7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Characteristics of RCTs focusing on health promotion in community samples: a scoping review protocol based on the d-CoSPICO framework

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Developing the capabilities of individuals, groups and communities to enhance their health has received a great deal of attention in the literature. One essential source of results is evidence-based intervention programmes, which often involve a number of different variables. This paper describes a methodology for carrying out a scoping review that maps available evidence on randomised controlled trials focusing on health promotion intervention programmes.

          Methods and analysis

          The scoping review protocol follows the general Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. It also incorporates some modifications to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Review flowchart and complements its methodological framework. This new format, called documents, Concept, Studies, Participants, Interventions, Comparator, and Outcomes (d-CoSPICO), guides the review sequence, which is represented in a flowchart. The search will focus on different sources of information using formal (searches in thematic –PubPsych, ERIC, MedLine, PsychINFO– and multidisciplinary databases –Academic Search Ultimate, Core Collection Web of Science, Scopus and ProQuest–, repositories and other websites), informal (contact with researchers), and retrospective (previous reviews on this topic) strategies to identify relevant publications until 2021, including grey literature. Coding, identification, selection, and data extraction will be carried out following the generation of a database in which each retrieved record’s content (abstract and/or full text) can be analysed. The review is expected to be completed in 2023.

          Ethics and dissemination

          Ethical approval is not required for this review. The d-CoSPICO framework and the results will be disseminated through (a) peer-reviewed publications; (b) presentations at scientific dissemination events and (c) training activities for applying this protocol.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

          Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement

            Systematic reviews should build on a protocol that describes the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of the review; few reviews report whether a protocol exists. Detailed, well-described protocols can facilitate the understanding and appraisal of the review methods, as well as the detection of modifications to methods and selective reporting in completed reviews. We describe the development of a reporting guideline, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015). PRISMA-P consists of a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review. Funders and those commissioning reviews might consider mandating the use of the checklist to facilitate the submission of relevant protocol information in funding applications. Similarly, peer reviewers and editors can use the guidance to gauge the completeness and transparency of a systematic review protocol submitted for publication in a journal or other medium.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The qualitative content analysis process.

              This paper is a description of inductive and deductive content analysis. Content analysis is a method that may be used with either qualitative or quantitative data and in an inductive or deductive way. Qualitative content analysis is commonly used in nursing studies but little has been published on the analysis process and many research books generally only provide a short description of this method. When using content analysis, the aim was to build a model to describe the phenomenon in a conceptual form. Both inductive and deductive analysis processes are represented as three main phases: preparation, organizing and reporting. The preparation phase is similar in both approaches. The concepts are derived from the data in inductive content analysis. Deductive content analysis is used when the structure of analysis is operationalized on the basis of previous knowledge. Inductive content analysis is used in cases where there are no previous studies dealing with the phenomenon or when it is fragmented. A deductive approach is useful if the general aim was to test a previous theory in a different situation or to compare categories at different time periods.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2023
                4 July 2023
                : 13
                : 7
                : e064769
                Affiliations
                [1 ] departmentDepartment of Psychology , Ringgold_16776Universidad Rey Juan Carlos , Alcorcón, Spain
                [2 ] departmentFaculty of Psychology , Ringgold_16757Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia , Madrid, Spain
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Luis Angel Saúl; lasaul@ 123456psi.uned.es
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9633-9137
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6351-8283
                Article
                bmjopen-2022-064769
                10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064769
                10335424
                37407032
                ac5577cc-99fb-45ba-b8fe-477ef6e00f27
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 18 May 2022
                : 21 June 2023
                Funding
                Funded by: Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED);
                Award ID: 2021-103-UNED-PROY
                Categories
                Health Policy
                1506
                1703
                Protocol
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                quality in health care,health & safety,health policy,public health
                Medicine
                quality in health care, health & safety, health policy, public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article