Search

Introduction: Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) are cells derived from somatic cells via reprogramming techniques. The iPSC approach has been increasingly used in neuropsychiatric research in the last decade. Though substance use disorders (SUDs) are a commonly occurring psychiatric disorder, the application of iPSC model in addiction research has been limited. No comprehensive review has been reported. We conducted a scoping review to collate existing evidence on the iPSC technologies applied to SUD research. We aim to identify current knowledge gaps and limitations in order to advance the use of iPSCs in the SUD field. Methods and analysis: We employed a scoping review using the methodological framework first created by Arksey and O'Malley and further updated by Levac et al. and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). We adopted the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Protocols (PRISMA-P) to report items for the protocol. We searched evidence from four electronic databases: PubMed®, Embase®, Web of Science™, and Scopus®. Primary research, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses were included and limited to studies published in English, at the time from 2007 to March 2022. This is an "ongoing" scoping review. Searched studies will be independently screened, selected, and extracted by two reviewers. Disagreement will be solved by the third reviewer and discussion. Extracted data will be analyzed in descriptive and quantitative approaches, then summarized and presented in appropriate formats. Results will be reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guideline and disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations. Conclusion: To our best knowledge, this is the first comprehensive scoping review of iPSC methods specifically applied to a broad range of addictive drugs/substances that lead to SUDs or misuse behavior. Registration: This protocol is registered on Zenodo repository (https://zenodo.org/) with doi:10.5281/zenodo.7915252. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although most norovirus outbreaks in high-income countries occur in healthcare facilities, information on associations between control measures and outbreak outcomes in these settings is lacking. We conducted a systematic review/meta-analysis to assess associations between norovirus outbreak control measures and outcomes in hospitals and long-term care facilities (LTCFs), globally. Using regression analyses stratified by setting (hospital/LTCF), we compared durations, attack rates, and case counts for outbreaks in which control measures were reportedly implemented to those in which they were not. We identified 102 papers describing 162 norovirus outbreaks. Control measures were reportedly implemented in 118 (73%) outbreaks and were associated with 0.6 (95% CI: 0.3–1.1) times smaller patient case counts and 0.7 (95% CI: 0.4, 1.0) times shorter durations in hospitals but 1.5 (95% CI: 1.1-2.2), 1.5 (95% CI: 1.0–2.1) and 1.6 (95% CI: 1.0–2.6) times larger overall, resident and staff case counts, respectively, and 1.4 (95% CI: 1.0–2.0) times longer durations in LTCFs. Reported implementation of control measures was associated with smaller/shorter outbreaks in hospitals but larger/longer outbreaks in LTCFs. Control measures were likely implemented in response to larger/longer outbreaks in LTCFs, rather than causing them. Prospective observational or intervention studies are needed to determine effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Web of Science and Scopus are the leading databases of scholarly impact. Recent studies outside the field of nursing report differences in journal coverage and quality. Purpose A comparative analysis of nursing publications reported impact. Method Journal coverage by each database for the field of nursing was compared. Additionally, publications by 2014 nursing faculty were collected in both databases and compared for overall coverage and reported quality, as modeled by Scimajo Journal Rank, peer review status, and MEDLINE inclusion. Individual author impact, modeled by the h-index, was calculated by each database for comparison. Discussion Scopus offered significantly higher journal coverage. For 2014 faculty publications, 100% of journals were found in Scopus, Web of Science offered 82%. No significant difference was found in the quality of reported journals. Author h-index was found to be higher in Scopus. Conclusion When reporting faculty publications and scholarly impact, academic nursing programs may be better represented by Scopus, without compromising journal quality. Programs with strong interdisciplinary work should examine all areas of strength to ensure appropriate coverage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]