Exploring the association of paid sick leave with healthcare utilization and health outcomes in the United States: a rapid evidence review

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Parent perceptions and decision making about treatments for epilepsy : a qualitative evidence synthesis

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Changes to Prenatal Care Visit Frequency and Telehealth : A Systematic Review of Qualitative Evidence

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Leveraging continuous glucose monitoring as a catalyst for behaviour change : a scoping review

The authors would like to thank the student interns for their support in screening articles for inclusion in the prior biological feedback scoping review, which laid the foundation for the present review.Peer reviewe

Schedule of Visits and Televisits for Routine Antenatal Care : A Systematic Review

This report is based on research conducted by the Brown Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. 75Q80120D00001). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents; the findings and conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. Therefore, no statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Publisher PD

Correction: Identifying behaviour change techniques in 287 randomized controlled trials of audit and feedback interventions targeting practice change among healthcare professionals

Correction: Implement Sci 18, 63 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-023-01318-

Identifying behaviour change techniques in 287 randomized controlled trials of audit and feedback interventions targeting practice change among healthcare professionals

Background: Audit and feedback (A&F) is among the most widely used implementation strategies, providing healthcare professionals with summaries of their practice performance to prompt behaviour change and optimize care. Wide variability in effectiveness of A&F has spurred efforts to explore why some A&F interventions are more effective than others. Unpacking the variability of the content of A&F interventions in terms of their component behaviours change techniques (BCTs) may help advance our understanding of how A&F works best. This study aimed to systematically specify BCTs in A&F interventions targeting healthcare professional practice change. / Methods: We conducted a directed content analysis of intervention descriptions in 287 randomized trials included in an ongoing Cochrane systematic review update of A&F interventions (searched up to June 2020). Three trained researchers identified and categorized BCTs in all trial arms (treatment & control/comparator) using the 93-item BCT Taxonomy version 1. The original BCT definitions and examples in the taxonomy were adapted to include A&F-specific decision rules and examples. Two additional BCTs (‘Education (unspecified)’ and ‘Feedback (unspecified)’) were added, such that 95 BCTs were considered for coding. / Results: In total, 47/95 BCTs (49%) were identified across 360 treatment arms at least once (median = 5.0, IQR = 2.3, range = 129 per arm). The most common BCTs were ‘Feedback on behaviour’ (present 89% of the time; e.g. feedback on drug prescribing), ‘Instruction on how to perform the behaviour’ (71%; e.g. issuing a clinical guideline), ‘Social comparison’ (52%; e.g. feedback on performance of peers), ‘Credible source’ (41%; e.g. endorsements from respected professional body), and ‘Education (unspecified)’ (31%; e.g. giving a lecture to staff). A total of 130/287 (45%) control/comparator arms contained at least one BCT (median = 2.0, IQR = 3.0, range = 0–15 per arm), of which the most common were identical to those identified in treatment arms. / Conclusions: A&F interventions to improve healthcare professional practice include a moderate range of BCTs, focusing predominantly on providing behavioural feedback, sharing guidelines, peer comparison data, education, and leveraging credible sources. We encourage the use of our A&F-specific list of BCTs to improve knowledge of what is being delivered in A&F interventions. Our study provides a basis for exploring which BCTs are associated with intervention effectiveness. / Trial registrations: N/A

Accelerated Diagnostic Protocols Using High-sensitivity Troponin Assays to “Rule In” or “Rule Out” Myocardial Infarction in the Emergency Department : A Systematic Review

Publisher PD

Accelerated diagnostic protocols using high-sensitivity troponin assays to rule in or out myocardial infarction : A systematic review

The authors are grateful to Gaelen Adam, MLIS for literature searching.Peer reviewe