-
Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and... 2021Chronic pain is a common and distressing symptom reported by patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Clinical practice and research in this area do not appear to be...
BACKGROUND
Chronic pain is a common and distressing symptom reported by patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Clinical practice and research in this area do not appear to be advancing sufficiently to address the issue of chronic pain management in patients with CKD.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the prevalence and severity of chronic pain in patients with CKD.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING
Interventional and observational studies presenting data from 2000 or later. Exclusion criteria included acute kidney injury or studies that limited the study population to a specific cause, symptom, and/or comorbidity.
PATIENTS
Adults with glomerular filtration rate (GFR) category 3 to 5 CKD including dialysis patients and those managed conservatively without dialysis.
MEASUREMENTS
Data extracted included title, first author, design, country, year of data collection, publication year, mean age, stage of CKD, prevalence of pain, and severity of pain.
METHODS
Databases searched included MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library, last searched on February 3, 2020. Two reviewers independently screened all titles and abstracts, assessed potentially relevant articles, and extracted data. We estimated pooled prevalence of overall chronic pain, musculoskeletal pain, bone/joint pain, muscle pain/soreness, and neuropathic pain and the statistic was computed to measure heterogeneity. Random effects models were used to account for variations in study design and sample populations and a double arcsine transformation was used in the model calculations to account for potential overweighting of studies reporting either very high or very low prevalence measurements. Pain severity scores were calibrated to a score out of 10, to compare across studies. Weighted mean severity scores and 95% confidence intervals were reported.
RESULTS
Sixty-eight studies representing 16 558 patients from 26 countries were included. The mean prevalence of chronic pain in hemodialysis patients was 60.5%, and the mean prevalence of moderate or severe pain was 43.6%. Although limited, pain prevalence data for peritoneal dialysis patients (35.9%), those managed conservatively without dialysis (59.8%), those following withdrawal of dialysis (39.2%), and patients with earlier GFR category of CKD (61.2%) suggest similarly high prevalence rates.
LIMITATIONS
Studies lacked a consistent approach to defining the chronicity and nature of pain. There was also variability in the measures used to determine pain severity, limiting the ability to compare findings across populations. Furthermore, most studies reported mean severity scores for the entire cohort, rather than reporting the prevalence (numerator and denominator) for each of the pain severity categories (mild, moderate, and severe). Mean severity scores for a population do not allow for "responder analyses" nor allow for an understanding of clinically relevant pain.
CONCLUSIONS
Chronic pain is common and often severe across diverse CKD populations providing a strong imperative to establish chronic pain management as a clinical and research priority. Future research needs to move toward a better understanding of the determinants of chronic pain and to evaluating the effectiveness of pain management strategies with particular attention to the patient outcomes such as overall symptom burden, physical function, and quality of life. The current variability in the outcome measures used to assess pain limits the ability to pool data or make comparisons among studies, which will hinder future evaluations of the efficacy and effectiveness of treatments. Recommendations for measuring and reporting pain in future CKD studies are provided.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO Registration number CRD42020166965.
PubMed: 33680484
DOI: 10.1177/2054358121993995 -
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric... Jul 2015Increased risk of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders among black Caribbean migrants and their descendants have been described since the 1960s. It remains... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders in Caribbean-born migrants and their descendants in England: systematic review and meta-analysis of incidence rates, 1950-2013.
PURPOSE
Increased risk of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders among black Caribbean migrants and their descendants have been described since the 1960s. It remains unclear whether this risk varies over time, between rural and urban areas, or according to methodological artefact.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of the incidence of adult-onset psychotic disorders in black Caribbean groups relative to the baseline population in England, published 1950-2013. Subject to sufficient data (N ≥ 5) we used random effects meta-analyses to estimate pooled incidence rates (IR) and rate ratios (IRR) of seven psychotic disorder outcomes, and meta-regression to inspect whether any variation was attributable to study-level methodological features, including case ascertainment, denominator reliability, choice of baseline population and study quality.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies met inclusion for review. Sixteen demonstrated statistically significant elevated incidence rates in the black Caribbean group, present across all major psychotic disorders, including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Methodological quality increased over time (p = 0.01), but was not associated with estimated IR or IRR. For schizophrenia (N = 11 studies) the pooled IRR in the black Caribbean group was 4.7 (95 % CI 3.9-5.7) relative to the baseline; no evidence of publication bias was observed. We found weak evidence to suggest schizophrenia IRRs were smaller from studies in more urban settings (odds ratio 0.98; 95 % CI 0.96-1.00; p = 0.06).
CONCLUSIONS
Higher incidence rates of psychotic disorders have been present for more than 60 years amongst black Caribbean ethnic groups in England, despite improved study methodologies over time. Aetiological explanations appear to more parsimoniously account for this excess than methodological biases.
Topics: Black People; Caribbean Region; England; Humans; Incidence; Psychotic Disorders; Reproducibility of Results; Risk; Schizophrenia; Transients and Migrants
PubMed: 25660551
DOI: 10.1007/s00127-015-1021-6 -
The Lancet. Gastroenterology &... May 2018CT colonography is highly sensitive for colorectal cancer, but interval or post-imaging colorectal cancer rates (diagnosis of cancer after initial negative CT... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
CT colonography is highly sensitive for colorectal cancer, but interval or post-imaging colorectal cancer rates (diagnosis of cancer after initial negative CT colonography) are unknown, as are their underlying causes. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of post-CT colonography and post-imaging colorectal cancer rates and causes to address this gap in understanding.
METHODS
We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included randomised, cohort, cross-sectional, or case-control studies published between Jan 1, 1994, and Feb 28, 2017, using CT colonography done according to international consensus standards with the aim of detecting cancer or polyps, and reporting post-imaging colorectal cancer rates or sufficient data to allow their calculation. We excluded studies in which all CT colonographies were done because of incomplete colonoscopy or if CT colonography was done with knowledge of colonoscopy findings. We contacted authors of component studies for additional data where necessary for retrospective CT colonography image review and causes for each post-imaging colorectal cancer. Two independent reviewers extracted data from the study reports. Our primary outcome was prevalence of post-imaging colorectal cancer 36 months after CT colonography. We used random-effects meta-analysis to estimate pooled post-imaging colorectal cancer rates, expressed using the total number of cancers and total number of CT colonographies as denominators, and per 1000 person-years. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42016042437.
FINDINGS
2977 articles were screened and 12 studies were eligible for analysis. These studies reported data for 19 867 patients (aged 18-96 years; of 11 590 with sex data available, 6532 [56%] were female) between March, 2002, and May, 2015. At a mean of 34 months' follow-up (range 3-128·4 months), CT colonography detected 643 colorectal cancers. 29 post-imaging colorectal cancers were subsequently diagnosed. The pooled post-imaging colorectal cancer rate was 4·42 (95% CI 3·03-6·42) per 100 cancers detected, corresponding to 1·61 (1·11-2·33) post-imaging colorectal cancers per 1000 CT colonographies or 0·64 (0·44-0·92) post-imaging colorectal cancers per 1000 person-years. Heterogeneity was low (I=0%). 17 (61%) of 28 post-imaging colorectal cancers were attributable to perceptual error and were visible in retrospect.
INTERPRETATION
CT colonography does not lead to an excess of post-test cancers relative to colonoscopy within 3-5 years, and the low 5-year post-imaging colorectal cancer rate confirms that the recommended screening interval of 5 years is safe. Since most post-imaging colorectal cancers arise from perceptual errors, radiologist training and quality assurance could help to reduce post-imaging colorectal cancer rates.
FUNDING
St Mark's Hospital Foundation and the UK National Institute for Health Research via the UCL/UCLH Biomedical Research Centre.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Colonography, Computed Tomographic; Colorectal Neoplasms; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Humans; Male; Mass Screening; Middle Aged; Quality Assurance, Health Care; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted; Time Factors; Young Adult
PubMed: 29472116
DOI: 10.1016/S2468-1253(18)30032-3 -
Clinical Genitourinary Cancer Oct 2020We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the response rates of patients with treatment-refractory urothelial carcinoma treated with programmed cell death 1... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the response rates of patients with treatment-refractory urothelial carcinoma treated with programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors. We reviewed the literature for prospective studies evaluating PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in refractory urothelial carcinoma patients, which formed the basis for US Food and Drug Administration approval of 5 different antagonistic antibodies targeting PD-1 or PD-L1 (atezolizumab, durvalumab, avelumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab). We considered studies examining PD-1/PD-L1-treated patients, which we identified using the following key terms in the Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science, ClinicalTrial.gov, and Cochrane Library databases. Eligible studies had ≥ 20 patients each and reported response rates, duration of response, and overall survival (OS). We performed fixed and random-effects meta-analyses to model the point estimates for objective response rate and complete response. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and OS for studies reporting these statistics were evaluated. We found 10 eligible studies that met our inclusion criteria, providing extractable numerators and denominators for response rates, PFS, and OS for 1934 patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. The objective response rate was 18% (95% confidence interval, 15-22) for second-line or later therapies. The random-effects estimate for complete response was 4% (95% confidence interval, 3-5), including all disease locations and all PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors. Median OS and PFS were < 13 months and 3 months, respectively, across all studies, irrespective of PD-L1 expression. We found that the estimated response rates of agents included in this meta-analysis seem to be more favorable than other salvage therapies.
Topics: B7-H1 Antigen; Carcinoma, Transitional Cell; Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor; Prospective Studies; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms
PubMed: 32146152
DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2020.01.004 -
Research in Social & Administrative... Jan 2024Dispensing errors can cause preventable patient harm such as adverse drug events, hospitalisation, or death. The aim of this study was to systematically review the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES
Dispensing errors can cause preventable patient harm such as adverse drug events, hospitalisation, or death. The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature and quantify the global prevalence of dispensing errors across pharmacy settings.
METHODS
Electronic databases including EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CINAHL were searched between January 2010 and September 2023. Studies published in English, from all pharmacy settings, with data that could be used to calculate the prevalence of dispensing errors were included. Studies were excluded if they did not report true dispensing errors. Data including study characteristics and dispensing error characteristics were extracted. The quality of the studies was assessed using 10 criteria. Random-effects meta-analysis was employed to estimate pooled prevalences and heterogeneity was quantified using the I statistic. Subgroup analyses were performed according to sample size, study design, setting, error identification method, location, and study quality.
PROSPERO
CRD42020197860.
RESULTS
Of the 4216 articles, 62 studies were included. Hospital was the most common pharmacy setting (n = 44, 71.0%) and 15 studies were based in the community. The type of denominator used to report dispensing errors varied between studies, such as dispensed items (n = 45, 72.6%), doses (n = 7, 11.3%), or patients (n = 5, 8.1%). The prevalence of dispensing errors ranged from 0 to 33.3% (n = 62 studies with 64 prevalence estimates). The pooled prevalence for dispensing errors across all studies was 1.6% (95% CI 1.2%-2.1%, I = 100%). A majority of studies were of moderate methodological quality (n = 36, 58.1%) and interrater reliability was applied in eight studies.
CONCLUSIONS
The worldwide prevalence of dispensing errors was 1.6% across community, hospital and other pharmacy settings. This varied depending on the type of denominator used, study design and how the error was identified. This review highlights the need for consistent definitions and standardised classifications of dispensing errors worldwide to reduce heterogeneity.
Topics: Humans; Medication Errors; Reproducibility of Results; Pharmacy; Pharmaceutical Services; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
PubMed: 37848350
DOI: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2023.10.003 -
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth May 2017The World Health Organization (WHO) considers pregnant women to be a risk group for severe influenza disease. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate influenza... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The World Health Organization (WHO) considers pregnant women to be a risk group for severe influenza disease. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate influenza disease incidence in pregnant women in order to inform estimates of influenza vaccine impact for low-resource countries.
METHODS
We performed electronic literature searches, targeting studies on the following outcomes in pregnant women: attack rate, hospitalization rate, intensive care unit admission rate, mortality rate, and disability-adjusted life years lost. Only original studies published in peer-reviewed journals that had laboratory confirmation for influenza virus infection and included population-based incidence rates with denominator data were included. We summarized study characteristics in descriptive tables and outcome-specific Forest plots. We generated summary incidence rates using random effects models and assessed statistical heterogeneity by visual examination of Forest plots, and by χ and I tests.
RESULTS
We identified 1543 articles, of which nine articles met the study inclusion criteria. Five were case series, three were cohort studies, and one was a randomized controlled trial. Eight studies were from high-income countries, and one was from an upper middle-income country. Six studies reported results for pandemic influenza, and three reported seasonal influenza. Statistical heterogeneity was high for all outcomes, and methodologies and duration of surveillance varied considerably among studies; therefore, we did not perform meta-analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
Study quality was very low according to GRADE criteria. More data on influenza disease incidence in pregnant women, particularly in low- and middle-income countries and for seasonal influenza disease, are needed to inform public health decision-making.
Topics: Comorbidity; Female; Hospitalization; Humans; Incidence; Influenza Vaccines; Influenza, Human; Orthomyxoviridae; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Risk Factors; Vaccination; Young Adult
PubMed: 28558777
DOI: 10.1186/s12884-017-1333-5 -
International Journal of Nursing Studies Jul 2024Numerous interventions for pressure injury prevention have been developed, including care bundles. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Numerous interventions for pressure injury prevention have been developed, including care bundles.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the effectiveness of pressure injury prevention care bundles on pressure injury prevalence, incidence, and hospital-acquired pressure injury rate in hospitalised patients.
DATA SOURCES
The Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (via PubMed), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EMBASE, Scopus, the Cochrane Library and two registries were searched (from 2009 to September 2023).
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies with a comparison group published in English after 2008 were included. Studies reporting on the frequency of pressure injuries where the number of patients was not the numerator or denominator, or where the denominator was not reported, and single subgroups of hospitalised patients were excluded. Educational programmes targeting healthcare professionals and bundles targeting specific types of pressure injuries were excluded.
PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS
Bundles with ≥3 components directed towards patients and implemented in ≥2 hospital services were included.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessments were undertaken independently by two researchers. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted. The certainty of the body of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.
RESULTS
Nine studies (seven non-randomised with historical controls; two randomised) conducted in eight countries were included. There were four to eight bundle components; most were core, and only a few were discretionary. Various strategies were used prior to (six studies), during (five studies) and after (two studies) implementation to embed the bundles. The pooled risk ratio for pressure injury prevalence (five non-randomised studies) was 0.55 (95 % confidence intervals 0.29-1.03), and for hospital-acquired pressure injury rate (five non-randomised studies) it was 0.31 (95 % confidence intervals 0.12-0.83). All non-randomised studies were at high risk of bias, with very low certainty of evidence. In the two randomised studies, the care bundles had non-significant effects on hospital-acquired pressure injury incidence density, but data could not be pooled.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS
Whilst some studies showed decreases in pressure injuries, this evidence was very low certainty. The potential benefits of adding emerging evidence-based components to bundles should be considered. Future effectiveness studies should include contemporaneous controls and the development of a comprehensive, theory and evidence-informed implementation plan.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO CRD42023423058.
TWEETABLE ABSTRACT
Pressure injury prevention care bundles decrease hospital-acquired pressure injuries, but the certainty of this evidence is very low.
Topics: Pressure Ulcer; Humans; Patient Care Bundles; Hospitalization
PubMed: 38642429
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2024.104768 -
Timing of maternal mortality and severe morbidity during the postpartum period: a systematic review.JBI Evidence Synthesis Sep 2022The objective of this review was to determine the timing of overall and cause-specific maternal mortality and severe morbidity during the postpartum period.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this review was to determine the timing of overall and cause-specific maternal mortality and severe morbidity during the postpartum period.
INTRODUCTION
Many women continue to die or experience adverse health outcomes in the postpartum period; however, limited work has explored the timing of when women die or present complications during this period globally.
INCLUSION CRITERIA
This review considered studies that reported on women after birth up to 6 weeks postpartum and included data on mortality and/or morbidity on the first day, days 2-7, and days 8-42. Studies that reported solely on high-risk women (eg, those with antenatal or intrapartum complications) were excluded, but mixed population samples were included (eg, low-risk and high-risk women).
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL were searched for published studies on December 20, 2019, and searches were updated on May 11, 2021. Critical appraisal was undertaken by 2 independent reviewers using standardized critical appraisal instruments from JBI. Quantitative data were extracted from included studies independently by at least 2 reviewers using a study-specific data extraction form. Quantitative data were pooled, where possible. Identified studies were used to obtain the summary estimate (proportion) for each time point. Maternal mortality was calculated as the maternal deaths during a given period over the total number of maternal deaths known during the postpartum period. For cause-specific analysis, number of deaths due to a specific cause was the numerator, while the total number of women who died due to the same cause in that period was the denominator. Random effects models were run to pool incidence proportion for relative risk of overall maternal deaths. Subgroup analysis was conducted according to country income classification and by date (ie, data collection before or after 2010). Where statistical pooling was not possible, the findings were reported narratively.
RESULTS
A total of 32 studies reported on maternal outcomes from 17 reports, all reporting on mixed populations. Most maternal deaths occurred on the first day (48.9%), with 24.5% of deaths occurring between days 2 and 7, and 24.9% occurring between days 8 and 42. Maternal mortality due to postpartum hemorrhage and embolism occurred predominantly on the first day (79.1% and 58.2%, respectively). Most deaths due to postpartum eclampsia and hypertensive disorders occurred within the first week (44.3% on day 1 and 37.1% on days 2-7). Most deaths due to infection occurred between days 8 and 42 (61.3%). Due to heterogeneity, maternal morbidity data are described narratively, with morbidity predominantly occurring within the first 2 weeks. The mean critical appraisal score across all included studies was 85.9% (standard deviation = 13.6%).
CONCLUSION
Women experience mortality throughout the entire postpartum period, with the highest mortality rate on the first day. Access to high-quality care during the postpartum period, including enhanced frequency and quality of postpartum assessments during the first 42 days after birth, is essential to improving maternal outcomes and to continue reducing maternal mortality and morbidity worldwide.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO CRD42020187341.
Topics: Female; Humans; Maternal Death; Maternal Mortality; Morbidity; Parturition; Postpartum Period; Pregnancy
PubMed: 35916004
DOI: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00578 -
Implementation Science : IS Aug 2015Care bundles have proven to be effective in improving clinical outcomes. It is not known which strategies are the most effective to implement care bundles. A systematic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Care bundles have proven to be effective in improving clinical outcomes. It is not known which strategies are the most effective to implement care bundles. A systematic review was conducted to determine the strategies used to implement care bundles in adult intensive care units and to assess the effects of these strategies when implementing bundles.
METHODS
The databases MEDLINE/PubMed, Ovid/Embase, CINAHL and CENTRAL were searched for eligible studies until January 31, 2015. Studies with (non)randomised designs on central line, ventilator or sepsis bundles were included if implementation strategies and bundle compliance were reported. Methodological quality was assessed by using the Downs and Black checklist. Data extraction and quality assessments were independently performed by two reviewers.
RESULTS
In total, 1533 records were screened and 47 studies were finally included. In 49 %, pre/post designs were used, 38 % prospective cohorts, and the remaining studies used retrospective designs (6 %), interrupted time series (4 %) and longitudinal designs (2 %). The methodological quality was classified as 'fair' in 77 %, and the remaining as 'good' (13 %) and 'poor' (11 %). The most frequently used strategies were education (86 %), reminders (71 %) and audit and feedback (63 %). Our results show that compliance is influenced by multiple factors, i.e. types and numbers of elements varied and different compliance measurements were reported. Furthermore, compliance was calculated within different time frames. Also, detailed information about compliance, such as numerators and denominators, was not reported. Therefore, recalculation of consistent monthly compliance levels was not possible.
CONCLUSIONS
The three most frequently used strategies were education, reminders and audit and feedback. We conclude that the heterogeneity among the included studies was high due to the variety in study designs, number and types of elements and types of compliance measurements. Due to the heterogeneity of the data and the poor quality of the studies, conclusions about which strategy results in the highest levels of bundle compliance could not be determined. We strongly recommend that studies in quality improvement should be reported in a formalised way in order to be able to compare research findings. It is imperative that authors follow the standards for quality improvement reporting excellence (SQUIRE) guidelines whenever they report quality improvement studies.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Patient Care Bundles; Program Development; Program Evaluation
PubMed: 26276569
DOI: 10.1186/s13012-015-0306-1 -
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine 2022Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is a comprehensive and important tool for assessment and decision-making in public health and healthcare practice. It is recommended... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is a comprehensive and important tool for assessment and decision-making in public health and healthcare practice. It is recommended by the WHO and has been applied in practice in many countries, mostly the developed ones. HTA might be an important tool to achieve universal health coverage (UHC), especially beneficial to low-and-middle-income countries (LMIC). Even though the Package for Essential Non-communicable Diseases (PEN) has already been initiated, there is a clear policy gap in the HTA of any health device, service, or procedure, including the assessment of cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) in Nepal. Hence, we carried out the review to document the HTA supported evidence of hypertension and diabetes screening, as CVRFs in Nepal.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched in PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar, along with some gray literature published in the last 6 years (2016-2021) in a systematic way with a controlled vocabulary using a well-designed and pilot tested search strategy, screened them, and a total of 53 articles and reports that matched the screening criteria were included for the review. We then, extracted the data in a pre-designed MS-Excel format, first in one, and then, from it, in two, with more specific data.
RESULTS
Of 53 included studies, we reported the prevalence and/or proportion of hypertension and diabetes with various denominators. Furthermore, HTA-related findings such as cost, validity, alternative tool or technology, awareness, and intervention effectiveness have been documented and discussed further, however, not summarized due to their sparingness.
CONCLUSION
Overall, the prevalence of DM (4.4-18.8%) and HTN (17.2-70.0%) was reported in most studies, with a few, covering other aspects of HTA of DM/HTN. A national policy for establishing an HTA agency and some immediately implementable actions are highly recommended.
PubMed: 35979024
DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.898225