医疗保健证据确定性或可信度评估系统:范围审查方案

IF 1.5 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Lucylynn Lizarondo, Heather Loveday, Susan Salmond, Kay Cooper, Christina Godfrey, Danielle Pollock, Kendra Rieger, Amanda Vandyk, Chandrashekar Janakiram, Nisha Kurian, Jacopo Fiorini, Cindy Stern
{"title":"医疗保健证据确定性或可信度评估系统:范围审查方案","authors":"Lucylynn Lizarondo, Heather Loveday, Susan Salmond, Kay Cooper, Christina Godfrey, Danielle Pollock, Kendra Rieger, Amanda Vandyk, Chandrashekar Janakiram, Nisha Kurian, Jacopo Fiorini, Cindy Stern","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-24-00556","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This scoping review aims to identify existing systems, frameworks, and approaches for assessing certainty or confidence in quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods evidence, providing a foundation for developing a unified framework tailored to mixed methods reviews.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Assessing the certainty or confidence in evidence is essential for developing health care recommendations, yet current frameworks are often limited to either quantitative or qualitative paradigms. With the rise of mixed methods research, which integrates quantitative and qualitative evidence to address complex health care questions, there is a growing need for systems capable of evaluating certainty across these diverse evidence types.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>This scoping review will include systems, frameworks, or approaches explicitly developed to assess the certainty or confidence in evidence from quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods studies. Eligible papers must describe the methodology, criteria, or principles of these systems or discuss their development, validation, or theoretical foundations. Systems focused solely on critical appraisal or quality assessment of individual studies will be excluded unless they integrate these assessments into a broader framework for assessing certainty in a body of evidence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review will be conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for scoping reviews and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. A comprehensive 3-step search strategy will identify published, unpublished, and gray literature from databases, organizational websites, and reference lists. Data will be extracted using a piloted extraction table and presented in tables, figures, and a narrative summary to map existing systems, frameworks, or approaches for assessing certainty or confidence in evidence.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>Open Science Framework: osf.io/36n78.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Systems for assessing the certainty or confidence of evidence in healthcare: a scoping review protocol.\",\"authors\":\"Lucylynn Lizarondo, Heather Loveday, Susan Salmond, Kay Cooper, Christina Godfrey, Danielle Pollock, Kendra Rieger, Amanda Vandyk, Chandrashekar Janakiram, Nisha Kurian, Jacopo Fiorini, Cindy Stern\",\"doi\":\"10.11124/JBIES-24-00556\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This scoping review aims to identify existing systems, frameworks, and approaches for assessing certainty or confidence in quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods evidence, providing a foundation for developing a unified framework tailored to mixed methods reviews.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Assessing the certainty or confidence in evidence is essential for developing health care recommendations, yet current frameworks are often limited to either quantitative or qualitative paradigms. With the rise of mixed methods research, which integrates quantitative and qualitative evidence to address complex health care questions, there is a growing need for systems capable of evaluating certainty across these diverse evidence types.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>This scoping review will include systems, frameworks, or approaches explicitly developed to assess the certainty or confidence in evidence from quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods studies. Eligible papers must describe the methodology, criteria, or principles of these systems or discuss their development, validation, or theoretical foundations. Systems focused solely on critical appraisal or quality assessment of individual studies will be excluded unless they integrate these assessments into a broader framework for assessing certainty in a body of evidence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review will be conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for scoping reviews and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. A comprehensive 3-step search strategy will identify published, unpublished, and gray literature from databases, organizational websites, and reference lists. Data will be extracted using a piloted extraction table and presented in tables, figures, and a narrative summary to map existing systems, frameworks, or approaches for assessing certainty or confidence in evidence.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>Open Science Framework: osf.io/36n78.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36399,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JBI evidence synthesis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JBI evidence synthesis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00556\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBI evidence synthesis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00556","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:该范围审查旨在确定现有的系统、框架和方法,以评估定量、定性和混合方法证据的确定性或信心,为开发适合混合方法审查的统一框架提供基础。引言:评估证据的确定性或可信度对于制定卫生保健建议至关重要,但目前的框架往往局限于定量或定性范式。随着综合定量和定性证据来解决复杂卫生保健问题的混合方法研究的兴起,越来越需要能够评估这些不同证据类型的确定性的系统。纳入标准:该范围审查将包括明确制定的系统、框架或方法,以评估定量、定性或混合方法研究证据的确定性或置信度。合格的论文必须描述的方法,标准,或这些系统的原则或讨论他们的发展,验证,或理论基础。只注重个别研究的关键性评价或质量评价的系统将被排除在外,除非它们将这些评价纳入评估证据确定性的更广泛框架。方法:本综述将按照JBI范围评价方法学进行,并使用系统评价和荟萃分析扩展范围评价首选报告项目(PRISMA-ScR)指南进行报告。一个全面的三步搜索策略将从数据库、组织网站和参考列表中识别已发表、未发表和灰色文献。将使用试点提取表提取数据,并以表格、图表和叙述性摘要的形式呈现,以绘制现有系统、框架或评估证据确定性或可信度的方法。评审注册:开放科学框架:osf.io/36n78。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Systems for assessing the certainty or confidence of evidence in healthcare: a scoping review protocol.

Objective: This scoping review aims to identify existing systems, frameworks, and approaches for assessing certainty or confidence in quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods evidence, providing a foundation for developing a unified framework tailored to mixed methods reviews.

Introduction: Assessing the certainty or confidence in evidence is essential for developing health care recommendations, yet current frameworks are often limited to either quantitative or qualitative paradigms. With the rise of mixed methods research, which integrates quantitative and qualitative evidence to address complex health care questions, there is a growing need for systems capable of evaluating certainty across these diverse evidence types.

Inclusion criteria: This scoping review will include systems, frameworks, or approaches explicitly developed to assess the certainty or confidence in evidence from quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods studies. Eligible papers must describe the methodology, criteria, or principles of these systems or discuss their development, validation, or theoretical foundations. Systems focused solely on critical appraisal or quality assessment of individual studies will be excluded unless they integrate these assessments into a broader framework for assessing certainty in a body of evidence.

Methods: This review will be conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for scoping reviews and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. A comprehensive 3-step search strategy will identify published, unpublished, and gray literature from databases, organizational websites, and reference lists. Data will be extracted using a piloted extraction table and presented in tables, figures, and a narrative summary to map existing systems, frameworks, or approaches for assessing certainty or confidence in evidence.

Review registration: Open Science Framework: osf.io/36n78.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JBI evidence synthesis
JBI evidence synthesis Nursing-Nursing (all)
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
218
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信