-
BMC Neurology Jun 2024The application of cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in stroke patients has received increasing attention due to its neuromodulation mechanisms.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The application of cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in stroke patients has received increasing attention due to its neuromodulation mechanisms. However, studies on the effect and safety of cerebellar TMS to improve balance capacity and activity of daily living (ADL) for stroke patients are limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effect and safety of cerebellar TMS on balance capacity and ADL in stroke patients.
METHOD
A systematic search of seven electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang and Chinese Scientific Journal) were conducted from their inception to October 20, 2023. The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of cerebellar TMS on balance capacity and/or ADL in stroke patients were enrolled. The quality of included studies were assessed by Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale.
RESULTS
A total of 13 studies involving 542 participants were eligible. The pooled results from 8 studies with 357 participants showed that cerebellar TMS could significantly improve the post-intervention Berg balance scale (BBS) score (MD = 4.24, 95%CI = 2.19 to 6.29, P < 0.00001; heterogeneity, I = 74%, P = 0.0003). The pooled results from 4 studies with 173 participants showed that cerebellar TMS could significantly improve the post-intervention Time Up and Go (TUG) (MD=-1.51, 95%CI=-2.8 to -0.22, P = 0.02; heterogeneity, I = 0%, P = 0.41). The pooled results from 6 studies with 280 participants showed that cerebellar TMS could significantly improve the post-intervention ADL (MD = 7.75, 95%CI = 4.33 to 11.17, P < 0.00001; heterogeneity, I = 56%, P = 0.04). The subgroup analysis showed that cerebellar TMS could improve BBS post-intervention and ADL post-intervention for both subacute and chronic stage stroke patients. Cerebellar high frequency TMS could improve BBS post-intervention and ADL post-intervention. Cerebellar TMS could still improve BBS post-intervention and ADL post-intervention despite of different cerebellar TMS sessions (less and more than 10 TMS sessions), different total cerebellar TMS pulse per week (less and more than 4500 pulse/week), and different cerebellar TMS modes (repetitive TMS and Theta Burst Stimulation). None of the studies reported severe adverse events except mild side effects in three studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Cerebellar TMS is an effective and safe technique for improving balance capacity and ADL in stroke patients. Further larger-sample, higher-quality, and longer follow-up RCTs are needed to explore the more reliable evidence of cerebellar TMS in the balance capacity and ADL, and clarify potential mechanisms.
Topics: Humans; Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation; Activities of Daily Living; Postural Balance; Stroke Rehabilitation; Cerebellum; Stroke; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38879485
DOI: 10.1186/s12883-024-03720-1 -
The Lancet. Psychiatry Jul 2024Many patients with schizophrenia have symptoms that do not respond to antipsychotics. This condition is called treatment-resistant schizophrenia and has not received... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Many patients with schizophrenia have symptoms that do not respond to antipsychotics. This condition is called treatment-resistant schizophrenia and has not received specific attention as opposed to general schizophrenia. Psychological and psychosocial interventions as an add-on treatment to pharmacotherapy could be useful, but their role and comparative efficacy to each other and to standard care in this population are not known. We investigated the efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability of psychological and psychosocial interventions for patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia.
METHODS
In this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA), we searched for published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) through a systematic database search in BIOSIS, CINAHL, Embase, LILACS, MEDLINE, PsychInfo, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for articles published from inception up to Jan 31, 2020. We also searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group registry for studies published from inception up to March 31, 2022, and PubMed and Cochrane CENTRAL for studies published from inception up to July 31, 2023. We included RCTs that included patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia. The primary outcome was overall symptoms. We did random-effects pairwise meta-analyses and NMAs to calculate standardised mean differences (SMDs) or risk ratios with 95% CIs. No people with lived experience were involved throughout the research process. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO, CRD42022358696.
FINDINGS
We identified 30 326 records, excluding 24 526 by title and abstract screening. 5762 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, of which 5540 were excluded for not meeting the eligibility criteria, and 222 reports corresponding to 60 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Of these, 52 RCTs with 5034 participants (1654 [33·2%] females and 3325 [66·8%] males with sex indicated) comparing 20 psychological and psychosocial interventions provided data for the NMA. Mean age of participants was 38·05 years (range 23·10-48·50). We aimed to collect ethnicity data, but they were scarcely reported. According to the quality of evidence, cognitive behavioural therapy for psychosis (CBTp; SMD -0·22, 95% CI -0·35 to -0·09, 35 trials), virtual reality intervention (SMD -0·41, -0·79 to -0·02, four trials), integrated intervention (SMD -0·70, -1·18 to -0·22, three trials), and music therapy (SMD -1·27, -1·83 to -0·70, one study) were more efficacious than standard care in reducing overall symptoms. No indication of publication bias was identified.
INTERPRETATION
We provide robust findings that CBTp can reduce the overall symptoms of patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, and therefore clinicians can prioritise this intervention in their clinical practice. Other psychological and psychosocial interventions showed promising results but need further investigation.
FUNDING
DAAD-ASFE.
Topics: Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Psychosocial Intervention; Schizophrenia, Treatment-Resistant; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Psychotherapy; Antipsychotic Agents; Treatment Outcome; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 38879276
DOI: 10.1016/S2215-0366(24)00136-6 -
JMIR AI Nov 2023There is a dearth of knowledge on reliable adherence prediction measures in behavior change support systems (BCSSs). Existing reviews have predominately focused on... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
There is a dearth of knowledge on reliable adherence prediction measures in behavior change support systems (BCSSs). Existing reviews have predominately focused on self-reporting measures of adherence. These measures are susceptible to overestimation or underestimation of adherence behavior.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review seeks to identify and summarize trends in the use of machine learning approaches to predict adherence to BCSSs.
METHODS
Systematic literature searches were conducted in the Scopus and PubMed electronic databases between January 2011 and August 2022. The initial search retrieved 2182 journal papers, but only 11 of these papers were eligible for this review.
RESULTS
A total of 4 categories of adherence problems in BCSSs were identified: adherence to digital cognitive and behavioral interventions, medication adherence, physical activity adherence, and diet adherence. The use of machine learning techniques for real-time adherence prediction in BCSSs is gaining research attention. A total of 13 unique supervised learning techniques were identified and the majority of them were traditional machine learning techniques (eg, support vector machine). Long short-term memory, multilayer perception, and ensemble learning are currently the only advanced learning techniques. Despite the heterogeneity in the feature selection approaches, most prediction models achieved good classification accuracies. This indicates that the features or predictors used were a good representation of the adherence problem.
CONCLUSIONS
Using machine learning algorithms to predict the adherence behavior of a BCSS user can facilitate the reinforcement of adherence behavior. This can be achieved by developing intelligent BCSSs that can provide users with more personalized, tailored, and timely suggestions.
PubMed: 38875538
DOI: 10.2196/46779 -
Medicine Jun 2024Many randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that exercise benefits cognitive function in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), but less attention has... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Many randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that exercise benefits cognitive function in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), but less attention has been paid to the development of exercise programs in this population.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to assess the effect of exercise intervention for elderly with MCI and provide the most effective exercise intervention plan.
METHODS
We searched 4 international databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library) and 4 Chinese databases (Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP database and Wanfang database) for studies on exercises associated with MCI up to September 25, 2022. The resulting standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals were statistically analyzed using Review Manager 5.3 software.
RESULTS
A total of 20 RCTs were comprised in this meta-analysis, including 1393 participants. The results of the meta-analysis revealed that exercise had positive effects on cognitive function in elderly with MCI and was statistically significant (SMD = 1.25, 95%CI: [0.88,1.62], P < .00001). Subgroup analysis showed that the most significant factor was the Peterson 2004 criteria, multi-exercise, 35 to 50 minutes/times, <3 times/3 to 5 times per week, >16 weeks and medium intensity.
CONCLUSION
Exercise intervention can significantly alleviate cognition in elderly with MCI. The best exercise program for exercise intervention for MCI is: multi-exercise, 35 to 50 minutes/times, 3 to 5 times/week, and exercise cycle for more than 16 weeks with medium intensity, has the best effect. Plus, more RCTs with larger sample sizes will be required in the future to demonstrate the link between exercise duration, intensity, and cognitive function.
Topics: Humans; Cognitive Dysfunction; Exercise Therapy; Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Cognition; Exercise; Female; Male
PubMed: 38875404
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000038025 -
Health system strengthening in fragile and conflict-affected states: A review of systematic reviews.PloS One 2024Globally, there is growing attention towards health system strengthening, and the importance of quality in health systems. However, fragile and conflict-affected states... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Globally, there is growing attention towards health system strengthening, and the importance of quality in health systems. However, fragile and conflict-affected states present particular challenges. The aim of this study was to explore health system strengthening in fragile and conflict-affected states by synthesising the evidence from published literature.
METHODS
We conducted a review of systematic reviews (Prospero Registration Number: CRD42022371955) by searching Ovid (Medline, Embase, and Global Health), Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases. Only English-language publications were considered. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tool was employed to assess methodological quality of the included studies. The findings were narratively synthesised and presented in line with the Lancet's 'high-quality health system framework'.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven systematic reviews, out of 2,704 identified records, considered key dimensions of health systems in fragile and conflict-affected states, with the 'foundations' domain having most evidence. Significant challenges to health system strengthening, including the flight of human capital due to safety concerns and difficult working conditions, as well as limited training capacities and resources, were identified. Facilitators included community involvement, support systems and innovative financing mechanisms. The importance of coordinated and integrated responses tailored to the context and stage of the crisis situation was emphasised in order to strengthen fragile health systems. Overall, health system strengthening initiatives included policies encouraging the return and integration of displaced healthcare workers, building local healthcare workers capacity, strengthening education and training, integrating healthcare services, trust-building, supportive supervision, and e-Health utilisation.
CONCLUSION
The emerging body of evidence on health system strengthening in fragile and conflict-affected states highlights its complexity. The findings underscore the significance of adopting a comprehensive approach and engaging various stakeholders in a coordinated manner considering the stage and context of the situation.
Topics: Humans; Delivery of Health Care; Armed Conflicts; Global Health
PubMed: 38875266
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0305234 -
Frontiers in Psychology 2024Patients with cancer experience significant psychosocial distress. Stressors include interpersonal difficulties like loneliness, isolation, thwarted belongingness,...
OBJECTIVE
Patients with cancer experience significant psychosocial distress. Stressors include interpersonal difficulties like loneliness, isolation, thwarted belongingness, communication impediments, and conflicts. Interventions are required that address their specific psychosocial needs. Interpersonal Psychotherapy (IPT) is a promising concept for the treatment of psychosocial distress associated with cancer because it addresses patients' interactions and role transformations. This review aims to provide an overview of the current evidence regarding interventions for patients with cancer based on IPT.
METHODS
A systematic review following PRISM guidelines was conducted, including randomized controlled trials of IPT-based interventions in patients with cancer, assessing effects on distress, depression, and anxiety.
RESULTS
Eight studies were included, sampling 390 patients in total. Seven out of eight studies assessed exclusively women with breast cancer. Two studies described IPT interventions and showed stronger improvement in depression and anxiety compared to TAU and equal improvement in depression compared to other psychotherapy interventions. Six studies described remote Interpersonal Counselling (IPC). One found remote IPC to be superior to control conditions regarding depression, and one found remote IPC to be superior to attention control, but not active control conditions. No study found remote IPC to be superior to control conditions regarding distress.
DISCUSSION
There are few randomized controlled trials of IPT for patients with cancer. Results regarding depression and anxiety are promising for in-person IPT, but mixed for remote IPC.
CONCLUSION
The review suggests in-person IPT, but not remote IPC, may yield benefits for patients with cancer. Research on the subject is scarce, and to inform implementation of IPT interventions, research with diverse groups of patients with cancer is required.
SYSTEMATIC TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO, Identifier CRD42023410687.
PubMed: 38873503
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1367807 -
Campbell Systematic Reviews Jun 2024Many intervention studies of summer programmes examine their impact on employment and education outcomes, however there is growing interest in their effect on young... (Review)
Review
REVIEW RATIONALE AND CONTEXT
Many intervention studies of summer programmes examine their impact on employment and education outcomes, however there is growing interest in their effect on young people's offending outcomes. Evidence on summer employment programmes shows promise on this but has not yet been synthesised. This report fills this evidence gap through a systematic review and meta-analysis, covering summer education and summer employment programmes as their contexts and mechanisms are often similar.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVE
The objective is to provide evidence on the extent to which summer programmes impact the outcomes of disadvantaged or 'at risk' young people.
METHODS
The review employs mixed methods: we synthesise quantitative information estimating the impact of summer programme allocation/participation across the outcome domains through meta-analysis using the random-effects model; and we synthesise qualitative information relating to contexts, features, mechanisms and implementation issues through thematic synthesis. Literature searches were largely conducted in January 2023. Databases searched include: Scopus; PsychInfo; ERIC; the YFF-EGM; EEF's and TASO's toolkits; RAND's summer programmes evidence review; key academic journals; and Google Scholar. The review employed PICOSS eligibility criteria: the was disadvantaged or 'at risk' young people aged 10-25; were either summer education or employment programmes; a valid group that did not experience a summer programme was required; studies had to estimate the summer programme's impact on violence and offending, education, employment, socio-emotional and/or health ; eligible were experimental and quasi-experimental; eligible were high-income countries. Other eligibility criteria included publication in English, between 2012 and 2022. Process/qualitative evaluations associated with eligible impact studies or of UK-based interventions were also included; the latter given the interests of the sponsors. We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Campbell Collaboration. The search identified 68 eligible studies; with 41 eligible for meta-analysis. Forty-nine studies evaluated 36 summer education programmes, and 19 studies evaluated six summer employment programmes. The number of participants within these studies ranged from less than 100 to nearly 300,000. The PICOSS criteria affects the external applicability of the body of evidence - allowances made regarding study design to prioritise evidence on UK-based interventions limits our ability to assess impact for some interventions. The risk of bias assessment categorised approximately 75% of the impact evaluations as low quality, due to attrition, losses to follow up, interventions having low take-up rates, or where allocation might introduce selection bias. As such, intention-to-treat analyses are prioritised. The quality assessment rated 93% of qualitative studies as low quality often due to not employing rigorous qualitative methodologies. These results highlight the need to improve the evidence.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
The quantitative synthesis examined impact estimates across 34 outcomes, through meta-analysis (22) or in narrative form (12). We summarise below the findings where meta-analysis was possible, along with the researchers' judgement of the security of the findings (high, moderate or low). This was based on the number and study-design quality of studies evaluating the outcome; the consistency of findings; the similarity in specific outcome measures used; and any other specific issues which might affect our confidence in the summary findings.Below we summarise the findings from the meta-analyses conducted to assess the impact of allocation to/participation in summer education and employment programmes (findings in relation to other outcomes are also discussed in the main body, but due to the low number of studies evaluating these, meta-analysis was not performed). We only cover the pooled results for the two programme types where there are not clear differences in findings between summer education and summer employment programmes, so as to avoid potentially attributing any impact to both summer programme types when this is not the case. We list the outcome measure, the average effect size type (i.e., whether a standardised mean difference (SMD) or log odds ratio), which programme type the finding is in relation to and then the average effect size along with its 95% confidence interval and the interpretation of the finding, that is, whether there appears to be a significant impact and in which direction (positive or negative, clarifying instances where a negative impact is beneficial). In some instances there may be a discrepancy between the 95% confidence interval and whether we determine there to be a significant impact, which will be due to the specifics of the process for constructing the effect sizes used in the meta-analysis. We then list the statistic and the -value from the homogeneity test as indications of the presence of heterogeneity. As the sample size used in the analysis are often small and the homogeneity test is known to be under-powered with small sample sizes, it may not detect statistically significant heterogeneity when it is in fact present. As such, a 90% confidence level threshold should generally be used when interpreting this with regard to the meta-analyses below. The presence of effect size heterogeneity affects the extent to which the average effects size is applicable to all interventions of that summer programme type. We also provide an assessment of the relative confidence we have in the generalisability of the overall finding (low, moderate or high) - some of the overall findings are based on a small sample of studies, the studies evaluating the outcome may be of low quality, there may be wide variation in findings among the studies evaluating the outcome, or there may be specific aspects of the impact estimates included or the effect sizes constructed that affect the generalisability of the headline finding. These issues are detailed in full in the main body of the review. -Engagement with/participation in/enjoyment of education (SMD):∘Summer education programmes: +0.12 (+0.03, +0.20); positive impact; = 48.76%, = 0.10; moderate confidence.-Secondary education attendance (SMD):∘Summer education programmes: +0.26 (+0.08, +0.44); positive impact; = N/A; = N/A; low confidence.∘Summer employment programmes: +0.02 (-0.03, +0.07); no impact; = 69.98%; = 0.03; low confidence.-Passing tests (log OR):∘Summer education programmes: +0.41 (-0.13, +0.96); no impact; = 95.05%; = 0.00; low confidence.∘Summer employment programmes: +0.02 (+0.00, +0.04); positive impact; = 0.01%; = 0.33; low confidence.-Reading test scores (SMD):∘Summer education programmes: +0.01 (-0.04, +0.05); no impact; = 0.40%; = 0.48; high confidence.-English test scores (SMD):∘Summer education programmes: +0.07 (+0.00, +0.13); positive impact; = 27.17%; = 0.33; moderate confidence.∘Summer employment programmes: -0.03 (-0.05, -0.01); negative impact; = 0.00%; = 0.76; low confidence.-Mathematics test scores (SMD):∘All summer programmes: +0.09 (-0.06, +0.25); no impact; = 94.53%; = 0.00; high confidence.∘Summer education programmes: +0.14 (-0.09, +0.36); no impact; = 94.15%; = 0.00; moderate confidence.∘Summer employment programmes: +0.00 (-0.04, +0.05); no impact; = 0.04%; = 0.92; moderate confidence.-Overall test scores (SMD):∘Summer employment programmes: -0.01 (-0.08, +0.05); no impact; = 32.39%; = 0.20; high confidence.-All test scores (SMD):∘Summer education programmes: +0.14 (+0.00, +0.27); positive impact; = 91.07%; = 0.00; moderate confidence.∘Summer employment programmes: -0.01 (-0.04, +0.01); no impact; = 0.06%; = 0.73; high confidence.-Negative behavioural outcomes (log OR):∘Summer education programmes: -1.55 (-3.14, +0.03); negative impact; = N/A; = N/A; low confidence.∘Summer employment programmes: -0.07 (-0.33, +0.18); no impact; = 88.17%; = 0.00; moderate confidence.-Progression to HE (log OR):∘All summer programmes: +0.24 (-0.04, +0.52); no impact; = 97.37%; = 0.00; low confidence.∘Summer education programmes: +0.32 (-0.12, +0.76); no impact; = 96.58%; = 0.00; low confidence.∘Summer employment programmes: +0.10 (-0.07, +0.26); no impact; = 76.61%; = 0.02; moderate confidence.-Complete HE (log OR):∘Summer education programmes: +0.38 (+0.15, +0.62); positive impact; = 52.52%; = 0.06; high confidence.∘Summer employment programmes: +0.07 (-0.19, +0.33); no impact; = 70.54%; = 0.07; moderate confidence.-Entry to employment, short-term (log OR):∘Summer employment programmes: -0.19 (-0.45, +0.08); no impact; = 87.81%; = 0.00; low confidence.∘Entry to employment, full period (log OR)∘Summer employment programmes: -0.15 (-0.35, +0.05); no impact; = 78.88%; = 0.00; low confidence.-Likelihood of having a criminal justice outcome (log OR):∘Summer employment programmes: -0.05 (-0.15, +0.05); no impact; = 0.00%; = 0.76; low confidence.-Likelihood of having a drug-related criminal justice outcome (log OR):∘Summer employment programmes: +0.16 (-0.57, +0.89); no impact; = 65.97%; = 0.09; low confidence.-Likelihood of having a violence-related criminal justice outcome (log OR):∘Summer employment programmes: +0.03 (-0.02, +0.08); no impact; = 0.00%; = 0.22; moderate confidence.-Likelihood of having a property-related criminal justice outcome (log OR):∘Summer employment programmes: +0.09 (-0.17, +0.34); no impact; = 45.01%; = 0.18; low confidence.-Number of criminal justice outcomes, during programme (SMD):∘Summer employment programmes: -0.01 (-0.03, +0.00); no impact; = 2.17%; = 0.31; low confidence.-Number of criminal justice outcomes, post-programme (SMD):∘Summer employment programmes: -0.01 (-0.03, +0.00); no impact; = 23.57%; = 0.37; low confidence.-Number of drug-related criminal justice outcomes, post-programme (SMD):∘Summer employment programmes: -0.01 (-0.06, +0.06); no impact; = 55.19%; = 0.14; moderate confidence.-Number of violence-related criminal justice outcomes, post-programme (SMD):∘Summer employment programmes: -0.02 (-0.08, +0.03); no impact; = 44.48%; = 0.18; low confidence.-Number of property-related criminal justice outcomes, post-programme (SMD):∘Summer employment programmes: -0.02 (-0.10, +0.05); no impact; = 64.93%; = 0.09; low confidence. We re-express instances of significant impact by programme type where we have moderate or high confidence in the security of findings by translating this to a form used by one of the studies, to aid understanding of the findings. Allocation to a summer education programme results in approximately 60% of individuals moving from never reading for fun to doing so once or twice a month (engagement in/participation in/enjoyment of education), and an increase in the English Grade Point Average of 0.08. Participation in a summer education programme results in an increase in overall Grade Point Average of 0.14 and increases the likelihood of completing higher education by 1.5 times. Signs are positive for the effectiveness of summer education programmes in achieving some of the education outcomes considered (particularly on test scores (when pooled across types), completion of higher education and STEM-related higher education outcomes), but the evidence on which overall findings are based is often weak. Summer employment programmes appear to have a limited impact on employment outcomes, if anything, a negative impact on the likelihood of entering employment outside of employment related to the programme. The evidence base for impacts of summer employment programmes on young people's violence and offending type outcomes is currently limited - where impact is detected this largely results in substantial reductions in criminal justice outcomes, but the variation in findings across and within studies affects our ability to make any overarching assertions with confidence. In understanding the effectiveness of summer programmes, the order of outcomes also requires consideration - entries into education from a summer employment programme might be beneficial if this leads towards better quality employment in the future and a reduced propensity of criminal justice outcomes.
QUALITATIVE SYNTHESIS
Various shared features among different summer education programmes emerged from the review, allowing us to cluster specific types of these interventions which then aided the structuring of the thematic synthesis. The three distinct clusters for summer education programmes were: catch-up programmes addressing attainment gaps, raising aspirations programmes inspiring young people to pursue the next stage of their education or career, and transition support programmes facilitating smooth transitions between educational levels. Depending on their aim, summer education programme tend to provide a combination of: additional instruction on core subjects (e.g., English, mathematics); academic classes including to enhance specialist subject knowledge (e.g., STEM-related); homework help; coaching and mentoring; arts and recreation electives; and social and enrichment activities. Summer employment programmes provide paid work placements or subsidised jobs typically in entry-level roles mostly in the third and public sectors, with some summer employment programmes also providing placements in the private sector. They usually include components of pre-work training and employability skills, coaching and mentoring. There are a number of mechanisms which act as facilitators or barriers to engagement in summer programmes. These include tailoring the summer programme to each young person and individualised attention; the presence of well-prepared staff who provide effective academic/workplace and socio-emotional support; incentives of a monetary (e.g., stipends and wages) or non-monetary (e.g., free transport and meals) nature; recruitment strategies, which are effective at identifying, targeting and engaging participants who can most benefit from the intervention; partnerships, with key actors who can help facilitate referrals and recruitment, such as schools, community action and workforce development agencies; format, including providing social activities and opportunities to support the formation of connections with peers; integration into the workplace, through pre-placement engagement, such as through orientation days, pre-work skills training, job fairs, and interactions with employers ahead of the beginning of the summer programme; and skill acquisition, such as improvements in social skills. In terms of the causal processes which lead from engagement in a summer programme to outcomes, these include: skill acquisition, including academic, social, emotional, and life skills; positive relationships with peers, including with older students as mentors in summer education programmes; personalised and positive relationships with staff; location, including accessibility and creating familiar environments; creating connections between the summer education programme and the students' learning at home to maintain continuity and reinforce learning; and providing purposeful and meaningful work through summer employment programmes (potentially facilitated through the provision of financial and/or non-financial incentives), which makes participants more likely to see the importance of education in achieving their life goals and this leads to raised aspirations. It is important to note that no single element of a summer programme can be identified as generating the causal process for impact, and impact results rather from a combination of elements. Finally, we investigated strengths and weaknesses in summer programmes at both the design and implementation stages. In summer education programmes, design strengths include interactive and alternative learning modes; iterative and progressive content building; incorporating confidence building activities; careful lesson planning; and teacher support which is tailored to each student. Design weaknesses include insufficient funding or poor funding governance (e.g., delays to funding); limited reach of the target population; and inadequate allocation of teacher and pupil groups (i.e., misalignment between the education stage of the pupils and the content taught by staff). Implementation strengths include clear programme delivery guidance and good governance; high quality academic instruction; mentoring support; and strong partnerships. Implementation weaknesses include insufficient planning and lead in time; recruitment challenges; and variability in teaching quality. In summer employment programmes, design strengths include use of employer orientation materials and supervisor handbooks; careful consideration of programme staff roles; a wide range of job opportunities; and building a network of engaged employers. Design weaknesses are uncertainty over funding and budget agreements; variation in delivery and quality of training between providers; challenges in recruitment of employers; and caseload size and management. Implementation strengths include effective job matching; supportive relationships with supervisors; pre-work training; and mitigating attrition (e.g., striving to increase take up of the intervention among the treatment group). Implementation weaknesses are insufficient monitors for the number of participants, and challenges around employer availability.
PubMed: 38873396
DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1406 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2024Despite the incentives and provisions created for hospitals by the US Affordable Care Act related to value-based payment and community health needs assessments, concerns... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Despite the incentives and provisions created for hospitals by the US Affordable Care Act related to value-based payment and community health needs assessments, concerns remain regarding the adequacy and distribution of hospital efforts to address SDOH. This scoping review of the peer-reviewed literature identifies the key characteristics of hospital/health system initiatives to address SDOH in the US, to gain insight into the progress and gaps.
METHODS
PRISMA-ScR criteria were used to inform a scoping review of the literature. The article search was guided by an integrated framework of Healthy People SDOH domains and industry recommended SDOH types for hospitals. Three academic databases were searched for eligible articles from 1 January 2018 to 30 June 2023. Database searches yielded 3,027 articles, of which 70 peer-reviewed articles met the eligibility criteria for the review.
RESULTS
Most articles (73%) were published during or after 2020 and 37% were based in Northeast US. More initiatives were undertaken by academic health centers (34%) compared to safety-net facilities (16%). Most (79%) were research initiatives, including clinical trials (40%). Only 34% of all initiatives used the EHR to collect SDOH data. Most initiatives (73%) addressed two or more types of SDOH, e.g., food and housing. A majority (74%) were downstream initiatives to address individual health-related social needs (HRSNs). Only 9% were upstream efforts to address community-level structural SDOH, e.g., housing investments. Most initiatives (74%) involved hot spotting to target HRSNs of high-risk patients, while 26% relied on screening and referral. Most initiatives (60%) relied on internal capacity vs. community partnerships (4%). Health disparities received limited attention (11%). Challenges included implementation issues and limited evidence on the systemic impact and cost savings from interventions.
CONCLUSION
Hospital/health system initiatives have predominantly taken the form of downstream initiatives to address HRSNs through hot-spotting or screening-and-referral. The emphasis on clinical trials coupled with lower use of EHR to collect SDOH data, limits transferability to safety-net facilities. Policymakers must create incentives for hospitals to invest in integrating SDOH data into EHR systems and harnessing community partnerships to address SDOH. Future research is needed on the systemic impact of hospital initiatives to address SDOH.
Topics: Humans; Social Determinants of Health; United States; Hospitals; Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Delivery of Health Care
PubMed: 38873294
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1413205 -
Digital Health 2024Wearable technology is used in healthcare to monitor the health of individuals. This study presents an updated systematic literature review of the use of wearable... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Wearable technology is used in healthcare to monitor the health of individuals. This study presents an updated systematic literature review of the use of wearable technology in promoting child and adolescent health, accompanied by recommendations for future research.
METHODS
This review focuses on studies involving children and adolescents aged between 2 and 18 years, regardless of their health condition or disabilities. Studies that were published from 2016 to 2024, and which met the inclusion criteria, were extracted from four academic databases (i.e. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science) using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol. Data on intervention purposes, interventions deployed, intervention duration, measurements, and the main outcomes of the studies were collected.
RESULTS
A total of 53 studies involving 14,852 participants were reviewed. They focused on various aspects, including the ownership and use of wearable devices ( = 3), the feasibility ( = 22), effectiveness ( = 4), and adherence ( = 2) of intervention strategies, or a combination of multiple aspects ( = 22). Among the interventions deployed, Fitbit was the most frequently used, featuring in 26 studies, followed by ActiGraph ( = 11). In intervention studies, the majority of studies focused on pre-morbidity prevention ( = 26) and the treatment of illnesses ( = 20), with limited attention given to postoperative monitoring ( = 4).
CONCLUSIONS
The use of wearable technology by children and adolescents has proven to be both feasible and effective for health promotion. This systematic review summarizes existing research by exploring the use of wearable technology in promoting health across diverse youth populations, including healthy and unhealthy individuals. It examines health promotion at various stages of the disease continuum, including pre-disease prevention, in-disease treatment, and postoperative monitoring. Additionally, the review provides directions for future research.
PubMed: 38868368
DOI: 10.1177/20552076241260507 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2024Exposure to pesticides is a global public health problem, especially for children. Its association with chronic respiratory disease among children has attracted... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Exposure to pesticides is a global public health problem, especially for children. Its association with chronic respiratory disease among children has attracted considerable attention, but the existing evidence remains inconclusive and cannot be certain. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aim to determine the global pooled effect size of association with pesticide exposure and asthma, wheezing, and respiratory tract infections among children.
METHODS
A comprehensive search was conducted for relevant literature from electronic databases, including PubMed, Google Scholar, Hinari, Semantic Scholar, and Science Direct. Studies that provided effect size on the association between pesticide exposure and childhood asthma, wheezing, and respiratory tract infections in children were included. The articles were screened, data was extracted, and the quality of each study was assessed with four independent reviewers. Random effects models for significant heterogeneity and fixed effect models for homogeneous studies were conducted to estimate pooled effect sizes with 95% confidence intervals using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 3.3.070 and MetaXL version 2. Funnel plot and Higgins statistics were used to determine the heterogeneity of the included studies. Subgroup analyses were computed based on the types of pesticide exposure, study design, sample size category, and outcome assessment technique.
RESULT
A total of 38 articles with 118,303 children less than 18 years of age were included in this meta-analysis. Pesticide exposure among children increased the risk of asthma by 24%; (OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.14-1.35) with extreme heterogeneity ( = 81%, < 0.001). Exposure to pesticides increased the odds of developing wheezing among children by 34% (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.14-1.57), with high heterogeneity ( = 79%, < 0.001) and also increased the risk of developing lower respiratory tract infection by 79% (OR = 1.79, 95% CI: 1.45-2.21) with nonsignificant low heterogeneity ( = 30%, -value = 0.18).
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis provided valuable evidence supporting the association between childhood asthma, wheezing, and lower respiratory tract infection with pesticide exposure. The findings would contribute to a better understanding of the estimate of the effect of pesticide exposure on respiratory health in children and inform evidence-based preventive strategies and public health interventions.
Topics: Humans; Asthma; Respiratory Sounds; Pesticides; Respiratory Tract Infections; Child; Environmental Exposure; Child, Preschool; Adolescent; Infant
PubMed: 38868160
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1402908