Global prevalence of antidepressant utilization in the community: A protocol for a systematic review

Introduction Antidepressant drugs are the most frequently prescribed medication for mental disorders. They are also used off-label and for non-psychiatric indications. Prescriptions of antidepressants have increased in the last decades, but no systematic review exists on the extent of their use in the community. Methods and analysis We will conduct a systematic review to estimate the prevalence of antidepressant use in the community. We will search for studies published from 1 January 2010 in the Embase and MEDLINE databases using a combination of controlled vocabulary and keywords adjusted for each database without any language restriction. The main inclusion criterion is the presence of prevalence data of antidepressant utilization. Thus, we will include all studies with a descriptive observational design reporting the prevalence of antidepressant use in the community. Study selection (by title/abstract and full-text screening) and data extraction for included studies will be independently conducted by pairs of reviewers. We will then synthesize the data on the prevalence of antidepressant use in individuals living in the community. If possible, we will perform a meta-analysis to generate prevalence-pooled estimates. If the data allows it, we will conduct subgroup analyses by antidepressant class, age, sex, country and other sociodemographic categories. We will evaluate the risk of bias for each included study through a quality assessment using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tool: Checklist for Studies Reporting Prevalence Data. DistillerSR software will be used for the management of this review. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval is not required for this review as it will not directly involve human or animal subjects. The findings of our systematic review will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals, the Qualaxia Network (https://qualaxia.org), presentations at international conferences on mental health and pharmacoepidemiology, as well as general public events. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021247423

Evaluation of the knowledge and attitude of pharmacists about the national malaria control policy in southern Benin

Abstract Background The national strategy against malaria in an endemic country should involve all the health stakeholders. In Benin, the private sector is rarely present in the activities of the National Malaria Control Programme (NMCP), and its surveillance system does not cover private sector outlets that are a non-negligible part of the healthcare system. Objective The aim of this study was to describe the drug delivery practices within private pharmacies of Cotonou and Porto-Novo and the awareness of medicine providers concerning the national policy of malaria treatment. Methods A survey was performed among pharmacy staff members responsible for dispensing medicines and providing advice to patients within pharmacies of Cotonou and Porto-Novo. Dispensing/pharmacy assistants (‘dispensators’) from 82 pharmacies in Cotonou and 19 in Porto-Novo were surveyed. Data entry was performed using Epidata 3.1 software and data analysis was carried out using SPSS software version 21.1. Chi square test was used to compare proportions. A significance threshold of 0.05 was defined for the p value. Results 46% of providers did not know the artemisinin-based combination therapy recommended by the NMCP for treating uncomplicated malaria. 58.7% were not able to recognize the gravity signs of malaria. 89.8% of dispensators were used to deliver an anti-malarial upon patient request, without prior biological confirmation as requested by the NMCP policy. Conclusions Dispensing practices within the studied pharmacies from Cotonou and Porto-Novo were not in adequacy with the NMCP guidelines for uncomplicated malaria, which is a striking weakness in the training of drug providers on key elements of the guidelines for managing malaria. The NMCP needs to help dispensator from private pharmacies sector to standardize drug delivery practices according to its guidelines

What methods are used to study the association between medication adherence trajectories, estimated with the group-based trajectory modeling (GBTM) method, and health-related outcomes?—a protocol for a systematic review

Background: The group-based trajectory modeling (GBTM) method is increasingly used in pharmacoepidemiologic studies to describe medication adherence trajectories over time. However, assessing the associations between these medication adherence trajectories and health-related outcomes remains challenging. The purpose of this review is to identify and systematically review the methods used to assess the association between medication adherence trajectories, estimated from the GBTM method, and health-related outcomes.Methods: We will conduct a systematic review according to the recommendations of the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions 6.2. Results will be reported following PRISMA 2020 (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) recommendations. We will search in the following databases: PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library. Two reviewers will independently select articles and extract data. Discrepancies at every step will be resolved through discussion, and consensus will be reached for all disagreed articles. A third reviewer will act as a referee if needed. We will produce tables to synthesize the modalities used to estimate medication adherence trajectories with GBTM. We will also synthesize the modalities used to assess the association between these medication adherence trajectories and health-related outcomes by identifying the types of health-related outcomes studied and how they are defined, the statistical models used, and how the medication adherence trajectories were used in these models, and the effect measure yield. We will also review the limitations and biases reported by the authors and their attempts to mitigate them. We will provide a narrative synthesis.Discussion: This review will provide a thorough exploration of the strategies and methods used in medication adherence research to estimate the associations between medication adherence trajectories, estimated with GBTM, and the different health-related outcomes. It will represent the first crucial steps toward optimizing these methods in adherence studies.Systematic review registration: Prospero CRD42021213503

Essential items for reporting of scaling studies of health interventions (SUCCEED) : protocol for a systematic review and Delphi process

CITATION: Gogovor, A., et al. 2020. Essential items for reporting of scaling studies of health interventions (SUCCEED) : protocol for a systematic review and Delphi process. Systematic Reviews, 9:11, doi:10.1186/s13643-019-1258-3.The original publication is available at https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.comBackground: The lack of a reporting guideline for scaling of evidence-based practices (EBPs) studies has prompted the registration of the Standards for reporting studies assessing the impact of scaling strategies of EBPs (SUCCEED) with EQUATOR Network. The development of SUCCEED will be guided by the following main steps recommended for developing health research reporting guidelines. Methods: Executive Committee. We established a committee composed of members of the core research team and of an advisory group. Systematic review. The protocol was registered with the Open Science Framework on 29 November 2019 (https://osf. io/vcwfx/). We will include reporting guidelines or other reports that may include items relevant to studies assessing the impact of scaling strategies. We will search the following electronic databases: EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, from inception. In addition, we will systematically search websites of EQUATOR and other relevant organizations. Experts in the field of reporting guidelines will also be contacted. Study selection and data extraction will be conducted independently by two reviewers. A narrative analysis will be conducted to compile a list of items for the Delphi exercise. Consensus process. We will invite panelists with expertise in: development of relevant reporting guidelines, methodologists, content experts, patient/member of the public, implementers, journal editors, and funders. We anticipated that three rounds of web-based Delphi consensus will be needed for an acceptable degree of agreement. We will use a 9-point scale (1 = extremely irrelevant to 9 = extremely relevant). Participants’ response will be categorized as irrelevant (1–3), equivocal (4–6) and relevant (7–9). For each item, the consensus is reached if at least 80% of the participants’ votes fall within the same category. The list of items from the final round will be discussed at face-to-face consensus meeting. Guideline validation. Participants will be authors of scaling studies. We will collect quantitative (questionnaire) and qualitative (semi-structured interview) data. Descriptive analyses will be conducted on quantitative data and constant comparative techniques on qualitative data. Discussion: Essential items for reporting scaling studies will contribute to better reporting of scaling studies and facilitate the transparency and scaling of evidence-based health interventions.https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13643-019-1258-3Publisher's versio