Search

Objective: The objective of this paper is to outline the updated methodological approach for conducting a JBI mixed methods systematic review with a focus on data synthesis, specifically, methods related to how data are combined and the overall integration of the quantitative and qualitative evidence. Introduction: Mixed methods systematic reviews provide a more complete basis for complex decision-making than that currently offered by single method reviews, thereby maximizing their usefulness to clinical and policy decision-makers. Although mixed methods systematic reviews are gaining traction, guidance regarding the methodology of combining quantitative and qualitative data is limited. In 2014, the JBI Mixed Methods Review Methodology Group developed guidance formixedmethods systematic reviews; however, since the introduction of this guidance, there have been significant developments in mixed methods synthesis. As such, the methodology group recognized the need to revise the guidance to align it with the current state of knowledge on evidence synthesis methodology. Methods: Between 2015 and 2019, the JBI Mixed Methods Review Methodology Group undertook an extensive review of the literature, held annual face-to-face meetings (which were supplemented by teleconferences and regular email correspondence), sought advice from experts in the field, and presented at scientific conferences. This process led to the development of guidance in the form of a chapter in the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis, the official guidance for conducting JBI systematic reviews. In 2019, the guidance was ratified by the JBI International Scientific Committee. Results: The updated JBI methodological guidance for conducting a mixed methods systematic review recommends that reviewers take a convergent approach to synthesis and integration whereby the specific method utilized is dependent on the nature/type of questions that are posed in the systematic review. The JBI guidance is primarily based on Hong et al. and Sandelowski's typology on mixed methods systematic reviews. If the review question can be addressed by both quantitative and qualitative research designs, the convergent integrated approach should be followed, which involves data transformation and allows reviewers to combine quantitative and qualitative data. If the focus of the review is on different aspects or dimensions of a particular phenomenon of interest, the convergent segregated approach is undertaken, which involves independent synthesis of quantitative and qualitative data leading to the generation of quantitative and qualitative evidence, which are then integrated together. Conclusions: The updated guidance on JBI mixed methods systematic reviews provides foundational work to a rapidly evolving methodology and aligns with other seminal work undertaken in the field of mixed methods synthesis. Limitations to the current guidance are acknowledged, and a series of methodological projects identified by the JBI Mixed Methods Review Methodology Group to further refine the methodology are proposed. Mixed methods reviews offer an innovative framework for generating unique insights related to the complexities associated with health care quality and safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current article provides an overview of an approach to incorporating a range of evidence, including qualitative research findings, which the authors piloted when developing a clinical guideline on epilepsies in children and young people. We describe methods used for incorporating literature types not usually included in Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network guidelines, including critical appraisal, and establishing dependability and credibility of qualitative findings. We highlight limitations encountered and make suggestions for future work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction The World Health Organization estimates that 10% of the 35.6 million people worldwide with dementia are aged under 65 years. In an ageing workforce this has implications for employers, employees, and statutory and third sector services. Limited research has been conducted into this emerging global issue. Method This systematic review, employing the methodology of the Joanna Briggs Institute, aimed to identify and synthesise the best available qualitative evidence regarding the needs, experiences and perspectives of people with early onset dementia or mild cognitive impairment who were either in employment or wished to gain employment. Results Of 69 studies identified, eight met the inclusion criteria. From these, four themes emerged: disease progression and recognition; the emotional impact of change; the employer’s management of the worker; and changes to the worker role. Conclusion There are health benefits to the individual with dementia or mild cognitive impairment of continuing to engage in meaningful occupation. Retirement policy changes have resulted in an ageing workforce with concurrent risk factors for dementia. A lack of understanding of reasonable adjustments and sheltered employment opportunities was evident from the literature. This review highlights the potential for occupational therapists to engage this client group in vocational rehabilitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many women from socially disadvantaged groups discontinue breastfeeding in the early postnatal period before lactation is fully established. This suggests that existing health service practices do not adequately meet the breastfeeding support needs of this population. The aim of this meta-synthesis is to review the literature exploring how women from socioeconomically deprived backgrounds experience breastfeeding establishment and to identify factors associated with supportive practice. Methods: The meta-synthesis includes qualitative studies exploring the perception of women from disadvantaged groups of in-hospital and professionally led interventions to support the establishment of breastfeeding. Searches were conducted for studies published between 1992 and 2013; after critical appraisal, eight studies were retained. Results: Three overarching themes of the influences on maternal perception of the efficacy of breastfeeding support were identified. These included practical skill and knowledge of the breastfeeding process, the influence of psychological factors on perceived breastfeeding ability, and the provision of a person-centered approach to infant feeding support. Conclusions: The findings illustrate that the factors associated with supportive breastfeeding practice are extensive, complex, and interrelated. Strategies which enable mothers to gain confidence in their ability to successfully breastfeed by acquiring technical expertise, which offer positive encouragement, and which are culturally specific are more likely to be perceived as supportive by women from socially disadvantaged groups. (BIRTH 42:4 December 2015) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are an increasing number of published single-method systematic reviews that focus on different types of evidence related to a particular topic. As policy makers and practitioners seek clear directions for decision-making from systematic reviews, it is likely that it will be increasingly difficult for them to identify 'what to do' if they are required to find and understand a plethora of syntheses related to a particular topic. Mixed-methods systematic reviews are designed to address this issue and have the potential to produce systematic reviews of direct relevance to policy makers and practitioners. On the basis of the recommendations of the Joanna Briggs Institute International Mixed Methods Reviews Methodology Group in 2012, the Institute adopted a segregated approach to mixed-methods synthesis as described by Sandelowski et al., which consists of separate syntheses of each component method of the review. Joanna Briggs Institute's mixed-methods synthesis of the findings of the separate syntheses uses a Bayesian approach to translate the findings of the initial quantitative synthesis into qualitative themes and pooling these with the findings of the initial qualitative synthesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) go undiagnosed and many of those who are diagnosed receive only symptomatic treatment. The difficulty of engaging patients with COPD in effective treatment plans is recognised, and healthcare professionals stress the importance of good communication. There is little in the literature to suggest how practitioners can provide this advanced, patient-centred care. The authors of this article argue that solution-focused brief therapy provides a framework for nurses to deliver safe, effective care that builds on 'what is well' with the patient and places their needs and agenda at the centre of care. They offer examples of techniques that can enhance practice, supported by case illustrations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) go undiagnosed and many of those who are diagnosed receive only symptomatic treatment. The difficulty of engaging patients with COPD in effective treatment plans is recognised, and healthcare professionals stress the importance of good communication. There is little in the literature to suggest how practitioners can provide this advanced, patient-centred care. The authors of this article argue that solution-focused brief therapy provides a framework for nurses to deliver safe, effective care that builds on 'what is well' with the patient and places their needs and agenda at the centre of care. They offer examples of techniques that can enhance practice, supported by case illustrations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is a requirement of nurses through the generation of evidence to implementing it, in a bid to to improve clinical practice. However, EBP is difficult to achieve. This paper highlights an approach to generating evidence for enhancing community nursing services for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) through a collaborative partnership. A district nurse and two nursing lecturers formed a partnership to devise a systematic review protocol and perform a systematic review to enhance COPD practice. This paper illustrates the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) systematic review process, the review outcomes and the practitioner learning. Collaborative partnerships between academics, researchers and clinicians are a potentially useful model to facilitate enhanced outcomes in evidence-based practice and evidence application. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Tropical Medicine & International Health is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In 1991, the latest version of the regulations governing the Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology (ETH) was approved. It included the clause that a systematic evaluation of the faculty should be carried out. The Center for Teaching and Learning at ETH Zürich was delegated the task of designing a model which would enable a regular and comprehensive assessment of the teaching at this institute to be undertaken, using student ratings as the basis for this assessment. The model was implemented in the winter semester 1993‐94 and since then over 2000 courses have been evaluated. The paper outlines the details of the model and describes examples of how the results have impacted on undergraduate education; the examples range from changes that have occurred in individual courses to efforts initiated across whole teaching divisions. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]