CLUSTER searching approach to inform evidence syntheses: A methodological review

Background The CLUSTER model of searching was proposed as a systematic method of searching for studies for reviews of complex interventions. The method has not been evaluated before. Aim This methodological review identified and evaluated a sample of evidence syntheses that have used CLUSTER. Methods A forward citation search on the seed CLUSTER publication was conducted on Web of Science Core Collection using six journal citation indexes and Google Scholar in December 2020. Reviews which used the CLUSTER method were eligible for inclusion. A narrative synthesis was used to describe the types of evidence syntheses that used CLUSTER searching, the extent to which the CLUSTER approach has been operationalised within evidence syntheses and whether the value, benefits and limitations of CLUSTER were assessed by the reviewers. Findings A total of sixteen reviews were identified and eligible for synthesis. Six different review types that used CLUSTER were identified with realist reviews being the most prominent. The evaluation of complex interventions was the most common review topic area. The use of CLUSTER varied among reviews with the retrieval of sibling studies being the most common reason. ‘Citations’ and ‘Lead authors’ were the most followed elements of CLUSTER. Conclusions Evidence suggests that CLUSTER has been adopted for use in reviews of complex interventions. Its usage varied among the included reviews. It is imperative that future reviewers diligently report the elements and steps of CLUSTER that were utilised in order to provide a reproducible and transparent search strategy that can be reported with similar transparency to bibliographic database searches

The challenge of conducting qualitative research to understand the factors that influence equity in medical education: A scoping review

Introduction There are national and international concerns about equity in basic and postgraduate medical education, especially about differential rates of access and attainment across groups of learners. Qualitative research has been increasingly used to understand the factors that influence equity but there are potential limitations to this understanding related to how the research has been conducted. The aim of the scoping review was to identify how qualitative research exploring the factors that influence equity in basic and postgraduate medical education has been conducted. The intention was to inform future research. Methods The electronic databases British Education Index, Campbell Library, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, ERIC, Google Scholar, Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC), MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science and medical education journals were searched to identify relevant published articles between 2008 and April 2019. Results Among 19,523 articles identified from the literature search, 72 full text articles were included in the review. Most studies had a focus on only one background characteristic and only two studies had a strengths-based focus on individuals. Recommendations for change was at the ‘policy level’ in ten studies and four studies had learner recommendations for change. No studies with a participatory approach were identified. Conclusion The approach to conducting previous qualitative research appears to limit greater understanding of the complexity of factors that influence equity. In response to this challenge, we recommend that future research widen the focus to consider the experiences and strengths of individual learners in addition to those identified by background characteristics. Future qualitative research is recommended to have a broad focus on both the ‘policy level’ and ‘local level’, especially from multiple perspectives. We also recommend greater collaboration of participants with researchers throughout the research process.</p

Size at birth and cognitive ability in late life: A systematic review

Recent evidence suggests that growth restriction in utero may lead to neurocognitive disorders in late life, either through impaired brain development or adverse metabolic programming

EstablishINg the best STEp-up treatments for children with uncontrolled asthma despite INhaled corticosteroids (EINSTEIN): Protocol for a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis using individual participant data (IPD)

IntroductionAsthma affects millions of children worldwide—1.1 million children in the UK. Asthma symptoms cannot be cured but can be controlled with low-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) in the majority of individuals. Treatment with a low-dose ICS, however, fails to control asthma symptoms in around 10%–15% of children and this places the individual at increased risk for an asthma attack. At present, there is no clear preferred treatment option for a child whose asthma is not controlled by low-dose ICS and international guidelines currently recommend at least three treatment options. Herein, we propose a systematic review and individual participant data network meta-analysis (IPD-NMA) aiming to synthesise all available published and unpublished evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to establish the clinical effectiveness of pharmacological treatments in children and adolescents with uncontrolled asthma on ICS and help to make evidence-informed treatment choices. This will be used to parameterise a Markov-based economic model to assess the cost-effectiveness of alternative treatment options in order to inform decisions in the context of drug formularies and clinical guidelines.Methods and analysisWe will search in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, NICE Technology Appraisals and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment series for RCTs of interventions in patients with uncontrolled asthma on ICS. All studies where children and adolescents were eligible for inclusion will be considered, and authors or sponsors will be contacted to request IPD on patients aged &lt;18. The reference lists of existing clinical guidelines, along with included studies and relevant reviews, will be checked to identify further relevant studies. Unpublished studies will be located by searching across a range of clinical trial registries, including internal trial registers for pharmaceutical companies. All studies will be appraised for inclusion against predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria by two independent reviewers with disagreements resolved through discussion with a third reviewer. We will perform an IPD-NMA—eventually supplemented with aggregate data for the RCTs without IPD—to establish both the probability that a treatment is best and the probability that a particular treatment is most likely to be effective for a specific profile of the patient. The IPD-NMA will be performed for each outcome variable within a Bayesian framework, using the WinBUGS software. Also, potential patient-level characteristics that may modify treatment effects will be explored, which represents one of the strengths of this study.Ethics and disseminationThe Committee on Research Ethics, University of Liverpool, has confirmed that ethics review is not required. The dissemination plan consists of publishing the results in an open-access medical journal, a plain-language summary available for parents and children, dissemination via local, national and international meetings and conferences and the press offices of our Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). A synopsis of results will be disseminated to NICE and British Thoracic Society/Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) as highly relevant to future clinical guideline updates.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019127599.</jats:sec

Best step-up treatments for children with uncontrolled asthma: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of individual participant data

Introduction: There is uncertainty about the best treatment option for children/adolescents with uncontrolled asthma despite inhaled corticosteroids, and international guidelines make different recommendations.Objectives: We evaluated the pharmacological treatments to reduce asthma exacerbations and symptoms in uncontrolled patients Methods: We searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, the Web of Science platform, NICE Technology Appraisals, the NIHR HTA series, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, conference abstracts and internal clinical trial registers (1 July 2014 to 5 May 2023) for randomised controlled trials of participants screening. Studies before July 2014 were retrieved from previous systematic reviews/contact with authors. Patients had to be randomised to any dose of ICS alone or combined with long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) or combined with leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs); LTRAs alone; theophylline; placebo. Primary outcomes were exacerbation and asthma control. The interventions evaluated were ICS (Low/Medium/High dose); ICS+LABA; ICS+LTRA; LTRA alone; theophylline; placebo.Results: Of the 4708 publications identified, 144 trials were eligible. Individual participant data were obtained from 29 trials, and aggregate data from 19 trials. Compared to ICS Low, ICS Medium+LABA was associated with the lowest odds of exacerbation (OR 0.44 [95% CrI 0.19–0.90]) and with an increased FEV1 (MD 0.71 [95% CrI 0.35–1.06]). Treatment with LTRA was the least preferred. No apparent differences were found for asthma control.Conclusion: Uncontrolled children/adolescents on low-dose ICS should be recommended a change to medium-dose ICS+LABA to reduce the risk for exacerbation and improve lung function

Respite care and short breaks for young adults aged 18–40 with complex health-care needs: mixed-methods systematic review and conceptual framework development

BackgroundThe number of young adults with complex health-care needs due to life-limiting conditions/complex physical disability has risen significantly over the last 15 years, as more children now survive into adulthood. The transition from children to adult services may disrupt provision of essential respite/short break care for this vulnerable population, but the impact on young adults, families and providers is unclear.AimTo review the evidence on respite care provision for young adults (aged 18–40 years) with complex health-care needs, provide an evidence gap analysis and develop a conceptual framework for respite care.DesignA two-stage mixed-methods systematic review, including a knowledge map of respite care and an evidence review of policy, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and experience.Data sourcesElectronic databases and grey/unpublished literature were searched from 2002 to September 2019. The databases searched included Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Health Management Information Consortium, PROSPERO, Turning Research into Practice, COnNECT+, British Nursing Index, Web of Science, Social Care Online, the National Institute for Health Research Journals Library, Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care specialist register, databases on The Cochrane Library and international clinical trials registers. Additional sources were searched using the CLUSTER (Citations, Lead authors, Unpublished materials, Scholar search, Theories, Early examples, Related projects) approach and an international ‘call for evidence’.Methods and analysisMultiple independent reviewers used the SPICE (Setting, Perspective, Intervention/phenomenon of interest, Comparison, Evaluation) framework to select and extract evidence for each stage, verified by a third reviewer. Study/source characteristics and outcomes were extracted. Study quality was assessed using relevant tools. Qualitative evidence was synthesised using a framework approach and UK policy was synthesised using documentary content analysis. GRADE-CERQual (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research) was used to assess confidence in the evidence. Logic models developed for each type of respite care constituted the conceptual framework.ResultsWe identified 69 sources (78 records) from 126,267 records. The knowledge map comprised the following types of respite care: residential, home based, day care, community, leisure/social provision, funded holidays and emergency. Seven policy intentions included early transition planning and prioritising respite care according to need. No evidence was found on effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Qualitative evidence focused largely on residential respite care. Facilitators of accessible/acceptable services included trusted and valued relationships, independence and empowerment of young adults, peer social interaction, developmental/age-appropriate services and high standards of care. Barriers included transition to adult services, paperwork, referral/provision delay and travelling distance. Young adults from black, Asian and minority ethnic populations were under-represented. Poor transition, such as loss of or inappropriate services, was contrary to statutory expectations. Potential harms included stress and anxiety related to safe care, frustration and distress arising from unmet needs, parental exhaustion, and a lack of opportunities to socialise and develop independence.LimitationsNo quantitative or mixed-methods evidence was found on effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of respite care. There was limited evidence on planned and emergency respite care except residential.ConclusionsPolicy intentions are more comprehensively met for young people aged Future workResearch to quantify the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of respite care to support service development and commissioning. Development of a core set of outcomes measures to support future collation of evidence.Study registrationThis study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018088780.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 9, No. 6. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

Toward a theory-led metaframework for considering socioeconomic health inequalities within systematic reviews

Objectives To develop a theory-led framework to inform reviewers’ understanding of what, how, and why health care interventions may lead to differential effects across socioeconomic groups. Study Design and Setting A metaframework approach combined two theoretical perspectives (socioeconomic health inequalities and complex interventions) into a single framework to inform socioeconomic health inequality considerations in systematic reviews. Results Four theories relating to complexity within systematic reviews and 16 health inequalities intervention theories informed the development of a metaframework. Factors relating to the type of intervention, implementation, context, participant response, and mechanisms associated with differential effects across socioeconomic groups were identified. The metaframework can inform; reviewer discussions around how socioeconomic status (SES) can moderate intervention effectiveness during question formulation, approaches to data extraction and help identify a priori analysis considerations. Conclusion The metaframework offers a transparent, practical, theory-led approach to inform a program theory for what, how, and why interventions work for different SES groups in systematic reviews. It can enhance existing guidance on conducting systematic reviews that consider health inequalities, increase awareness of how SES can moderate intervention effectiveness, and encourage a greater engagement with theory throughout the review process