","authors":"Mirza Hassan,&nbsp;Howard White,&nbsp;Iffat Zahan,&nbsp;Ashrita Saran,&nbsp;Shamael Ahmed,&nbsp;Semab Rahman,&nbsp;Shabnaz Zubaid","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1430","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.1430","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for an evidence and gap map, which aims to map the existing evidence on the effectiveness of social accountability interventions in low- and middle-income countries. This map will help users identify the size and quality of the evidence base, guide strategic program development, and highlight gaps for future research. The map will cover studies published after 2000, including systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, non-experimental designs, and before-after designs.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11538311/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142591840","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":"New search guidance for Campbell systematic reviews","authors":"Heather MacDonald,&nbsp;Sarah Young","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70005","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;Searching for studies in systematic reviews is a critical step that lays the foundation for the remaining stages of the review and synthesis. Searching in the social sciences and other disciplines covered by the Campbell Collaboration comes with added complexities and challenges related to finding and organizing evidence across a rich diversity of sources. To assist Campbell authors and information specialists supporting Campbell reviews in this process, we recently published new guidance (MacDonald et al., &lt;span&gt;2024&lt;/span&gt;) based on the previous guidance document originally published in 2010 and updated in 2017. The guide was revised to reflect current Campbell Collaboration areas of practice and recommendations in the recently updated Methodological Expectations of Campbell Collaboration Intervention Reviews (MECCIR) (Dewidar et al., &lt;span&gt;2024&lt;/span&gt;), capture evolving practice and strategies for searching, and update links and descriptions of individual bibliographic and other resources. It includes helpful templates, lists, and checklists to assist authors in meeting the expectations for conduct and reporting of Campbell systematic review searches. Here, we provide an overview and highlight some of the key changes and new additions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The new guidance includes several new sections. The &lt;i&gt;Section 1.0 About this Guide&lt;/i&gt; describes who this guide is for: both review authors and information specialists. Also new is the section &lt;i&gt;2.0 Working with an Information Specialist&lt;/i&gt; which explains the role of the information specialist in the systematic review process. Searching for and retrieving information is a key component of systematic reviews and information specialists, as experts in search, can play a supporting or collaborative role in the production of these reviews.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In the section on &lt;i&gt;4.0 Sources to Search&lt;/i&gt;, the list of sources has been placed in an Appendix which can be found on the Open Science Framework (OSF). The list can now be updated frequently so that accurate and up-to-date information is available to researchers. As well in this edition preprint repositories have been added to the list of potential sources of studies.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;5.0 Planning the Search&lt;/i&gt; has a new section on using seed articles, or benchmarking studies, to help in the construction and validation of the search strategy. Using a seed article set can help identify search terms and ensure the search strategy finds relevant studies. Also new to the &lt;i&gt;5.3 Search updates&lt;/i&gt; subsection, is the practice of checking for retracted studies. While the guidance on how to deal with retracted studies is still under debate (Faggion, &lt;span&gt;2019&lt;/span&gt;), checking for retractions, corrections, errata and other areas of concern related to included studies should be a routine step in any review.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The author team updated the &lt;i&gt;6.0 Designing Search Strategies&lt;/i&gt; section with a new subsection on identifying search terms (both controlled vocabulary and keyword","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70005","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142579673","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":"PROTOCOL: Is the CEO/employee pay ratio related to firm performance in publicly traded companies?","authors":"Denise M. Rousseau,&nbsp;Cédric Velghe,&nbsp;Ryan Splenda,&nbsp;Byeong Jo Kim,&nbsp;Jangbum Lee","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70003","url":null,"abstract":"<p>One goal of this systematic review is to assess whether the pay ratio, that is, the relative difference between the compensation a firm's CEO receives and that of its nonmanagerial employees, is related to subsequent firm performance. A second goal is to identify factors influencing this relationship across publicly traded firms, including the pay ratio's perceived fairness by employees, the firm's business strategy, and related factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70003","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142579672","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":"PROTOCOL: Risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse and interventions against child sexual abuse: An umbrella review","authors":"Izabela Zych,&nbsp;Inmaculada Marín-López","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70000","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70000","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell Collaboration systematic review. Our objective is to conduct an umbrella review to synthesize published and unpublished systematic reviews focused on risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse and effectiveness of interventions against child sexual abuse perpetration and victimization. Specific research questions are: (i) what are the risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse victimization, and what are their relative strength and/or magnitude for predicting child sexual abuse victimization? (ii) what are the risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse perpetration, and what are their relative strength and/or magnitude for predicting child sexual abuse perpetration? (iii) are interventions aimed at reducing and/or preventing child sexual abuse effective? (iv) what are the moderators that increase or decrease effectiveness of the interventions? Efforts to decrease child sexual abuse need to be based on research, but more accessible evidence regarding the breadth of risk and protective factors and effectiveness of interventions to reduce child sexual abuse needs to be provided to policymakers. This will be the first umbrella review that comprehensively synthesizes findings of the previous systematic reviews that focus on risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse and interventions to prevent or reduce child sexual abuse. The results will be able to inform enhanced prevention policy and programs, and regulatory measures for specific contexts of child sexual abuse.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70000","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142579671","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":"PROTOCOL: The association between adverse childhood experiences and employment outcomes: Protocol for a systematic review","authors":"Amarech Obse,&nbsp;Evdoxia Gkaintatzi,&nbsp;Paul McCrone","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70002","url":null,"abstract":"<p>There is growing evidence of a link between adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and health and economic outcomes. Previous systematic reviews synthesised evidence of the relationships between ACEs and various health and some economic outcomes such as healthcare costs and educational attainment. The primary aim of this systematic review is to synthesise the evidence on the relationship between ACEs and employment outcomes. MEDLINE, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection (APA PsycInfo), ECONLIT, Sociological Abstracts, Social Science Research Network (SSRN) and Scopus will be searched using a predefined search strategy. Cross-sectional, cohort, or longitudinal studies published between 2000 and 2024 will be included. ACEs include abuse, neglect, household dysfunction, bullying, foster care, and racism that occur during childhood or adolescence. Employment outcomes include employment status, occupation, and income. Risk of bias of individual studies will be assessed using appropriate NHLBI-NHI quality assessment tools for each type of study. Proportions or means will be used to analyse and compare outcomes. If data allows, we will conduct meta-analysis. Sub-group analyses (e.g., by gender, age group, type and number of ACEs, and intersections of identities of study subjects will be conducted. Further analysis will be conducted to assess the mediators of the effect of ACEs on employment outcomes. By sythesising evidence of the association between ACEs and economic wellbeing later in life, this review will add evidence to the broader literature on poverty. The results of this synthesis will inform policies on child welfare and employment. Results of the review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70002","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142563012","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":"PROTOCOL: Employee work motivation, effort, and performance under a merit pay system: A systematic review","authors":"Cédric Velghe,&nbsp;Anders McIlquham-Schmidt,&nbsp;Pinar Celik,&nbsp;Martin Storme,&nbsp;Stan De Spiegelaere","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70001","DOIUrl":"10.1002/cl2.70001","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: One goal of this systematic review is to identify whether merit pay predicts employee work motivation, effort, and performance; a second goal is to determine whether the association between merit pay and subsequent employee work motivation, effort, and performance is stronger depending on the actual relationship between the performance ratings and merit increases received, as well as on the perceived relationship by employees between their performance and their pay; a third goal is to identify whether the association between merit pay and subsequent employee motivation depends on what type of motivation is measured (i.e., intrinsic vs. extrinsic/general work motivation).</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11522831/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142548097","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":"The FRIENDS preventive programme for reducing anxiety symptoms in children and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Trine Filges,&nbsp;Geir Smedslund,&nbsp;Tine Eriksen,&nbsp;Kirsten Birkefoss,&nbsp;Malene Wallach Kildemoes","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1443","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1443","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Background&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Anxiety and stress responses are often considered normative experiences, and children and adolescents may benefit from anxiety prevention programmes. One such programme is FRIENDS which is based on a firm theoretical model which addresses cognitive, physiological and behavioural processes. FRIENDS is manualised and can, thus, easily be integrated into school curriculums.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Objectives&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;What are the effects of the FRIENDS preventive programme on anxiety symptoms in children and adolescents? Do the effects differ between participant age groups, participant socio-economic status, type of prevention, type of provider, country of implementation and/or implementation issues in relation to the booster sessions and parent sessions?&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Search Methods&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;The database searches were carried out in September 2023, and other sources were searched in October 2023. We searched to identify both published and unpublished literature. A date restriction from 1998 and onwards was applied.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Selection Criteria&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;The intervention was three age-appropriate preventive anxiety programmes: Fun FRIENDS, FRIENDS for Life, and My FRIENDS Youth. Primary outcome was anxiety symptoms and secondary outcome was self-esteem. Studies that used a control group were eligible, whereas qualitative approaches were not.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Data Collection and Analysis&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;The number of potentially relevant studies was 2865. Forty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-eight studies were used in the data synthesis. Four studies had a critical risk of bias. Six studies did not report data that enabled calculation of effect sizes and standard errors. Two studies had partial overlap of data to other studies used, and two were written in Persian. Meta-analyses were conducted on each outcome separately. All analyses were inverse variance weighted using random effects statistical models.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Main Results&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Studies came from 15 different countries. Intervention start varied from 2001 to 2016. The average number of participants analysed was 240, and the average number of controls was 212. Twenty-five comparisons reported on anxiety symptoms post-intervention. The weighted average standardised mean difference ","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1443","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142451276","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":"Protocol: Assessing the impact of interest-holder engagement on guideline development: A systematic review","authors":"Lyubov Lytvyn,&nbsp;Jennifer Petkovic,&nbsp;Joanne Khabsa,&nbsp;Olivia Magwood,&nbsp;Pauline Campbell,&nbsp;Ian D. Graham,&nbsp;Kevin Pottie,&nbsp;Julia Bidonde,&nbsp;Heather Limburg,&nbsp;Danielle Pollock,&nbsp;Elie A. Akl,&nbsp;Thomas W. Concannon,&nbsp;Peter Tugwell","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1444","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1444","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The objective of this review is to identify and synthesize empirical research on the impacts of interest-holder engagement on the guideline development process and content. Our research questions are as follows: (1) What are the empirical examples of impact on the process in health guideline development across any of the 18 steps of the GIN-McMaster checklist? (2) What are the empirical examples of impact on the content in health guideline development across any of the 18 steps of the GIN-McMaster checklist?</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1444","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142439039","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}