Equity was rarely considered in Cochrane Eyes and Vision systematic reviews and primary studies on cataract

Evans, Jennifer R; Mwangi, Nyawira; Burn, Helen; Ramke, Jacqueline

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.04.024

Cited by 21 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A piloted form based on the PROGRESS-Plus framework [ 36 ] will be used for data extraction. A growing number of systematic reviews utilise this framework [ 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 ] to study health inequities and evaluate interventions among different populations including migrants [ 41 ]. The data extracted will include author(s), publication year, study design and setting, sampling and data collection method(s), population characteristics, intervention, outcomes, and quality assessment.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Association between Post-Migration Nutrition and Lifestyle Transition and the Risk of Developing Chronic Diseases among Sub-Saharan African Migrants: A Mixed Method Systematic Review Protocol

Akombi-Inyang

Huda

Schutte

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sub-Saharan African (SSA) migrants face nutrition and lifestyle changes upon arrival in a host country. The shift in diet and lifestyle reflects post-migration acculturation and could predispose migrants to nutrition- and lifestyle- related chronic diseases. A mixed-methods systematic review of published studies and the grey literature on post-migration nutrition and lifestyle transition among SSA migrants will be undertaken. Studies published in English and conducted from 2000 to 2020 using quantitative and/or qualitative methods will be included. Ten bibliographic databases will be searched: Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, CINAHL, PubMed, ProQuest, PsycINFO, Informit and Web of Science. Data extraction will be informed by the Cochrane PROGRESS-Plus framework and the Joanna Briggs Institute manual. The quality of the included studies will be appraised for risk of bias using validated tools. An integrated approach to quantitative and qualitative data synthesis through data transformation will be undertaken, and a narrative synthesis of the findings will be provided. This protocol is guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines and provides insight into the scope and parameters of the systematic review to be conducted. The aim of the review is to evaluate the association between post-migration nutrition and lifestyle transition and the risk of developing chronic diseases among SSA migrants in Australia. This review will provide insight into possible areas for interventions to improve the health of migrants. Systematic Review Registration: The protocol was registered with the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews CRD42020206560.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Association between Post-Migration Nutrition and Lifestyle Transition and the Risk of Developing Chronic Diseases among Sub-Saharan African Migrants: A Mixed Method Systematic Review Protocol

Akombi-Inyang

Huda

Schutte

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further, although Europe was the predominant source of Cochrane authors, they were mostly located in the UK and several European countries had higher proportions of non-Cochrane authors which may suggest that these countries also have potentially untapped potential with regard to contributions to Cochrane. This finding is echoed in a recent investigation of Cochrane Eyes and Vision Cataract reviews which found only 17% of Cochrane reviews assessed included an author from a low-and middle-income country in their byline [26].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Authorship diversity among systematic reviews in eyes and vision

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Importance: The inclusion of authors from diverse backgrounds and with different lived experiences is critical to ensuring the questions addressed in systematic reviews (SRs), as well as the subsequent conclusions and recommendations made, are representative of the global community. Objective: To assess the gender and geographic diversity of authors among all Cochrane SRs in eyes and vision as compared with a random sample of non-Cochrane SRs of interventions in the field of eyes and vision. Design: The Cochrane Eyes and Vision US Satellite maintains a database of SRs in the field of eyes and vision. We selected all (n = 313) eyes and vision intervention SRs published in The Cochrane Library and a random sample of 313 eyes and vision intervention SRs published elsewhere for this study. We determined gender of the first and corresponding authors ("woman," "man," or "unknown") using a previously developed algorithm and their location based on institution country and the World Health Organization region. Results: From the 626 reviews included in our sample, we identified 751 unique authors who comprised 887 author positions (i.e., first and/or corresponding authors). We were able to ascertain the gender of 647/751 (86%) authors: 276 women and 371 men. Among Cochrane eyes and vision SRs, the proportions of women in first and/or corresponding author positions were consistent and approximately equal to men. Among non-Cochrane eyes and vision SRs, the representation of women was markedly lower as corresponding authors than other positions. Most authors of Cochrane eyes and vision SRs were from the UK (31%) and USA (26%), whereas most authors of non-Cochrane SRs were from China (34%). Conclusions and relevance: Compared with authors of non-Cochrane SRs in eyes and vision, authors of Cochrane SRs appear to have approximately equal representation of women and men among perceived important author positions and be located in European and North American countries, possibly due to the locations of the Cochrane editorial teams. Cochrane Eyes and Vision should continue to recruit authors from around the world in locations that reflect the global burden of eye disease.

show abstract

“…This nding is echoed in a recent investigation of Cochrane Eyes and Vision Cataract reviews which found only 17% of Cochrane reviews assessed included an author from a low-and middle-income country in their byline. 26 Cochrane reviews have been consistently found to be of higher methodological quality than non-Cochrane reviews. 14,[27][28][29] Recruiting and training these authors in Cochrane methods would greatly increase the capacity of Cochrane Eyes and Vision research output and the geographic diversity and representation in Cochrane reviews, as well as improve the overall quality of the evidence for eyes and vision conditions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Authorship diversity among systematic reviews in eyes and vision

Qureshı

Han

Fapohunda

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Importance: The inclusion of authors from diverse backgrounds and with different lived experiences is critical to ensuring the questions addressed in systematic reviews (SRs), as well as the subsequent conclusions and recommendations made, are representative of the global community.Objective: To assess the gender and geographic diversity of authors among all Cochrane SRs in eyes and vision as compared with a random sample of non-Cochrane SRs of interventions in the field of eyes and vision.Design: The Cochrane Eyes and Vision United States Satellite maintains a database of SRs in the field of eyes and vision. We selected all (n = 313) eyes and vision intervention SRs published in The Cochrane Library and a random sample of 313 eyes and vision intervention SRs published elsewhere for this study. We determined gender of the first and corresponding authors (‘woman,’ ‘man,’ or ‘unknown’) using a previously developed algorithm and their location based on institution country and the World Health Organization region. Results: From the 626 reviews included in our sample, we identified 751 unique authors who comprised 887 author positions (i.e., first and/or corresponding authors). We were able to ascertain the gender of 647/751 (86%) authors: 276 women, and 371 men. Among Cochrane eyes and vision SRs, the proportions of women in first and/or corresponding author positions were consistent and approximately equal to men. Among non-Cochrane eyes and vision SRs, the representation of women was markedly lower as corresponding authors than other positions. Most authors of Cochrane eyes and vision SRs were from the United Kingdom (31%) and United States of America (26%), whereas most authors of non-Cochrane SRs were from China (34%). Conclusions and relevance: Compared with authors of non-Cochrane SRs in eyes and vision, authors of Cochrane SRs appear to have approximately equal representation of women and men among perceived important author positions and be located in European and North American countries, possibly due to the locations of the Cochrane editorial teams. Cochrane Eyes and Vision should continue to recruit authors from around the world in locations that reflect the global burden of eye disease.

show abstract

Equity was rarely considered in Cochrane Eyes and Vision systematic reviews and primary studies on cataract

Cited by 21 publications

References 17 publications

The Association between Post-Migration Nutrition and Lifestyle Transition and the Risk of Developing Chronic Diseases among Sub-Saharan African Migrants: A Mixed Method Systematic Review Protocol

The Association between Post-Migration Nutrition and Lifestyle Transition and the Risk of Developing Chronic Diseases among Sub-Saharan African Migrants: A Mixed Method Systematic Review Protocol

Authorship diversity among systematic reviews in eyes and vision

Authorship diversity among systematic reviews in eyes and vision

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About