Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.

/pdf/prisma-extension-for-scoping-reviews-prisma-scr-checklist-53qupltibg.pdf

PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

https://www.alzint.org/u/2020/08/Lancet-global-prevalence-dementia-2005.pdf

Global prevalence of dementia: a Delphi consensus study

https://www.healthcare.uiowa.edu/familymedicine/fpinfo/Docs/Chest%20Rx%20VTE%20Feb%202016.pdf

Antithrombotic Therapy for VTE Disease: CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report

Health providers face the problem of trying to make decisions in situations where there is insufficient information and also where there is an overload of (often contradictory) information. Statistical methods such as meta-analysis have been developed to summarise and to resolve inconsistencies in study findings—where information is available in an appropriate form. Consensus methods provide another means of synthesising information, but are liable to use a wider range of information than is common in statistical methods, and where published information is inadequate or non-existent these methods provide a means of harnessing the insights of appropriate experts to enable decisions to be made. Two consensus methods commonly adopted in medical, nursing, and health services research—the Delphi process and the nominal group technique (also known as the expert panel)—are described, together with the most appropriate situations for using them; an outline of the process involved in undertaking a study using each method is supplemented by illustrations of the authors' work. Key methodological issues in using the methods are discussed, along with the distinct contribution of consensus methods as aids to decision making, both in clinical practice and in health service development.



This is the sixth in a series of seven articles describing non-quantitative techniquesand showing their value in health research



Quantitative methods such as meta-analysis have been developed to provide statistical overviews of the results of clinical trials and to resolve inconsistencies in the results of published studies. Consensus methods are another means of dealing with conflicting scientific evidence. They allow a wider range of study types to be considered than is usual in statistical reviews. In addition they allow a greater role for the qualitative assessment of evidence (box 1). These methods, unlike those described in the other papers in this series, are primarily concerned with deriving quantitative estimates through qualitative …

/pdf/consensus-methods-for-medical-and-health-services-research-vfufdnfo1u.pdf

Consensus methods for medical and health services research.

Aim. To outline the key concepts and principles of the Delphi technique.

Methods. Reference is made to a selection of studies that illustrate a variety of methodological interpretations. Drawing on Heshusius's concept of ‘goodness criteria’, particular emphasis is given to the question of scientific merit and means of evaluation.

Conclusion. Although the technique should be used with caution, it appears to be an established method of harnessing the opinions of an often diverse group of experts on practice-related problems.

https://rachel.org/files/document/The_Delphi_Technique_Myths_and_Realities.pdf

The Delphi technique: myths and realities.

Prevalence of prostatitis-like symptoms in a population based study using the national institutes of health chronic prostatitis symptom index

Objective To summarise the evidence on the effect of psychological coping styles (including fighting spirit, helplessness/hopelessness, denial, and avoidance) on survival and recurrence in patients with cancer. Design Systematic review of published and unpublished prospective observational studies. Main outcome measures Survival from or recurrence of cancer. Results 26 studies investigated the association between psychological coping styles and survival from cancer, and 11 studies investigated recurrence. Most of the studies that investigated fighting spirit (10 studies) or helplessness/hopelessness (12 studies) found no significant associations with survival or recurrence. The evidence that other coping styles play an important part was also weak. Positive findings tended to be confined to small or methodologically flawed studies; lack of adjustment for potential confounding variables was common. Positive conclusions seemed to be more commonly reported by smaller studies, indicating potential publication bias. Conclusion There is little consistent evidence that psychological coping styles play an important part in survival from or recurrence of cancer. People with cancer should not feel pressured into adopting particular coping styles to improve survival or reduce the risk of recurrence.

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/325/7372/1066.1.full.pdf

Influence of psychological coping on survival and recurrence in people with cancer: systematic review

Prevalence of Urinary Symptoms and Other Urological Conditions in Spanish Men 50 Years Old or Older

Studies have shown that organ donation continues to remain a topic of debate and a high public priority.1 In 1998, 1576 transplants were performed in Canada, but 3548 patients remained on donor waiting lists. Canada's organ donation rate in 1999 was just 14.1 per million population, compared with 21.3 per million in the United States and 33.6 per million in Spain.2 The obvious solution to this problem is to decrease the disparity between the numbers of potential and actual donors. Possible donors are excluded because they do not meet eligibility requirements, usually owing to a pre-existing illness. Many potential donors are missed because physicians fail to approach family members about the possibility of donation. In Ontario, the decision to donate organs lies ultimately with family members. Physicians may miss potential donors because they falsely believe that the patient is unsuitable for donation or because they are deterred by emotional stress associated with a request for organ donation. Physicians who do approach family members often lose an opportunity to obtain an organ because they lack sufficient knowledge about organ donation to answer questions or concerns.3 Physician education has been shown to increase donation requests and procurement by addressing these problems.4,5,6 Also, the benefits of education for physicians in this area may diminish with time.4 This problem may be solved by making organ donation a key component of medical education and fostering an interest in organ donation among students. Results of a recent pilot study suggest that medical students at Queen's University in Kingston, Ont., demonstrate little knowledge of scientific and social issues related to organ donation.7 Furthermore, medical students were not shown to have any more knowledge of organ donation than their nonmedical undergraduate counterparts. This lack of knowledge may reflect the minimal time allotted to issues of organ donation in the medical curriculum. Organ donation and transplantation are important topics in surgical education. There is a growing trend for a reduced exposure to topics related to surgery in undergraduate medical curricula. This may be responsible in part for the declining number of students applying to surgery training.8 At Queen's University, 1 lecture hour is allocated to ethical issues relating to organ donation, and 1 problem-based learning case has organ donation as a learning issue. An additional immunology lecture covers topics related to the science of transplantation and graft rejection. No time is allotted to teaching the process of organ donation or how to approach a family about organ donation.

Knowledge of organ donation among medical students has not been examined in detail. A study conducted in Germany looked at the knowledge level of first-year medical students and found it to be at a level consistent with that of the lay public.9 We, therefore, sought to determine whether medical students have the knowledge needed to maximize organ donation rates and, if not, to identify areas that could be targeted by future curriculum modifications.

http://canjsurg.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/46-6-453.pdf

Duncan Hunter

Papers

Consensus methods for medical and health services research.

Prevalence of prostatitis-like symptoms in a population based study using the national institutes of health chronic prostatitis symptom index

Influence of psychological coping on survival and recurrence in people with cancer: systematic review

Prevalence of Urinary Symptoms and Other Urological Conditions in Spanish Men 50 Years Old or Older

Do medical students have the knowledge needed to maximize organ donation rates