Search

Identifying which approaches can effectively reduce the need for out-of-home care for children is critically important. Despite the proliferation of different interventions and approaches globally, evidence summaries on this topic are limited. This study is a scoping review using a realist framework to explore what research evidence exists about reducing the number of children and young people in care. Searches of databases and websites were used to identify studies evaluating intervention effect on at least one of the following outcomes: reduction in initial entry to care; increase in family reunification post care. Data extracted from papers included type of study, outcome, type and level of intervention, effect, mechanism and moderator, implementation issues and economic (EMMIE) considerations. Data were coded by: primary outcome; level of intervention (community, policy, organisation, family or child); and type of evidence, using the realist EMMIE framework. This is the first example of a scoping review on any topic using this framework. Evaluated interventions were grouped and analysed according to system-level mechanism. We present the spread of evidence across system-level mechanisms and an overview of how each system-level mechanism might reduce the number of children in care. Implications and gaps are identified.

BackgroundDespite the accumulation of research papers on aspirin and cancer, there is doubt as to whether or not aspirin is an acceptable and effective adjunct treatment of cancer. The results of several randomised trials are awaited, and these should give clear evidence on three common cancers: colon, breast and prostate. The biological effects of aspirin appear likely however to be of relevance to cancer generally, and to metastatic spread, rather than just to one or a few cancers, and there is already a lot of evidence, mainly from observational studies, on the association between aspirin and survival in a wide range of cancers.AimsIn order to test the hypothesis that aspirin taking is associated with an increase in the survival of patients with cancer, we conducted a series of systematic literature searches to identify clinical studies of patients with cancer, some of whom took aspirin after having received a diagnosis of cancer.ResultsThree literature searches identified 118 published observational studies in patients with 18 different cancers. Eighty-one studies report on aspirin and cancer mortality and 63 studies report on all-cause mortality. Within a total of about a quarter of a million patients with cancer who reported taking aspirin, representing 20%-25% of the total cohort, we found aspirin to be associated with a reduction of about 20% in cancer deaths (pooled hazard ratio (HR): 0.79; 95% confidence intervals: 0.73, 0.84 in 70 reports and a pooled odds ratio (OR): 0.67; 0.45, 1.00 in 11 reports) with similar reductions in all-cause mortality (HR: 0.80; 0.74, 0.86 in 56 studies and OR: 0.57; 0.36, 0.89 in seven studies). The relative safety of aspirin taking was examined in the studies and the corresponding author of every paper was written to asking for additional information on bleeding. As expected, the frequency of bleeding increased in the patients taking aspirin, but fatal bleeding was rare and no author reported a significant excess in fatal bleeds associated with aspirin. No author mentioned cerebral bleeding in the patients they had followed.ConclusionsThere is a considerable body of evidence suggestive of about a 20% reduction in mortality in patients with cancer who take aspirin, and the benefit appears not to be restricted to one or a few cancers. Aspirin, therefore, appears to deserve serious consideration as an adjuvant treatment of cancer, and patients with cancer, and their carers, have a right to be informed of the available evidence.

Background: Despite an abundance of information regarding menopausal women in western society, African menopausal women have been overlooked in menopausal research, particularly, where they find information regarding menopause. Since inadequate health-related knowledge on menopause negatively affects the understanding of and coping with menopause and related symptoms, it is important to determine where women in Africa obtain their information about menopause. Aim: To conduct a systematic review to identify and analyse information sources consulted by menopausal women in the African region regarding the management of menopausal symptoms. Method: PubMed, Embase (OVID), Google Scholar, Medline (OVID), Medline in Process (OVID), Scopus, https://www.africabib.org/, African Index Medicus; http://indexmedicus.afro.who. int/,and African Journals Online (AJOL) were searched for publications from January 2000 to April 2017. Fourteen studies met the eligibility criteria. Twelve were quantitative while two were qualitative. Studies were independently appraised by two researchers using checklists from the Centre for Evidence-Based Management. Results: Meta-analysis explored the prevalence of different information sources reported with friends being the highest (44%, 95% CI: [0.35, 0.54]) followed by relatives (35%, 95% CI: [0.22, 0.50]) with medical providers being sources of information for only 30% of participants (95% CI: [0.15, 0.50]). Conclusion: Information regarding menopause among African women emanated primarily from friends and relatives, suggesting that women perceive menopause as a natural process whereby information is the best gleaned from informal sources. However, health care should aim to increase public awareness of menopause education and strengthen efforts to provide accurate, timely and helpful information for women and their friends and families.

Objective – Evidence from systematic reviews a decade ago suggested that face-to-face and online methods to provide information literacy training in universities were equally effective in terms of skills learnt, but there was a lack of robust comparative research. The objectives of this review were (1) to update these findings with the inclusion of more recent primary research; (2) to further enhance the summary of existing evidence by including studies of blended formats (with components of both online and face-to-face teaching) compared to single format education; and (3) to explore student views on the various formats employed. Methods – Authors searched seven databases along with a range of supplementary search methods to identify comparative research studies, dated January 1995 to October 2016, exploring skill outcomes for students enrolled in higher education programs. There were 33 studies included, of which 19 also contained comparative data on student views. Where feasible, meta-analyses were carried out to provide summary estimates of skills development and a thematic analysis was completed to identify student views across the different formats. Results – A large majority of studies (27 of 33; 82%) found no statistically significant difference between formats in skills outcomes for students. Of 13 studies that could be included in a meta-analysis, the standardized mean difference (SMD) between skill test results for face-to-face versus online formats was -0.01 (95% confidence interval -0.28 to 0.26). Of ten studies comparing blended to single delivery format, seven (70%) found no statistically significant difference between formats, and the remaining studies had mixed outcomes. From the limited evidence available across all studies, there is a potential dichotomy between outcomes measured via skill test and assignment (course work) which is worthy of further investigation. The thematic analysis of student views found no preference in relation to format on a range of measures in 14 of 19 studies (74%). The remainder identified that students perceived advantages and disadvantages for each format but had no overall preference. Conclusions – There is compelling evidence that information literacy training is effective and well received across a range of delivery formats. Further research looking at blended versus single format methods, and the time implications for each, as well as comparing assignment to skill test outcomes would be valuable. Future studies should adopt a methodologically robust design (such as the randomized controlled trial) with a large student population and validated outcome measures.

IntroductionThe increasing number of children and young people entering statutory care in the UK is a significant social, health and educational priority. Development of effective approaches to safely reduce this number remains a complex but critical issue. Despite a proliferation in interventions, evidence summaries are limited. The present protocol outlines a scoping review of research evidence to identify what works in safely reducing the number of children and young people (aged ≤18 years) entering statutory social care. The mapping of evidence gaps, clusters and uncertainties will inform the research programme of the newly funded Department for Education’s What Works Centre for Children’s Social Care.Methods and analysisThe review uses Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review methodology. Electronic database and website searches will identify studies targeting reduction of care entry, reduction of care re-entry and increase in post-care reunification. Supplementary searching techniques will include international expert consultation. Abstracts and full-text studies will be independently screened by two reviewers. Ten per cent of data abstraction will be independently conducted by two reviewers, with the remainder being extracted and then verified by a second reviewer. Descriptive numerical summaries and a thematic qualitative synthesis will be generated. Evidence will be synthesised according to primary outcome, intervention point (mapped across socioecological domains) and the realist EMMIE categorisation of evidence type (Effectiveness; Mechanisms of change; Moderators; Implementation; Economic evaluation).Ethics and disseminationOutputs will be a conceptual evidence map, a descriptive table quantitatively summarising evidence and a qualitative narrative summary. Results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication, conference presentations, the What Works Centre website, and knowledge translation events with policy-makers and practitioners. Findings will inform the primary research programme of the What Works Centre for Children’s Social Care and the subsequent suite of systematic reviews to be conducted by the Centre in this substantive area.

Background Evidence is growing that low-dose aspirin used as an adjuvant treatment of cancer is associated with an increased survival and a reduction in metastatic spread. We therefore extended up to August 2017 an earlier systematic search and meta-analyses of published studies of low-dose aspirin taken by patients with a diagnosis of cancer. Methods Searches were completed in Medline and Embase to August 2017 using a pre-defined search strategy to identify reports of relevant studies. References in all the selected papers were scanned. Two reviewers independently applied pre-determined eligibility criteria and extracted data on cause-specific cancer deaths, overall mortality and the occurrence of metastatic spread. Meta-analyses were then conducted for different cancers and heterogeneity and publication bias assessed. Sensitivity analyses and attempts to reduce heterogeneity were conducted. Results Analyses of 29 studies reported since an earlier review up to April 2015 are presented in this report, and these are then pooled with the 42 studies in our earlier publication. Overall metaanalyses of the 71 studies are presented, based on a total of over 120 thousand patients taking aspirin. Ten of the studies also give evidence on the incidence of metastatic cancer spread. There are now twenty-nine observational studies describing colorectal cancer (CRC) and post-diagnostic aspirin. Pooling the estimates of reduction by aspirin which are reported as hazard ratios (HR), gives an overall HR for aspirin and CRC mortality 0.72(95% CI 0.64-0.80). Fourteen observational studies have reported on aspirin and breast cancer mortality and pooling those that report the association with aspirin as a hazard ratio gives HR 0.69 (0.53-0.90). Sixteen studies report on aspirin and prostate cancer mortality and a pooled estimate yields an HR of 0.87 (95% CI 0.73-1.05). Data from 12 reports relating to other cancers are also listed. Ten studies give evidence of a reduction in metastatic spread; four give a pooled HR 0.31 (95% CI 0.18, 0.54) and five studies which reported odds ratio of metastatic spread give OR 0.79 (0.66 to 0.95). Conclusion Being almost entirely from observational studies, the evidence of benefit from aspirin is limited. There is heterogeneity between studies and the results are subject to important biases, only some of which can be identified. Nevertheless, the evidence would seem to merit wide discussion regarding whether or not it is adequate to justify the recommendation of low-dose therapeutic aspirin, and if it is, for which cancers?

BACKGROUND: Aspirin has been shown to lower the incidence and the mortality of vascular disease and cancer but its wider adoption appears to be seriously impeded by concerns about gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Unlike heart attacks, stroke and cancer, GI bleeding is an acute event, usually followed by complete recovery. We propose therefore that a more appropriate evaluation of the risk-benefit balance would be based on fatal adverse events, rather than on the incidence of bleeding. We therefore present a literature search and meta-analysis to ascertain fatal events attributable to low-dose aspirin. METHODS: In a systematic literature review we identified reports of randomised controlled trials of aspirin in which both total GI bleeding events and bleeds that led to death had been reported. Principal investigators of studies in which fatal events had not been adequately described were contacted via email and asked for further details. A meta-analyses was then performed to estimate the risk of fatal gastrointestinal bleeding attributable to low-dose aspirin. RESULTS: Eleven randomised trials were identified in the literature search. In these the relative risk (RR) of 'major' incident GI bleeding in subjects who had been randomised to low-dose aspirin was 1.55 (95% CI 1.33, 1.83), and the risk of a bleed attributable to aspirin being fatal was 0.45 (95% CI 0.25, 0.80). In all the subjects randomised to aspirin, compared with those randomised not to receive aspirin, there was no significant increase in the risk of a fatal bleed (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.41, 1.43). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the adverse events caused by aspirin are GI bleeds, and there appears to be no valid evidence that the overall frequency of fatal GI bleeds is increased by aspirin. The substantive risk for prophylactic aspirin is therefore cerebral haemorrhage which can be fatal or severely disabling, with an estimated risk of one death and one disabling stroke for every 1,000 people taking aspirin for ten years. These adverse effects of aspirin should be weighed against the reductions in vascular disease and cancer.

ObjectiveMusculoskeletal care pathways are variable and inconsistent. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the evidence for the clinical and/or cost effectiveness of current care pathways for adults with hip and/or knee pain referred for specialist opinion.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesElectronic database searches were carried out in MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, PEDro, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central and Health Management Information Consortium without language restriction from 1990 onwards. Websites were reviewed for grey literature.Eligibility criteriaAll study designs and documents that considered care pathways for adults with musculoskeletal hip and/or knee pain referred for specialist opinion were screened by two reviewers. Risk of bias was assessed using The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist for randomised controlled trials and the Joanna Briggs Institute checklists.Data extraction and synthesisData extraction and quality assessment were performed by one reviewer and checked by a second. Findings are reported narratively.ResultsThe titles and abstracts of 1248 articles were screened and 140 full-text articles retrieved. 19 papers reporting 17 studies met the study inclusion criteria. Quality was low due to study design and methodological flaws. Most of the outcomes relate to organisational process at the ‘meso’ level of a whole systems approach.ConclusionIt can be concluded that the pathway is not linear, containing variations and activity loops. The available evidence suggests that, from the point of referral for specialist opinion, a model is required that integrates the skills of all the different healthcare professionals and streamlining is required to ensure that individuals are seen by the healthcare professional that best meets their needs. There is very limited evidence of patient experience informing knee and hip care pathways.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42016035510.

Claire Stansfield1, Alison LWeightman2, Josephine Kavanagh1, Marit Johansen3 Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Coordinating Centre, (EPPI-Centre), Institute of Education, University of London, UK Support Unit for Research Evidence (SURE), Cardiff University, UK Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Global Health Unit, Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (Norwegian Satellite), Oslo, Norway Address correspondence to Claire Stansfield, E-mail: c.stansfield@ioe.ac.uk

Background Musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions are the most frequently reported chronic conditions and one of the biggest causes of disability in the UK. Given the ageing population and the impact of these problems, the demand for MSK treatment will rise. Despite reduced waiting times, MSK pathways have remained variable and inconsistent and need to be improved to meet patient needs. The aim of this systematic review is to understand the evidence for the effectiveness of current models of service delivery and care pathways for adult hip/knee pain patients accessing secondary care for specialist opinions. Methods MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, CINAHL, Embase, PEDro, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central and HMIC databases will be searched without language restrictions for papers published from 1990 onward. Websites will be reviewed for grey literature including care pathways, policy documents and unpublished MSK research. Additionally, reference lists will be checked and citations tracked for included studies. Discussion The following evidence will be included: research considering care pathways at the intersection between primary and secondary care for adults with hip and/or knee pain in countries with an established clinical pathway. Studies considering generalised inflammatory arthropathy and post-surgical care pathways will be excluded. Screening for included data will be conducted independently by two reviewers. After benchmarking, quality assessment and data extraction will be conducted by one reviewer and checked by a second. A mixed method analysis will be conducted. This systematic review will be used as part of a programme of research to identify best practice for MSK hip and knee pain care pathways. It will provide recommendations for pathway re-design to meet patient needs and ensure efficient streamlining of the patient journey. The review will combine a wide range of information sources including patient and clinician opinion, clinical guidelines, health service delivery research and stakeholder requirements. This should result in a pathway that provides better patient experience and outcomes, whilst meeting the demands placed on the NHS for high-quality evidence-based interventions with efficient use of resources. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42016035510 Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0301-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundExcess alcohol consumption has serious adverse effects on health and results in violence-related harm.ObjectiveThis study investigated the impact of change in community alcohol availability on alcohol consumption and alcohol-related harms to health, assessing the effect of population migration and small-area deprivation.DesignA natural experiment of change in alcohol outlet density between 2006 and 2011 measured at census Lower Layer Super Output Area level using observational record-linked data.SettingWales, UK; population of 2.5 million aged ≥ 16 years.Outcome measuresAlcohol consumption, alcohol-related hospital admissions, accident and emergency (A&E) department attendances from midnight to 06.00 and violent crime against the person.Data sourcesLicensing Act 2003 [Great Britain.Licensing Act 2003. London: The Stationery Office; 2003. URL:www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/17/contents(accessed 8 June 2015)] data on alcohol outlets held by the 22 local authorities in Wales, alcohol consumption data from annual Welsh Health Surveys 2008–12, hospital admission data 2006–11 from the Patient Episode Database for Wales (PEDW) and A&E attendance data 2009–11 were anonymously record linked to the Welsh Demographic Service age–sex register within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank. A final data source was recorded crime 2008–11 from the four police forces in Wales.MethodsOutlet density was estimated (1) as the number of outlets per capita for the 2006 static population and the per quarterly updated population to assess the impact of population migration and (2) using new methods of network analysis of distances between each household and alcohol outlets within 10 minutes of walking and driving. Alcohol availability was measured by three variables: (1) the previous quarterly value; (2) positive and negative change over the preceding five quarters; and (3) volatility, a measure of absolute quarterly changes during the preceding five quarters. Longitudinal statistical analysis used multilevel Poisson models of consumption and Geographically Weighted Regression (GWR) spatial models of binge drinking, Cox regression models of hospital admissions and A&E attendance and GWR models of violent crime against the person, each as a function of alcohol availability adjusting for confounding variables. The impact on health inequalities was investigated by stratifying models within quintiles of the Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation.ResultsThe main finding was that change in walking outlet density was associated with alcohol-related harms: consumption, hospital admissions and violent crime against the person each tracked the quarterly changes in outlet density. Alcohol-related A&E attendances were not clinically coded and the association was less conclusive. In general, social deprivation was strongly associated with the outcome measures but did not substantially modify the associations between the outcomes and alcohol availability. We found no evidence for an important effect of population migration.LimitationsLimitations included the absence of any standardised methods of alcohol outlet data collation, processing and validation, and incomplete data on on-sales and off-sales. We were dependent on the quality of clinical coding and administrative records and could not identify alcohol-related attendances in the A&E data set.ConclusionThis complex interdisciplinary study found that important alcohol-related harms were associated with change in alcohol outlet density. Future work recommendations include defining a research standard for recording outlet data and classification of outlet type, the methodological development of residence-based density measures and a health economic analysis of model-predicted harms.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Public Health Research programme. Additional technical and computing support was provided by the Farr Institute at Swansea University, made possible by the following grant:Centre for the Improvement of Population Health through E-records Research (CIPHER) and Farr Institute capital enhancement. CIPHER and the Farr Institute are funded by Arthritis Research UK, the British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, the Chief Scientist Office (Scottish Government Health Directorates), the Economic and Social Research Council, the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, the Medical Research Council, the National Institute for Health Research, the National Institute for Social Care and Health Research (Welsh Government) and the Wellcome Trust (grant reference MR/K006525/1).

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (overview). The objectives are as follows: This overview intends to: a) summarise the existing evidence on interventions that aim to increase PA; b) explore whether any effects of the intervention are different within and between populations, and whether these differences form an equity gradient such as an effect that differs according the advantage/disadvantage (e.g. low income and ethnic minorities); c) highlight gaps in the present evidence base that may warrant a Cochrane systematic review to be completed; and c) identify 'up to date' Cochrane reviews. .

This article provides a brief history of the development of the MEDLINE database and its huge impact within the UK, from its inception to the present time. The origins of MEDLINE can be traced back to a collection of books in the US Surgeon General's Office during the American Civil War and John Shaw Billings' decision, during 1867, to make this Library as complete as possible. From these beginnings, Index Medicus was developed in the early years of the 20th century, and electronic versions of the database began with the computerized on-demand search service MEDLARS in 1964 and then via CD-ROM and Internet Grateful Med to the web-based and free-to-all service, PubMed, in 1997. The response to PubMed was immediate and startling with usage increasing from 7 million searches per annum in 1996 to 400 million searches per annum in 2001 and the service continues to improve. MEDLINE providers are now offering mapping of natural language queries to the sophisticated indexing vocabulary (Medical Subject Headings, MeSH) and the provision of specific filters for different types of publication to improve searching efficiency, as well as links to full-text versions of the papers where available. The next steps are likely to involve an increased blurring of database and full-text boundaries, incorporating seamless access to the best available evidence within MEDLINE and a wide range of other information resources within a single search and to an increasing amount of full-text via various open-archive initiatives. As ever, the US National Library of Medicine is in the vanguard of research and further applications of its MEDLINE database for users within the UK will be awaited with great interest.

Objective: An updated systematic review was carried out of research studies looking at the value and impact of library services on health outcomes for patients and time saved by health professionals. Methods: A comprehensive systematic search was undertaken of the published literature to September 2003 in ERIC, LISA, Medline, PreMedline, Embase, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and Google. Some handsearching was carried out, reference lists were scanned and experts in the field were contacted. 28 research studies of professionally led libraries for healthcare staff, including clinical librarian projects, met the inclusion criterion of at least one health or 'time saved' outcome. Papers were critically appraised using internationally accepted criteria. Data were extracted and results were summarised using a narrative format since the studies were heterogeneous and precluded a statistical analysis. Results: There is evidence of impact from both traditional and clinical librarian services. The higher quality studies of traditional services measured impacts of 37-97% on general patient care, 10-31% on diagnosis, 20-51% on choice of tests, 27-45% on choice of therapy and 10-19% on reduced length of stay. Four studies of clinical librarian projects suggested that professionals saved time as a result of clinical librarian input, and two of these studies showed evidence of cost-effectiveness. However, the clinical librarian studies were generally smaller, with poorer quality standards. Conclusions: Research studies suggest that professionally-led library services have an impact on health outcomes for patients and may lead to time savings for health care professionals. The available studies vary greatly in quality but the better quality studies also suggest positive impacts. Good practice can be gathered from these studies to guide the development of a pragmatic survey for library services that includes the direct effects for patients among the outcome measures.

Study objective: To develop a cross disciplinary literature search methodology for conducting systematic reviews of all types of research investigating aspects of the built environment and the health of the public. Design: The method was developed following a comprehensive search of literature in the area of housing and injuries, using 30 databases covering many disciplines including medicine, social science, architecture, science, engineering, environment, planning and psychology. The results of the database searches, including the type (or evidence) of research papers identified, were analysed to identify the most productive databases and improve the efficiency of the strategy. The revised strategy for literature searching was then applied to the area of neighbourhoods and mental health, and an analysis of the evidence type of references was carried out. In recognition of the large number and variety of observational studies, an expanded evidence type classification was developed for this purpose. Main results: From an analysis of 722 citations obtained by a housing and injuries search, an overlap of only 9% was found between medical and social science databases and only 1% between medical and built environment databases. A preliminary evidence type classification of those citations that could be assessed (from information in the abstracts and titles) suggested that the majority of intervention studies on housing and injuries are likely to be found in the medical and social science databases. A number of relevant observational studies (10% of all research studies) would have been missed, however, by excluding built environment and grey literature databases. In an area lacking in interventional research (housing/neighbourhoods and mental health) as many as 25% of all research studies would have been missed by ignoring the built environment and grey literature. Conclusions: When planning a systematic review of all types of evidence in a topic relating to the built environment and the health of the public, a range of bibliographical databases from various disciplines should be considered.

Evidence-based practice is gaining support amongst health professionals. However, the major barrier remains the lack of time to read the literature. There are also problems with the take-up and use of evidence-based information sources such as Cochrane reviews and Effective Health Care bulletins. If such evidence is to be incorporated into local guidelines and used in day-to-day practice, practitioners request that these and other reliable publications be further summarized in short packages and available within seconds. The Health Evidence Bulletins Wales offer a model for this approach. The Bulletins have gone through several developmental stages leading to a novel two-column format. In the first column, brief statements summarize the best available evidence within a topic area. In the second, full details are provided of the supporting publications (and the evidence type, or research design) with links to the full text of documents, where possible from the electronic versions of each Bulletin. Results from a questionnaire study using a random sample and unsolicited feedback suggest that this ‘two-tier’ approach to information provision is valued by users and has implications for information services currently under development to support clinical governance.

Background In many countries, national, regional and local inter- and intra-agency collaborations have been introduced to improve health outcomes. Evidence is needed on the effectiveness of locally developed partnerships which target changes in health outcomes and behaviours. Objectives To evaluate the effects of interagency collaboration between local health and local government agencies on health outcomes in any population or age group. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Public Health Group Specialised Register, AMED, ASSIA, CENTRAL, CINAHL, DoPHER, EMBASE, ERIC, HMIC, IBSS, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, OpenGrey, PsycINFO, Rehabdata, Social Care Online, Social Services Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, TRoPHI and Web of Science from 1966 through to January 2012. 'Snowballing' methods were used, including expert contact, citation tracking, website searching and reference list follow-up. Selection criteria Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series (ITS) where the study reported individual health outcomes arising from interagency collaboration between health and local government agencies compared to standard care. Studies were selected independently in duplicate, with no restriction on population subgroup or disease. Data collection and analysis Two authors independently conducted data extraction and assessed risk of bias for each study. Main results Sixteen studies were identified (28,212 participants). Only two were considered to be at low risk of bias. Eleven studies contributed data to the meta-analyses but a narrative synthesis was undertaken for all 16 studies. Six studies examined mental health initiatives, of which one showed health benefit, four showed modest improvement in one or more of the outcomes measured but no clear overall health gain, and one showed no evidence of health gain. Four studies considered lifestyle improvements, of which one showed some limited short-term improvements, two failed to show health gains for the intervention population, and one showed more unhealthy lifestyle behaviours persisting in the intervention population. Three studies considered chronic disease management and all failed to demonstrate health gains. Three studies considered environmental improvements and adjustments, of which two showed some health improvements and one did not. Meta-analysis of three studies exploring the effect of collaboration on mortality showed no effect (pooled relative risk of 1.04 in favour of control, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.17). Analysis of five studies (with high heterogeneity) looking at the effect of collaboration on mental health resulted in a standardised mean difference of -0.28, a small effect favouring the intervention (95% CI -0.51 to -0.06). From two studies, there was a statistically significant but clinically modest improvement in the global assessment of function symptoms score scale, with a pooled mean difference (on a scale of 1 to 100) of -2.63 favouring the intervention (95% CI -5.16 to -0.10). For physical health (6 studies) and quality of life (4 studies) the results were not statistically significant, the standardised mean differences were -0.01 (95% CI -0.10 to 0.07) and -0.08 (95% CI -0.44 to 0.27), respectively. Authors' conclusions Collaboration between local health and local government is commonly considered best practice. However, the review did not identify any reliable evidence that interagency collaboration, compared to standard services, necessarily leads to health improvement. A few studies identified component benefits but these were not reflected in overall outcome scores and could have resulted from the use of significant additional resources. Although agencies appear enthusiastic about collaboration, difficulties in the primary studies and incomplete implementation of initiatives have prevented the development of a strong evidence base. If these weaknesses are addressed in future studies (for example by providing greater detail on the implementation of programmes; using more robust designs, integrated process evaluations to show how well the partners of the collaboration worked together, and measurement of health outcomes) it could provide a better understanding of what might work and why. It is possible that local collaborative partnerships delivering environmental Interventions may result in health gain but the evidence base for this is very limited. Evaluations of interagency collaborative arrangements face many challenges. The results demonstrate that collaborative community partnerships can be established to deliver interventions but it is important to agree goals, methods of working, monitoring and evaluation before implementation to protect programme fidelity and increase the potential for effectiveness.

Background Unintentional house fires appear to be reducing but remain a serious public health concern, disproportionately affecting certain groups in population. To ensure preventative measures reach those at greatest risk, it is vital that risk factors for unintentional fires are identified; particularly in light of recent funding cuts in many Fire Services across high-income countries. However, the last review to be conducted in this area was undertaken over 15 years ago. Methods To synthesise the evidence on risk factors for unintentional house fires, a range of bibliographic databases and grey literature were searched until October 2015. Key journals and reference lists were also hand-searched. To ensure the magnitude of risk could be quantified for each factor, only those studies that contained a comparison group, and undertook appropriate statistical analyses were included. A best evidence synthesis was undertaken instead of a meta-analysis due to study heterogeneity. Results This review identified 12 studies that investigated a variety of potential risk factors and outcomes that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. None of the identified studies were deemed high quality, but the available evidence suggests the following factors may be associated with fire risk: age, gender, socio-economic status, race/ethnicity, disability, household ownership, household composition, property characteristics, smoking, alcohol/drug use, fire safety practices and marital status. It also appears that whilst older and disabled residents are more likely to suffer an injury or fatality in the event of a fire; they are less likely to ignite a fire in the first instance. Conclusions There is a surprising paucity of high quality studies examining risk factors for house fire incidents, injuries and deaths. Further high quality studies, adopting standardised methods are required to permit synthesis, and to develop a firmer understanding of unintentional house fire risk factors.

NeLH Oral Health Specialist Library www.nelh.nhs.uk/oralhealth — how to access evidence based material quickly

Background: Excess alcohol consumption has serious adverse effects on health and violence-related harm. In the UK around 37% of men and 29% of women drink to excess and 20% and 13% report binge drinking. The potential impact on population health from a reduction in consumption is considerable. One proposed method to reduce consumption is to reduce availability through controls on alcohol outlet density. In this study we investigate the impact of a change in the density of alcohol outlets on alcohol consumption and alcohol-related harms to health in the community. Methods/Design: A natural experiment of the effect of change in outlet density between 200509, in Wales, UK; population 2.4 million aged 16 years and over. Data on outlets are held by the 22 local authorities in Wales under The Licensing Act 2003. The study outcomes are change in (1) alcohol consumption using data from annual Welsh Health Surveys, (2) alcohol-related hospital admissions using the Patient Episode Database for Wales, (3) Accident & Emergency department attendances between midnight6am, and (4) alcohol-related violent crime against the person, using Police data. The data will be anonymously record-linked within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank at individual and 2001 Census Lower Super Output Area levels. New methods of network analysis will be used to estimate outlet density. Longitudinal statistical analysis will use (1) multilevel ordinal models of consumption and logistic models of admissions and Accident & Emergency attendance as a function of change in individual outlet exposure, adjusting for confounding variables, and (2) spatial models of the change in counts/rates of each outcome measure and outlet density. We will assess the impact on health inequalities and will correct for population migration. Discussion: This inter-disciplinary study requires expertise in epidemiology and public health, health informatics, medical statistics, geographical information science, and research into alcohol-related violence. Information governance requirements for the use of record-linked data have been approved together with formal data access agreements for the use of the Welsh Health Survey and Police data. The dissemination strategy will include policy makers in national and local government. Public engagement will be through the Clinical Research Collaboration-Cymru "Involving People" network, which will provide input into the implementation of the research. © 2012 Fone et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd., link_to_subscribed_fulltext

Objectives To determine the association between area and individual measures of social disadvantage and infant health in the UK. Design Systematic review and meta-analyses. Data sources 26 databases and websites, reference lists, experts in the field and hand-searching. Study selection 36 prospective and retrospective observational studies with socioeconomic data and health outcomes for infants in the UK, published from 1994 to May 2011. Data extraction and synthesis 2 independent reviewers assessed the methodological quality of the studies and abstracted data. Where possible, study outcomes were reported as ORs for the highest versus the lowest deprivation quintile. Results In relation to the highest versus lowest area deprivation quintiles, the odds of adverse birth outcomes were 1.81 (95% CI 1.71 to 1.92) for low birth weight, 1.67 (95% CI 1.42 to 1.96) for premature birth and 1.54 (95% CI 1.39 to 1.72) for stillbirth. For infant mortality rates, the ORs were 1.72 (95% CI 1.37 to 2.15) overall, 1.61 (95% CI 1.08 to 2.39) for neonatal and 2.31 (95% CI 2.03 to 2.64) for post-neonatal mortality. For lowest versus highest social class, the odds were 1.79 (95% CI 1.43 to 2.24) for low birth weight, 1.52 (95% CI 1.44 to 1.61) for overall infant mortality, 1.42 (95% CI 1.33 to1.51) for neonatal and 1.69 (95% CI 1.53 to 1.87) for post-neonatal mortality. There are similar patterns for other infant health outcomes with the possible exception of failure to thrive, where there is no clear association. Conclusions This review quantifies the influence of social disadvantage on infant outcomes in the UK. The magnitude of effect is similar across a range of area and individual deprivation measures and birth and mortality outcomes. Further research should explore the factors that are more proximal to mothers and infants, to help throw light on the most appropriate times to provide support and the form(s) that this support should take., Article summary Article focus To determine the association between area and individual measures of social disadvantage and infant health in the UK. Key messages It is possible to be reasonably confident of the magnitude of effect of social disadvantage on health outcomes for UK infants, in particular the effects of area or individual deprivation on birth outcomes and infant mortality. The magnitude of effect, of a range of measures of social disadvantage on infant health outcomes, is broadly similar and has remained so over the past 30 years. Future research should concentrate on the more proximal determinants of infant health outcomes (such as individual maternal and infant factors) and the impact of any interventions employed to mitigate these determinants. Strengths and limitations of this study A rigorous systematic review and accompanying meta-analyses provide confidence in the findings. Specific relevance to the UK. A risk of publication bias (missing studies) cannot be ruled out though, given the large size of many included studies, the likely effect is minimal. The review concentrates on health outcomes only.

BACKGROUND: Multi‐strategic community wide interventions for physical activity are increasingly popular but their ability to achieve population level improvements is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of community wide, multi‐strategic interventions upon population levels of physical activity. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Public Health Group Segment of the Cochrane Register of Studies,The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, MEDLINE in Process, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, PsycINFO, ASSIA, the British Nursing Index, Chinese CNKI databases, EPPI Centre (DoPHER, TRoPHI), ERIC, HMIC, Sociological Abstracts, SPORTDiscus, Transport Database and Web of Science (Science Citation Index, Social Sciences Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index). We also scanned websites of the EU Platform on Diet, Physical Activity and Health; Health‐Evidence.org; the International Union for Health Promotion and Education; the NIHR Coordinating Centre for Health Technology (NCCHTA); the US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and NICE and SIGN guidelines. Reference lists of all relevant systematic reviews, guidelines and primary studies were searched and we contacted experts in the field. The searches were updated to 16 January 2014, unrestricted by language or publication status. SELECTION CRITERIA: Cluster randomised controlled trials, randomised controlled trials, quasi‐experimental designs which used a control population for comparison, interrupted time‐series studies, and prospective controlled cohort studies were included. Only studies with a minimum six‐month follow up from the start of the intervention to measurement of outcomes were included. Community wide interventions had to comprise at least two broad strategies aimed at physical activity for the whole population. Studies which randomised individuals from the same community were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias. Each study was assessed for the setting, the number of included components and their intensity. The primary outcome measures were grouped according to whether they were dichotomous (per cent physically active, per cent physically active during leisure time, and per cent physically inactive) or continuous (leisure time physical activity time (time spent)), walking (time spent), energy expenditure (as metabolic equivalents or METS)). For dichotomous measures we calculated the unadjusted and adjusted risk difference, and the unadjusted and adjusted relative risk. For continuous measures we calculated percentage change from baseline, unadjusted and adjusted. MAIN RESULTS: After the selection process had been completed, 33 studies were included. A total of 267 communities were included in the review (populations between 500 and 1.9 million). Of the included studies, 25 were set in high income countries and eight were in low income countries. The interventions varied by the number of strategies included and their intensity. Almost all of the interventions included a component of building partnerships with local governments or non‐governmental organisations (NGOs) (29 studies). None of the studies provided results by socio‐economic disadvantage or other markers of equity. However, of those included studies undertaken in high income countries, 14 studies were described as being provided to deprived, disadvantaged or low socio‐economic communities. Nineteen studies were identified as having a high risk of bias, 10 studies were unclear, and four studies had a low risk of bias. Selection bias was a major concern with these studies, with only five studies using randomisation to allocate communities. Four studies were judged as being at low risk of selection bias although 19 studies were considered to have an unclear risk of bias. Twelve studies had a high risk of detection bias, 13 an unclear risk and four a low risk of bias. Generally, the better designed studies showed no improvement in the primary outcome measure of physical activity at a population level. All four of the newly included, and judged to be at low risk of bias, studies (conducted in Japan, United Kingdom and USA) used randomisation to allocate the intervention to the communities. Three studies used a cluster randomised design and one study used a stepped wedge design. The approach to measuring the primary outcome of physical activity was better in these four studies than in many of the earlier studies. One study obtained objective population representative measurements of physical activity by accelerometers, while the remaining three low‐risk studies used validated self‐reported measures. The study using accelerometry, conducted in low income, high crime communities of USA, emphasised social marketing, partnership with police and environmental improvements. No change in the seven‐day average daily minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity was observed during the two years of operation. Some program level effect was observed with more people walking in the intervention community, however this result was not evident in the whole community. Similarly, the two studies conducted in the United Kingdom (one in rural villages and the other in urban London; both using communication, partnership and environmental strategies) found no improvement in the mean levels of energy expenditure per person per week, measured from one to four years from baseline. None of the three low risk studies reporting a dichotomous outcome of physical activity found improvements associated with the intervention. Overall, there was a noticeable absence of reporting of benefit in physical activity for community wide interventions in the included studies. However, as a group, the interventions undertaken in China appeared to have the greatest possibility of success with high participation rates reported. Reporting bias was evident with two studies failing to report physical activity measured at follow up. No adverse events were reported.The data pertaining to cost and sustainability of the interventions were limited and varied. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Although numerous studies have been undertaken, there is a noticeable inconsistency of the findings in the available studies and this is confounded by serious methodological issues within the included studies. The body of evidence in this review does not support the hypothesis that the multi‐component community wide interventions studied effectively increased physical activity for the population, although some studies with environmental components observed more people walking.

What can one expect to learn from a guide to effective MEDLINE searching? The author states that his intention is to promote `better searches and, hence, better application of what is known . . . to help you search with an understanding of what is possible and not be disappointed.' He does not, however, identify his target audience and so, as librarians with differing amounts of experience in both searching and teaching MEDLINE, we set out to decide whether the book had achieved this objective. Chapter 1 (`Origins') provides a stimulating account of the origins of MEDLINE from J. Shaw Billings via Hollerith's punch cards to web-based, full-text access. A detailed and clear explanation of Boolean logic is also provided along with key points that any end-user should be aware of such as the density of the indexing, the use of a controlled vocabulary and grammar (Medical Subject Headings, MeSH) and the requirement for practice and for active thought when using MEDLINE. Whilst the history of the database is likely to include something of interest for most readers, the extended explanation of the principles of Boolean logic is probably unnecessary. The chapter is well written, however, and the author's readable style is well illustrated in the following quotation which provides excellent justification for the book: `Using MEDLINE is a bit like driving a powerful racing car that has been modified for street use. It can transport you with astonishing speed to places you don't want to go.' Chapter 2 (on searching) notes the size of database, explaining that 4200 journals are indexed and some 33 000 new citations are added each month. Although these may arguably be the `best' journals, it is not made clear to readers that this selection constitutes only 35–40% of all biomedical journals and that non-journal …

Background: The focus of the Public Health Review Group (PHRG) is population level interventions with an emphasis on equity and inequalities.1,2 A core function of a Cochrane Review Group (CRG) is the development and management of a specialized register with the aim to provide a single resource of all studies pertinent to a particular specialist subject or area.

Within public health decision making, there has been an increasing awareness of the need for better syntheses of evidence related to interventions addressing upstream, population-level determinants of health and health inequalities. This includes focusing greater attention on ways of integrating evidence from a range of sources and on best ways of using what evidence is currently available, while remaining aware of its limitations. 1 Inherent within this is the need to consider further the contribution and value of multiple forms of evidence to the evidence base rather than a stringent focus on ranking evidence by more traditional scientific measures. Whilst we would argue that well-conducted experimental studies provide strong evidence on intervention effectiveness it is not always possible to carry out such studies when evaluating complex public health interventions. Accordingly, exploring ways of incorporating diverse evidence sources into systematic reviews, together with a realistic view of the scope, strengths and limitations of such evidence, needs consideration if public health is to make an effective contribution to impacting health inequalities and the social determinants of health. High quality systematic reviews can inform both the development of further primary research as well as policymaking, which does not absolve the need for better primary research on the effectiveness and economic efficiency of interventions and policies with regards to health inequalities, 2 but primary research must be informed by better understanding of what research already exists and hence where the gaps are.

Background. Gulf War veterans have a number of health complaints. We therefore decided to carry out a systematic review to identify and summarize the findings from studies that have assessed multi-symptom conditions in Gulf War veterans and in an unexposed comparison group.Method. Studies published between January 1990 and May 2004 were identified by searching a large number of electronic databases. Reference lists and websites were also searched and key researchers were contacted. Studies were included if they compared the prevalence of chronic fatigue syndrome, multiple chemical sensitivity, CDC-defined chronic multi-symptom illness, fibromyalgia, or symptoms of either fatigue or numbness and tingling in Gulf War veterans and non-Gulf veterans. A total of 2401 abstracts were independently reviewed by two authors.Results. Twenty-three publications fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Gulf deployment was most strongly associated with chronic fatigue syndrome (OR 3·8, 95% CI 2·2–6·7). Gulf War veterans were also approximately three and a half times more likely than non-Gulf veterans to report multiple chemical sensitivity or chronic multi-symptom illness as defined by CDC. The methodological quality of the studies varied but the later and larger studies were of a high methodological standard with robust sampling strategies, adequate response rates and good adjustment for confounders.Conclusions. The results support the hypothesis that deployment to the Gulf War is associated with greater reporting of multi-symptom conditions.

Background Veterans of the Persian Gulf War of 1991 have reported a range of adverse health symptoms. This systematic review aims to identify all studies that have compared the prevalence of symptoms of pain in veterans of the Gulf War to that in a non-Gulf military comparison group, and to determine whether Gulf War veterans are at increased risk of reporting pain. Methods Studies published between January 1990 and May 2004 were identified by searching a large number of electronic databases. Reference lists and websites were also searched and key researchers were contacted. Studies were included if they reported the prevalence of any symptom or condition that included the word "pain" in Gulf War veterans and in a comparison group of non-Gulf veterans. 2401 abstracts were independently reviewed by two authors. Results Twenty studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Five main sites of pain were identified (muscle, joint, chest/heart, back and abdominal pain) and separate meta-analyses were performed to summarise the results related to each site. A greater proportion of Gulf veterans reported symptoms at each site of pain when compared to a non-Gulf military group. Gulf deployment was most strongly associated with abdominal pain, with Gulf veterans being more than three times more likely to report such pain than a comparison group (OR 3.23; 95%CI 2.31–4.51). Statistical heterogeneity between study estimates was significant, probably due to variation in measured periods of prevalence and symptom measurement methods. Conclusion A higher proportion of veterans of the Persian Gulf War of 1991 reported symptoms of pain than military comparison groups. This is consistent with previously demonstrated increased reporting of more general symptoms (fatigue, multiple chemical sensitivity, post traumatic stress disorder) in these veterans compared with non-Gulf military groups. However, the primary studies were heterogeneous and varied greatly in quality.

Background The preparation of rigorous systematic reviews to address public health policy questions presents various methodological challenges. The Cochrane Public Health Group conducted a consultation that aimed to explore the usefulness of public health systematic reviews, and key issues hindering timely production of useful, policy relevant reviews. Methods We purposively sampled users of reviews, commissioners, and authors with diverse experience of using and conducting reviews in the UK. Interview data were coded using framework analysis, and the range and consistency of responses were explored in the analysis. We obtained ethics approval from the University of Cardiff. Findings Telephone interviews were conducted with 14 policy makers and 13 systematic review authors. Systematic reviews were valued by decision makers. Useful reviews needed to be timely and clearly communicated, to ask relevant questions, and be actionable and applicable to specific contexts. There were concerns that extremely rigorous reviews were less useful, for example by excluding evidence from non-randomised studies. There was frustration with reviews that had a narrow scope and did not report on emerging mechanisms for health effects. Authors described the challenges of completing large, complex reviews, highlighting resource constraints and reviewer capacity as important issues. Lack of methodological expertise was reported as a major barrier to producing useful reviews. Involvement of policy makers in the review process was viewed as important for improving communication and relevance of reviews. Interpretation The findings support the assertion that systematic reviews have a crucial role in knowledge exchange, and the data reiterate recommendations for clear communication of useful, timely evidence for evidence users. Issues specific to systematic reviews point to substantial challenges in the production of useful systematic reviews. The consultation was small, limiting the generalisability of the findings. Nevertheless, the apparent tension between producing timely, actionable findings for decision makers and the resource implications in producing complex reviews that include diverse sources of evidence presents a serious threat to the usefulness of reviews. Greater engagement with review users throughout the review process to define review scope, and interpretation of findings could improve the usefulness of reviews. In addition, further support to increase methodological capacity for broad public health reviews is required.

The Protocols for Investment in Health Gain were commissioned by the Welsh Office, and published in the early 1990s, to identify areas of health care where further investment could lead to improvements in the health of the people of Wales. The documents also highlighted current practices which were of questionable value.

A useful international benchmark, but should not be used to allocate resources In the linked bibliometric analysis (doi:10.1136/bmj.d1028), Glanville and colleagues assess the value of primary care research from the United Kingdom and five comparator countries, as measured by references or citations in later research publications. The authors found that these measures consistently placed UK researchers among the best in the world.1 Although opinions differ as to how reliable bibliometrics are as a sole measure of the quality and impact of research,2 3 4 they are increasingly used to assess peer reviewed research outputs in contexts such as local research performance indicators, grant applications, and academic appraisal processes. The Higher Education Funding Council for England’s current recommendation is that, because bibliometrics are unlikely to be free from distortion,5 the forthcoming Research Excellence Framework subpanels will be asked to decide whether they wish to use citation information to inform their review of research outputs. Some may well do so. The decisions made by the framework will inform the distribution of public funds by the four UK higher education funding bodies and therefore influence the development of the evidence base, in one direction or another, that supports clinical decisions in the more than 300 million general practice consultations each year in the UK, which represent more than 95% of all NHS consultations. …

BackgroundVeterans of the Persian Gulf War of 1991 have reported symptoms attributed to their military service.AimsTo review all studies comparing the prevalence of psychiatric disorders in Gulf War veterans and in a comparison group of service personnel not deployed to the Gulf War.MethodStudies of military personnel deployed to the Gulf published between 1990 and 2001 were identified from electronic databases. Reference lists and websites were searched and key researchers were contacted for information. Atotal of 2296 abstracts and 409 complete articles were reviewed and data were extracted independently by two members of the research team.ResultsThe prevalence of psychiatric disorder in 20 studies of Gulf War veterans was compared with the prevalence in the comparison group. Prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and common mental disorder were higher in the Gulf War veterans. Heterogeneity between studies was significant, but all reported this increased prevalence.ConclusionsVeterans of the Persian Gulf War reported an increased prevalence of PTSD and common mental disorder compared with other active service personnel not deployed to the Gulf. These findings are attributable to the increase in psychologically traumatic events in wartime.

The Cochrane Collaboration was established in 1993, following the opening of the UK Cochrane Centre in 1992, at a time when searching for studies for inclusion in systematic reviews was not well-developed. Review authors largely conducted their own searches or depended on medical librarians, who often possessed limited awareness and experience of systematic reviews. Guidance on the conduct and reporting of searches was limited. When work began to identify reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for inclusion in Cochrane Reviews in 1992, there were only approximately 20,000 reports indexed as RCTs in MEDLINE and none indexed as RCTs in Embase. No search filters had been developed with the aim of identifying all RCTs in MEDLINE or other major databases. This presented The Cochrane Collaboration with a considerable challenge in identifying relevant studies. Over time, the number of studies indexed as RCTs in the major databases has grown considerably and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) has become the best single source of published controlled trials, with approximately 700,000 records, including records identified by the Collaboration from Embase and MEDLINE. Search filters for various study types, including systematic reviews and the Cochrane Highly Sensitive Search Strategies for RCTs, have been developed. There have been considerable advances in the evidence base for methodological aspects of information retrieval. The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions now provides detailed guidance on the conduct and reporting of searches. Initiatives across The Cochrane Collaboration to improve the quality inter alia of information retrieval include: the recently introduced Methodological Expectations for Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR) programme, which stipulates 'mandatory’ and 'highly desirable’ standards for various aspects of review conduct and reporting including searching, the development of Standard Training Materials for Cochrane Reviews and work on peer review of electronic search strategies. Almost all Cochrane Review Groups and some Cochrane Centres and Fields now have a Trials Search Co-ordinator responsible for study identification and medical librarians and other information specialists are increasingly experienced in searching for studies for systematic reviews. Prospective registration of clinical trials is increasing and searching trials registers is now mandatory for Cochrane Reviews, where relevant. Portals such as the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) are likely to become increasingly attractive, given concerns about the number of trials which may not be registered and/or published. The importance of access to information from regulatory and reimbursement agencies is likely to increase. Cross-database searching, gateways or portals and improved access to full-text databases will impact on how searches are conducted and reported, as will services such as Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Technologies such as textual analysis, semantic analysis, text mining and data linkage will have a major impact on the search process but efficient and effective updating of reviews may remain a challenge. In twenty years’ time, we envisage that the impact of universal social networking, as well as national and international legislation, will mean that all trials involving humans will be registered at inception and detailed trial results will be routinely available to all. Challenges will remain, however, to ensure the discoverability of relevant information in diverse and often complex sources and the availability of metadata to provide the most efficient access to information. We envisage an ongoing role for information professionals as experts in identifying new resources, researching efficient ways to link or mine them for relevant data and managing their content for the efficient production of systematic reviews.

Ningun apartado de esta revision puede ser reproducido o publicado sin la autorizacion de Update Software Ltd. Ni la Colaboracion Cochrane, ni los autores, ni John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. son responsables de los errores generados a partir de la traduccion, ni de ninguna consecuencia derivada de la aplicacion de la informacion de esta Revision, ni dan grantia alguna, implicita o explicitamente, respecto al contenido de esta publicacion. El copyright de las Revisiones Cochrane es de John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. El texto original de cada Revision (en ingles) esta disponible en www.thecochranelibrary.com. Intervenciones comunitarias para el aumento de la actividad fisica Philip RA Baker, Daniel P Francis, Jesus Soares, Alison L Weightman, Charles Foster