Advisory groups in realist reviews: systematically mapping current research and recommendations for practice

Introduction Realist reviews may involve groups or panels external to the research team who provide external and independent perspectives informing the review based on their experience of the topic area. These panels or groups are termed in this study as an “advisory group.” This study aims to map current practice of advisory groups in realist reviews and provide guidance for planning and reporting. Methods A “best-fit” framework synthesis methodology was used by first searching for a best-fit framework and then conducting a systematic search to identify a sample of realist reviews and rapid realist reviews (RRRs) from the most recent year, 2021. Nine databases were searched: CINAHL Complete, Cochrane, Embase, ERIC, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, Social Services Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, and Web of Science Core Collection. Screening and data extraction was conducted by two researchers. The chosen best-fit framework (ACTIVE framework) informed the data extraction tool. Results One hundred and seven reviews (93 realist reviews, 14 RRRs) were identified for inclusion. Of these, 40% (n = 37) of realist reviews and 71.5% (n = 10) of RRRs mentioned use of an advisory group, though there was considerable variation in terminology used. Individuals in advisory groups were involved at varying stages of the review and tended to bring experience in the topic area from the perspective of (i) a lived experience, i.e., patients, carers, family members (n = 15 realist reviews; n = 4 RRRs); (ii) professional experience, such as healthcare professionals (n = 20 realist reviews; n = 6 RRRs); or (iii) policy or research experience in the topic area (n = 19 realist reviews; n = 7 RRRs). Conclusions This study proposes a definition of advisory groups, considerations for advisory group use, and suggested items for reporting. The purpose of the advisory group should be carefully considered when deciding on their use in a realist review

Intermittent fasting interventions for the treatment of overweight and obesity in adults aged 18 years and over:a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: To examine the effectiveness of intermittent energy restriction in the treatment for overweight and obesity in adults, when compared to usual care treatment or no treatment. Introduction: Intermittent energy restriction encompasses dietary approaches including intermittent fasting, alternate day fasting, and fasting for two days per week. Despite the recent popularity of intermittent energy restriction and associated weight loss claims, the supporting evidence base is limited. Inclusion criteria: This review included overweight or obese (BMI ≥25 kg/m2) adults (≥18 years). Intermittent energy restriction was defined as consumption of ≤800 kcal on at least one day, but no more than six days per week. Intermittent energy restriction interventions were compared to no treatment (ad libitum diet) or usual care (continuous energy restriction ∼25% of recommended energy intake). Included interventions had a minimum duration of 12 weeks from baseline to post outcome measurements. The types of studies included were randomized and pseudo-randomized controlled trials. The primary outcome of this review was change in body weight. Secondary outcomes included: i) anthropometric outcomes (change in BMI, waist circumference, fat mass, fat free mass); ii) cardio-metabolic outcomes (change in blood glucose and insulin, lipoprotein profiles and blood pressure); and iii) lifestyle outcomes: diet, physical activity, quality of life and adverse events. Methods: A systematic search was conducted from database inception to November 2015. The following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN registry, and anzctr.org.au for English language published studies, protocols and trials. Two independent reviewers evaluated the methodological quality of included studies using the standardized critical appraisal instruments from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Data were extracted from papers included in the review by two independent reviewers using the standardized data extraction tool from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Effect sizes were expressed as weighted mean differences and their 95% confidence intervals were calculated for meta-analyses. Results: Six studies were included in this review. The intermittent energy restriction regimens varied across studies and included alternate day fasting, fasting for two days, and up to four days per week. The duration of studies ranged from three to 12 months. Four studies included continuous energy restriction as a comparator intervention and two studies included a no treatment control intervention. Meta-analyses showed that intermittent energy restriction was more effective than no treatment for weight loss (−4.14 kg; 95% CI −6.30 kg to −1.99 kg; p ≤ 0.001). Although both treatment interventions achieved similar changes in body weight (approximately 7 kg), the pooled estimate for studies that investigated the effect of intermittent energy restriction in comparison to continuous energy restriction revealed no significant difference in weight loss (−1.03 kg; 95% CI −2.46 kg to 0.40 kg; p = 0.156). Conclusions: Intermittent energy restriction may be an effective strategy for the treatment of overweight and obesity. Intermittent energy restriction was comparable to continuous energy restriction for short term weight loss in overweight and obese adults. Intermittent energy restriction was shown to be more effective than no treatment, however, this should be interpreted cautiously due to the small number of studies and future research is warranted to confirm the findings of this review

Acceptability of financial incentives for breastfeeding: thematic analysis of readers' comments to UK online news reports.

BACKGROUND: Whilst it is recommended that babies are breastfed exclusively for the first six months, many mothers do not maintain breastfeeding for this length of time. Previous research confirms that women and midwives value financial incentives for breastfeeding, but limited research has explored the wider acceptability of these interventions to the general public. This paper examines opinion towards financial incentives for breastfeeding using reader responses to UK on-line media coverage of a study undertaken in this area. METHODS: This study used netnography to undertake a thematic analysis of 3,373 reader comments posted in response to thirteen articles, published in November 2013, which reported findings from a feasibility study of financial incentives for breastfeeding. All articles were published on one of six UK news websites that achieved a monthly audience of at least five million viewers across laptop and desktop computers and mobile devices during April-May 2013. RESULTS: Nine analytical themes were identified, with a majority view that financial incentives for breastfeeding are unacceptable. These themes cover a range of opinions: from negligent parents unable to take responsibility for their own actions; through to psychologically vulnerable members of society who should be protected from coercion and manipulation; to capable and responsible women who can, and should be allowed to, make their own decisions. Many views focused on the immediate costs of the intervention, concluding that this was something that was currently unaffordable to fund (e.g. by the NHS). Others contrasted the value of the incentive against other 'costs' of breastfeeding. There was some consideration of the issue of cost-effectiveness and cost-saving, where the potential future benefit from initial investment was identified. Many commenters identified that financial incentives do not address the many structural and cultural barriers to breastfeeding. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, those commenting on the on-line UK news articles viewed financial incentives for breastfeeding as unacceptable and that alternative, structural, interventions were likely to be more effective. Further consideration of how best to conduct internet-based qualitative research to elicit opinion towards public health issues is required

Dietary advice for muscularity, leanness and weight control in Men's Health magazine: a content analysis

Background: The dietary content of advice in men’s lifestyle magazines has not been closely scrutinised. Methods: We carried out an analysis of such content in all 2009 issues (n = 11) of Men’s Health (MH) focusing on muscularity, leanness and weight control. Results: Promotion of a mesomorphic body image underpinned advice to affect muscle building and control weight. Diet advice was underpinned by a strong pseudo-scientific discourse, with citation of expert sources widely used to legitimise the information. Frequently multiple dietary components were advocated within one article e.g. fat, omega-3 fatty acids, thiamine, zinc and high-glycaemic index foods. Furthermore advice would cover numerous nutritional effects, e.g. strengthening bones, reducing stress and boosting testosterone, with little contextualisation. The emphasis on attainment of a mesomorphic body image permitted promotion of slimming diets. Advice to increase calorie and protein intake to augment muscle mass was frequent (183 and 262 references, respectively). Such an anabolic diet was advised in various ways, including consumption of traditional protein foods (217 references) and sports foods (107 references), thereby replicating muscle magazines’ support for nutritional supplements. Although advice to increase consumption of red meat was common (52 references), fish and non-flesh sources of protein (eggs, nuts & pulses, and soy products) together exceeded red meat in number of recommendations (206 references). Advice widely asserted micronutrients and phytochemicals from plant food (161 references) as being important in muscle building. This emphasis diverges from stereotypical gender-based food consumption patterns. Dietary advice for control of body weight largely replicated that of muscularity, with strong endorsement to consume fruits and vegetables (59 references), diets rich in nuts and pulses and fish (66 references), as well as specific micronutrients and phytochemicals (62 references). Notably there was emphasis on fat-burning, good fats and consumption of single foods, with relatively little mention of dietary restriction. Conclusions: Despite the widespread use of scientific information to endorse dietary advice, the content, format and scientific basis of dietary content of MH leaves much to be desired. The dietary advice as provided may not be conducive to public health

"It's a balance of just getting things right"

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. This study was funded by NHS Grampian. FD, LC, JC, and GMcN receive personal support from the RESAS programme of the Scottish Government Nutrition and Health. We would also like to thank Caroline Comerford of NHS Grampian and other members of the research steering group for their advice during the study; the parents for their time and input; the nursery school staff for distributing study packs for parents; Andrea Gilmartin for organising the focus groups and Dr Sandra Carlisle for the helpful comments on earlier drafts of the manuscript.Peer reviewedPublisher PD