Campbell Systematic Reviews最新文献

{"title":"From Rapid Reviews to Rapid Living Evidence Synthesis: Lessons From COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Reviews for Canadian Public Health Decision-Making.","authors":"Nana Wu, Keven Joyal-Desmarais, Lori-Ann Linkins, Iván Darío Flórez, Simon L Bacon","doi":"10.1177/18911803261454706","DOIUrl":"10.1177/18911803261454706","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic demanded evidence synthesis approaches that could keep pace with rapidly evolving science and urgent policy needs. Rapid reviews and living evidence syntheses (LES) emerged as critical methodological responses, yet limited guidance exists for teams undertaking such work, particularly regarding the operational challenges of sustained production, multi-team coordination, and the transition from rapid reviews to living formats under emergency conditions.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This paper aims to document and appraise methodological decisions made across each component of the synthesis process and their rationale; identify the contextual factors, coordination mechanisms, and infrastructure that enabled or constrained synthesis implementation under emergency conditions; and derive practical recommendations for evidence synthesis teams, funders and commissioners, and methodologists.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We present a structured reflective process evaluation of our experience producing three rapid LESs on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness as part of COVID-END in Canada, addressing vaccine effectiveness in adults (short-term and long-term) and children/adolescents, collectively producing 79 versions over approximately two years. Drawing on a Context-Mechanism-Outcome (CMO) lens, we examine eight core methodological processes, each time highlighting: the methodological decision and its rationale; the challenges encountered; and the lessons learned.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Key insights include: decision-maker engagement played a central role in methodological decisions, directly determining scope boundaries, update frequency, and presentation formats; the multi-team coordination structure was essential to quality under streamlined methods, with cross-team verification partially offsetting the validity risks of single-reviewer screening; choosing between narrative synthesis (compared to meta-analytic approaches) in two of three products reflected capacity constraints during emergency production, a distinction with implications for how such adaptations are evaluated against existing guidance; automation produced considerable efficiency gains but required added development capacity and resources, demonstrating that teams should plan and budget for automation from the outset rather than absorbing its demands reactively during production; and coverage was acceptable for decision timelines. External cross-checks identified five studies not captured by our searches across the entire project, of which only two were ultimately eligible for synthesis. Emergency production meant that key process records, including change logs, per-cycle search records, and pilot screening agreement data, were not systematically captured. Future teams should plan to assemble a minimal transparency package from the outset. A minimum viable LES framework is proposed comprising minimum infrastructure, minim","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"22 2","pages":"18911803261454706"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2026-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13251847/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148228667","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: Artificial Intelligence and Other Digital Tools Used by, and for Community Health Workers (CHWs) in Low and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) to Improve Outcomes and Increase Effectiveness: An Evidence and Gap Map.","authors":"William C Philbrick, Jacob Milnor, Feven Tassaw Mekuria, Perpetua Mbachu, Patricia Mechael, Brian Ssennoga, Zeus Aranda","doi":"10.1177/18911803261439093","DOIUrl":"10.1177/18911803261439093","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This is the protocol for the development of a Campbell Collaboration evidence and gap map (EGM). This protocol presents the methodology for developing the EGM. The objectives of this EGM include answering the following questions related to the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and other digital health tools by, and for CHWs in LMICs. (1) What are the primary digital tools used by and for CHWs in LMICs, and for what purposes? (2) To what extent, if any, is AI specifically being utilized by or for CHWs? (3) What is the empirical evidence supporting the effectiveness of such tools, including AI, and the quality of that evidence? (4) Does the use of digital tools and job aids by CHWs in LMICs contribute to (1) greater effectiveness and efficiency in carrying out assigned CHWs' responsibilities; and (2) better health and other well-being outcomes for the clients and communities the CHWs serve? (5) What are the risks and drawbacks of using digital tools, especially AI? What safeguarding strategies are employed to mitigate these risks? (6) What are the primary gaps in the evidence for using digital tools, including AI, used by, and for CHWs in LMICs?</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"22 2","pages":"18911803261439093"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13251846/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148228603","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":"Context, Mechanisms and Outcomes of Reasonable Adjustments Across Acute Hospital Settings for People With Intellectual Disabilities: A Scoping Review Protocol.","authors":"Mairead Moloney, Laurence Taggart, Owen Doody","doi":"10.1177/18911803261453950","DOIUrl":"10.1177/18911803261453950","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This is a protocol for a Campbell scoping review. The objective is to map the existing evidence on the implementation of reasonable adjustments in acute hospital settings for people with intellectual disabilities, using a realist lens. This involves examining how contextual factors interact with underlying mechanisms to influence outcomes related to equitable access, quality of care, and health experiences. In the context of healthcare for people with intellectual disabilities, reasonable adjustments can help bridge health inequities. There is a strong evidence base in the literature for reasonable adjustments, however there is little evidence of implementation across acute hospitals. Exploring this topic using a realist lens of context, mechanism and outcomes may help identify the underlying factors influencing implementation of reasonable adjustments in clinical practice. The review will follow the JBI scoping review methodology and will be reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. Evidence sources examining reasonable adjustments implemented by healthcare staff to support people with intellectual disabilities in acute hospital settings will be included. A comprehensive search strategy will be applied across the following information sources: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Academic Search Complete, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, PsycINFO, JBI Evidence Synthesis, and The Cochrane Database of Systematic Review. Additionally, a rigorous search of grey literature will be conducted across defined databases, search engines and repositories. Sources will be limited to the English language, with no time limit imposed. Data will be extracted using a table designed for the review and following qualitative content analysis, results will be presented in tabular form with narrative summaries.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"22 2","pages":"18911803261453950"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13251843/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148228403","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: Multisource Feedback and Work Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Emilia Wietrak, Iulia Alina Cioca, Jonny Gifford, Cristóbal Urbano","doi":"10.1177/18911803261451264","DOIUrl":"10.1177/18911803261451264","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Multisource feedback (MSF) is widely used in performance management and leadership development, yet there is still no consensus on whether it predicts improvements in employee performance. This study presents a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating whether the use of person-moderated MSF predicts changes in individual work performance. The review is guided by an integrative framework drawing on feedback intervention theory and existing MSF models. A systematic search and meta-analytic synthesis of the empirical literature will be conducted, and potential moderators of the MSF-performance relationship will be examined to identify under what conditions effects occur. By clarifying whether and when MSF contributes to performance improvement, the study aims to provide evidence-based insights for researchers and practitioners designing feedback systems in organizations. The review will be guided by the following questions: 1. Does the use of MSF predict changes in work performance? 2. Do certain moderators affect the relationship between MSF and changes in work performance? The potential moderators are: • The number of feedback sources • The characteristic of feedback (positive vs. negative vs. evenly balanced) • Employee perceptions of and reactions to feedback • Psychological individual differences • Follow-up activities • The intended purpose of MSF • The format of feedback • The delivery mode of feedback • Socio-cultural individual differences.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"22 2","pages":"18911803261451264"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13251835/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148228586","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":"Barriers and Facilitators to Interest-Holder Engagement in Health Guideline Development: A Qualitative Evidence Synthesis.","authors":"Olivia Magwood, Jennifer Petkovic, Lyubov Lytvyn, Joanne Khabsa, Andrea Raymond, Marisha Palm, Danielle Pollock, Pauline Campbell, Thomas W Concannon, Alex Young Soo Lee, Nicole Skoetz, Sean Grant, Sumanth Nagraj Kumbargere, Jessica Tiilikainen, Arnav Agarwal, Heather Limburg, Leonila F Dans, Alison Riddle, Elie A Akl, Vivian Welch, Peter Tugwell","doi":"10.1177/18911803261435889","DOIUrl":"10.1177/18911803261435889","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Health guidelines are important resources for informing decisions made by health practitioners, patients, caregivers, policymakers, and other interest-holders. Interest-holder engagement in health guideline development can improve the relevance of recommendations, promote considerations of equity, and support implementation. To facilitate efficient and effective health guideline development, there is a need for a comprehensive, global, evidence-based guidance for interest-holder engagement in guideline development. This paper synthesises the barriers and facilitators to interest-holder engagement in guideline development. Several systematic reviews have examined the topic of interest-holder engagement in guideline development, but few have explicitly focused on barriers and facilitators to engagement and the majority of these were related to patients. With increased recognition of the value of broad interest-holder engagement, understanding the barriers and facilitators to interest-holder engagement is key to developing a relevant and inclusive health guideline.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objectives: &lt;/strong&gt;The objective of this review is to identify and synthesise the reported evidence on barriers and facilitators to interest-holder engagement in health guideline development. We address this objective through two research questions: 1. What are the reported barriers to interest-holder engagement in health guideline development across the 18 topics of the GIN-McMaster checklist? 2. What are the reported facilitators to interest-holder engagement in health guideline development across the 18 topics of the GIN-McMaster checklist?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Search methods: &lt;/strong&gt;We searched five major electronic databases (MEDLINE (OVID), Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; EBSCO), EMBASE (OVID), PsycInfo (OVID), Scopus, and Sociological Abstracts. We also conducted an extensive grey literature search using the websites of agencies who actively engage interest-holders in research and/or guideline-producing agencies, such as PCORI, WHO and GIN. We searched from database inception up to the 26th September, 2022. Backward and forward citation tracking was performed on included articles to identify other eligible studies.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Selection criteria: &lt;/strong&gt;We included primary research studies which qualitatively reported on the barriers or facilitators to interest-holder engagement in health guideline development. This included qualitative or mixed method research studies using methods such as interviews, focus groups, or surveys to collect participant experiences; case studies of existing programmes; and process evaluation studies. We excluded non-empirical publications including commentaries and editorials. We excluded publications with incomplete data, including conference abstracts and protocols. We defined interest-holders as \"any individual or group who is responsible for or affected by health- and he","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"22 2","pages":"18911803261435889"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13251851/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148228439","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: Psychosocial Interventions Addressing Mental Health Outcomes Among Hospital-Based Healthcare Workers in United States Hospitals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Harly M Blumhagen, Brandy R Maynard","doi":"10.1177/18911803261451268","DOIUrl":"10.1177/18911803261451268","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Healthcare workers employed in hospital settings face significant occupational stressors that place them at elevated risk for a range of mental health outcomes, including burnout, depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, secondary traumatic stress, compassion fatigue, and moral injury. These challenges carry serious consequences for healthcare worker well-being, patient safety, care quality, and workforce retention. Despite growing recognition of this crisis and recent federal legislation allowing funding to address healthcare worker mental health, no comprehensive synthesis exists identifying which psychosocial interventions are most effective for this population in the United States.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to examine the effects of psychosocial interventions on mental health outcomes among healthcare workers employed in United States hospital settings, to identify moderators or intervention effectiveness, and to provide actionable evidence to inform program development, resource allocation, and policy implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We will search eight electronic databases and complete an extensive grey literature search to identify studies published from 2010 to present. Eligible study designs include randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cluster randomized controlled trials (CRCTs), and quasi-experimental designs (QEDs) with a control group examining psychosocial interventions delivered within or through hospital-affiliated systems in the United States. Participants will include hospital-based healthcare workers who provide direct clinical care. Primary outcomes include burnout, depression symptoms, anxiety symptoms, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), secondary traumatic stress, vicarious trauma, compassion fatigue, and moral injury, assessed using validated measures. Secondary outcomes include turnover intention and turnover rates, extracted when reported. Two reviewers will independently screen studies and extract data. Risk of bias will be assessed using the ROB 2 tool for RCTs and the ROBINS-I V2 tool for QEDs. Where sufficient data are available, meta-analyses will be conducted using a random-effects model with robust variance estimation (RVE) to account for dependent effect sizes. Heterogeneity will be assessed using the Q statistic and I² statistic, interpreted alongside 95% prediction intervals and visual inspection of forest plots. Moderator analyses will explore intervention type, healthcare worker role, treatment duration, delivery format, and facilitator type as potential sources of heterogeneity.</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"22 2","pages":"18911803261451268"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13251841/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148228577","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":"Effects of Social Prescribing for Older Adults: An Evidence and Gap Map.","authors":"Elizabeth Tanjong Ghogomu, Vivian Welch, Mojde Yaqubi, Omar Dewidar, Victoria Barbeau, Sierra Dowling, Yanfei Li, Hind Sabri, Mohamed Elmestekawy, Esam Aljufri, Bernia Aliyar, Yuewen Pan, Abdulah Al Ameer, Ali Al Zubaidi, Mostafa Bondok, Waleed Kojan, Mohamad Tarek Madani, Kathy Tong, Adedeji Irefin, Isha Roi Rampersad, Zoe Tsai, Fatima Jahel, Srija Biswas, Kiffer G Card, Sonia Hsiung, Caitlin Muhl, Michelle L A Nelson, Douglas M Salzwedel, Marianne Saragosa, Cindy Yu, Kate Mulligan, Paul Hébert","doi":"10.1177/18911803261435893","DOIUrl":"10.1177/18911803261435893","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Many factors such as declining physical function, low socioeconomic status and unemployment play a role in the complex health and social needs of older adults. While healthcare providers can assist in treating health conditions, non-clinical interventions are most likely needed to meet their social needs and improve wellbeing. Social prescribing has been introduced to help primary care providers and other connectors meet patient's social needs that contribute to poor health and inequalities. With the increasing recognition of these complex challenges, decision-makers need to know which social prescribing interventions or social prescriptions are effective for older adults.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objectives: &lt;/strong&gt;To map the available evidence on the effectiveness of social prescribing interventions and social prescriptions addressing a non-medical health-related need for older adults in clinical and community settings.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Search methods: &lt;/strong&gt;We searched the following databases from inception until November 14, 2023, with no language restrictions: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, EBM Reviews, Elsevier Scopus, Epistemonikos, CABI CAB Direct, NIHR PROSPERO, WHO Global Index Medicus, Clarivate Web of Science Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Conference Proceedings, Clarivate Korean Citation Index (KCI), Clarivate SciELO Citation Index and Google Scholar via Harzing Publish or Perish.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Selection criteria: &lt;/strong&gt;Titles and abstracts and full text of potentially eligible articles were independently screened in duplicate for systematic reviews and studies with concurrent control groups assessing the effectiveness of social prescribing and social prescription interventions on the wellbeing of older adults. Conflicts were resolved through consensus.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Data collection and analysis: &lt;/strong&gt;We developed and pilot-tested a data collection form in EPPI-Reviewer. Data was extracted and coded individually by reviewers based on an intervention-outcome framework which was also used to define the dimensions of the evidence and gap map. Data extraction was validated by a second reviewer for 20%. We assessed the quality of reviews using the AMSTAR2 tool. The quality of primary studies was not assessed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Main results: &lt;/strong&gt;We included 662 articles (430 primary studies, 232 reviews) that assessed the effectiveness of social prescribing interventions or social prescriptions targeting non-medical health-related social needs of older adults to improve their health and wellbeing. Over 65% of the articles were published in 2019 or later.AMSTAR2 quality was rated as critically low for 55%, low for 31%, moderate for 6% and high for only 4% of systematic reviews. Of the included primary studies, 48% were randomized controlled trials and 52% were non-randomized studies.Most of the evidence was from high-income countries (78% of reviews and 93% of primary studies), few from upper-middle (25% of rev","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"22 2","pages":"18911803261435893"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13251852/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148228673","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":"Gender-Responsive Macro-Level Policies and Women's Economic Empowerment in Sub-Saharan Africa: An Evidence and Gap Map.","authors":"Clarice Panyin Nyan, Takyiwaa Manuh, Sheila Agyemang Oppong, Miriam Oppong, Kwadwo Danso-Mensah, Isaac Letsa, Nana Esi Badu-Ansah, David Sarfo Ameyaw","doi":"10.1177/18911803261450808","DOIUrl":"10.1177/18911803261450808","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Women's economic empowerment is a key development goal; yet, significant gender inequalities in employment, income, and economic decision-making persist in low- and middle-income countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. Even with economic growth, women are often stuck in informal and precarious jobs, facing structural barriers related to labor markets, access to finance, asset ownership, and restrictive legal frameworks. Most existing research on Women's economic empowerment has focused on micro-level interventions, such as financial support, training, and mentorship, providing limited insights into the impact of macro-level and structural policies. New research suggests that macroeconomic, fiscal, and labor market policies are not gender-neutral; they can shape employment opportunities and income security differently, particularly in contexts with unequal unpaid care responsibilities. However, evidence on macro-level, gender-responsive policies and their effects on women's economic empowerment remains scattered across various policy areas and outcomes in sub-Saharan Africa. This Evidence and Gap Map systematically identifies, categorizes, and maps the existing evidence to facilitate informed policy-making, prioritize research, and guide future synthesis.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objectives: &lt;/strong&gt;To map evidence on gender-responsive macro-level policies and their impact on women's economic empowerment in sub-Saharan Africa.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Search methods: &lt;/strong&gt;From January to September 2024, we searched the following databases, limiting our results to English language publications: CAB Abstracts, Web of Science, Dimensions, and Scopus. We also utilized gray literature sources, including organizational databases, Google Scholar, and registries.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Selection criteria: &lt;/strong&gt;Two reviewers independently screened the titles, abstracts, and full texts of potentially eligible articles to determine their inclusion based on the specified eligibility criteria. Studies were included if they focused on populations in sub-Saharan Africa, examined macro-level gender-responsive policies, reported outcomes related to women's economic empowerment, and utilized either primary or systematic or scoping review study designs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Data collection and analysis: &lt;/strong&gt;We developed and pilot-tested a data extraction code set in EPPI-Reviewer, where data were extracted and coded in duplicate. To evaluate the quality of the reviews, we employed the AMSTAR2 tool; however, we did not assess the quality of the primary studies.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Main results: &lt;/strong&gt;This Evidence and Gap Map includes a total of 245 articles made up of 224 primary studies and 21 systematic and scoping reviews that evaluate the impact of gender-responsive macro-level policies on women's economic empowerment. The majority of the studies focused on social protection and informal economy policy interventions, with women's economic opportuniti","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"22 2","pages":"18911803261450808"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13251850/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148228652","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":"Learner-Educator Co-creation of Student Assessment in Health Professional Education Courses: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Laura A Killam, Christina Godfrey, Mercedes Lock, Renée Gordon, Amanda Ross-White, Marian Luctkar-Flude","doi":"10.1177/18911803261435895","DOIUrl":"10.1177/18911803261435895","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Co-creation means engaging learners in working collaboratively to make decisions about course planning, implementation, or student assessment. Involving students in these decisions potentially enhances learning. When co-creation is part of assessment, it may reach more learners but may also pose pragmatic challenges. In this review, we focused on co-creation of assessment that may occur at any time during a health professional course. Systematic examination of learner-educator co-creation is needed to inform how educators can engage strategically in co-creation with healthcare students.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objectives: &lt;/strong&gt;The objective of this scoping review was to examine strategies for collaborative learner-educator decision-making during the design, implementation, or evaluation of student assessment in health professional education.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Search methods: &lt;/strong&gt;Searches were conducted until August 1, 2024, in six databases with no date limitation (MEDLINE, Embase, Education Source Complete, CINAHL, ERIC and APA PsycInfo). Reference lists of included full-text papers and papers close to meeting inclusion criteria were manually searched, along with publications by conference abstract authors.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Selection criteria: &lt;/strong&gt;We included all papers focused on how learners and educators share decision making regarding student assessment during a health professional course. Information about co-creation that occurs outside of a course or is not related to student assessment was excluded.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Data collection and analysis: &lt;/strong&gt;Standard procedures for reviewing and summarizing data according to JBI methodology were used. Two reviewers independently screened documents and extracted data. Data about paper characteristics, where co-creation occurs, decisions that are co-created, process descriptions, and author conclusions were extracted and summarized.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Main results: &lt;/strong&gt;We screened 11,517 titles and abstracts, then 341 full-text reports for eligibility. In total, we identified 27 reports published between 1980 and 2025 that describe 25 unique courses where co-creation of assessment has been reported in the literature.Co-creation of assessment was reported in nursing, social work, medicine, health services navigation, paramedicine, pharmacy, occupational therapy and dental technology disciplines, at the undergraduate, graduate, and postgraduate levels. Most courses where co-creation occurred were mandatory. Reports spanned various years of study. Many assessment decisions were made together, predominantly assessment instructions and grading criteria. Diverse ways of co-creating with different levels of student influence over decisions were reported. The most reported strategy for co-creation was discussion during class time or in individual meetings. A wide range of benefits and ways to support co-creation were reported. Barriers, disadvantages, and future consideration","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"22 2","pages":"18911803261435895"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13269963/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148273267","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":"School-Based Educational Interventions for Improving Knowledge of Back Health, Ergonomics and Postural Behaviour of School Children Aged 4-18 Years: A Best Evidence Systematic Review.","authors":"Josette Bettany-Saltikov, Robert Mcsherry, Roongtip Duangkaew, Gokulakannan Kandasamy, Garikoitz Aristegui Racero, Paul van Schaik, Julie Hogg, Mona Salman, Fiona McPherson","doi":"10.1177/18911803261443227","DOIUrl":"10.1177/18911803261443227","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Musculoskeletal and back health of school aged children is a global health problem, with evidence that the prevalence of these problems is increasing. Many modern school systems require children to assume sedentary positions for extended periods of time, and the increasing use of classroom-based technology adds to the number of hours seated. With the incidence of musculoskeletal pain reported not only in adult populations but increasingly in young people, an understanding of spinal health and posture may be essential for students.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objectives: &lt;/strong&gt;The main objective for conducting this review was to conduct a best evidence systematic review. This means we only included the highest quality papers on the effectiveness of school-based education programs on back health for improving knowledge of back health, ergonomics and postural behaviour in school children aged 4-18 years.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Search methods: &lt;/strong&gt;We searched the following 21 electronic databases from inception till the 20th January 2023: AMED (EBSCOhost), APA PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) (EBSCOhost), British Education Index (EBSCOhost), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Wiley), EMBASE (Ovid), ERIC (EBSCOhost), EThOS (British Library), Europe PMC (Europepmc.org), GoogleScholar. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) (INAHTA), Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC) (Ovid), MEDLINE (EBSCOhost), PEDro (pedro.org.au), ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (Proquest), ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Database (ProQuest), SCOPUS (Elsevier), SportDISCUS (EBSCOhost), Web of Science (Arts and Humanities Citation Index, Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index, Emerging Sources Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Social Sciences and Humanities; Clarivate), ZEToC (British Library). &lt;b&gt;Selection Criteria&lt;/b&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Population: &lt;/strong&gt;The population eligible for the review included all children and young people between 4 and 18 years of age, attending school. Exclusion criteria: Children under 4 years of age and adults over 18 years of age; chronic disease or conditions or co-morbidities.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Intervention: &lt;/strong&gt;Studies needed to meet the following criteria to be included: any formal educational school-based programme that included back health, ergonomics and postural behaviour that was designed to support the educational performance of students' knowledge of posture and ergonomics within an educational establishment. We excluded physical activity or exercise only interventions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Comparison: &lt;/strong&gt;Included studies were required to have a control group that represented either business-as-usual (no intervention), or a wait-list design.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Outcomes: &lt;/strong&gt;We included studies that examined back care knowledge, knowledge of back care ergonomic","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"22 2","pages":"18911803261443227"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13269978/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148273385","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}