Background:Urinary incontinence is a common complaint in all parts of the world, cause of distress, as well as significant costs for both individuals and society. The aim of this study will be to evaluate the rigor of the development of clinical practice guidelines and to identify the recommendations of interventions for urinary incontinence in adult women.Methods:In this systematic review, clinical practice guidelines will be identified using a prospective protocol through a systematic search of: MEDLINE (via Ovid); EMBASE (Excerpt Medical Database, via Ovid); Web of Science and Virtual Health Library. Specific databases of guidelines for clinical practice will also be searched (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, American Urological Association, and others). Reviewers, independently and in duplicate, will assess the quality of the guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE II). The results will be checked for discrepancies. Differences between the scores equal to or greater than 2 will be considered as discrepant and the final result will be decided by consensus. A comparison of the recommendations of interventions and information about the level of evidence, the degree of recommendation, the level of agreement and the level of acceptance will be described. This step will also be done independently and in duplicate, and the result will be decided by consensus. The results will be presented in tables and the descriptive statistics will be calculated for all domains of the AGREE II instrument as mean (standard deviation) and median (interquartile range).Results:The results derived from this study will increase the knowledge about the development of recommendations guidelines for urinary incontinence of high methodological rigor. This study may also identify key areas for future research.Conclusion:This study may guide health professionals, policy makers, and health policy managers in choosing the guidelines for recommendation in clinical practice.Protocol Registration:PROSPERO - CRD42018116517

No abstract

Background: Research integrity is a dynamic area within the ethical research ecosystem. Several efforts have been made to incorporate this topic in scientific governance frameworks. However, the efforts generally result in non-binding declarations and policies. Due to differences in legal systems, research cultures, and institutional approaches worldwide, there is a need to identify and map existent strategies on sound scientific practices. Objective: This scoping review aims to systematically search, map, and evaluate the best available evidence on strategies and recommendations regarding research integrity. The goal is to identify international, national, regional, and local legal frameworks, institutional policies and guidelines, research integrity policies, interventions, strategies, and recommendations for: (i) The design and conduct of research projects, (ii) The publication of research results, (iii) The monitoring of scientific practices, (iv) The implementation of corrective actions, and (v) Mentoring and education on research integrity. Methods: The search will follow the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) and the methodological approach designed by Arksey and O'Malley. It will include legal frameworks, national and international governmental and non-governmental documentation, and scholarly articles published in peer-reviewed journals on research integrity. The search will be conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, JSTOR, Latin American & Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (Lilacs), Scopus, OECD Library. It will be complemented with hand searching and scanning, covering other databases and grey literature sources. We will extract and synthesize the data using two macro-genres: legal documents (soft law and hard law) and non-legal documents. Keywords: Research integrity, publication ethics, scoping review, Latin America