Systematic Reviews: Challenges for Their Justification, Related Comprehensive Searches, and Implications

Misra, Durga Prasanna; Agarwal, Vikas

doi:10.3346/jkms.2018.33.e92

Cited by 29 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We chose to perform a narrative review due to (i) concerns that the systematic review process will omit many studies based on strict inclusion/exclusion criteria, and (ii) the broad scope of the present review, which is unsuitable if using the systematic process (Misra and Agarwal, 2018). Articles were obtained by searching relevant keywords into Google Scholar and PubMed databases.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual Responses to Heat Stress: Implications for Hyperthermia and Physical Work Capacity

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Extreme heat events are increasing in frequency, severity, and duration. It is well known that heat stress can have a negative impact on occupational health and productivity, particularly during physical work. However, there are no up-to-date reviews on how vulnerability to heat changes as a function of individual characteristics in relation to the risk of hyperthermia and work capacity loss. The objective of this narrative review is to examine the role of individual characteristics on the human heat stress response, specifically in relation to hyperthermia risk and productivity loss in hot workplaces. Finally, we aim to generate practical guidance for industrial hygienists considering our findings. Factors included in the analysis were body mass, body surface area to mass ratio, body fat, aerobic fitness and training, heat adaptation, aging, sex, and chronic health conditions. Findings: We found the relevance of any factor to be dynamic, based on the work-type (fixed pace or relative to fitness level), work intensity (low, moderate, or heavy work), climate type (humidity, clothing vapor resistance), and variable of interest (risk of hyperthermia or likelihood of productivity loss). Heat adaptation, high aerobic fitness, and having a large body mass are the most protective factors during heat exposure. Primary detrimental factors include low fitness, low body mass, and lack of heat adaptation. Aging beyond 50 years, being female, and diabetes are less impactful negative factors, since their independent effect is quite small in well matched participants. Skin surface area to mass ratio, body composition, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease are not strong independent predictors of the heat stress response. Conclusion: Understanding how individual factors impact responses to heat stress is necessary for the prediction of heat wave impacts on occupational health and work capacity. The recommendations provided in this report could be utilized to help curtail hyperthermia risk and productivity losses induced by heat.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual Responses to Heat Stress: Implications for Hyperthermia and Physical Work Capacity

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Evidence-based practice is underpinned by research and guided by principles of safety, effectiveness, person-centered care, timeliness, efficiency, and equity (1) alongside clinical expertise, and the values of people who seek health care (2). There has also been an exponential growth in the number of systematic review findings which places demands on clinicians for analysis and comprehension of healthcare evidence (3,4). However, finite resources mean that allied health managers must make explicit or implicit choices about how to prioritise interventions, funds and staff time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translating evidence into practice: A longitudinal qualitative exploration of allied health decision making.

White

Grant

Sarkies

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHealth policy and management decisions rarely reflect research evidence. In response, it is important to determine how to improve evidence-informed decision-making. As part of a broader study exploring implementation science strategies we examined how allied health managers respond to two distinct recommendations and the evidence that supports them. MethodsAllied health managers across Australia and New Zealand who were responsible for weekend allied health resource allocation decisions towards the provision of inpatient service to acute general medical and surgical wards, and sub-acute rehabilitation wards were eligible for inclusion. Consenting participants were randomised to: (1) control group or; (2) Implementation Group 1: received an evidence-based policy recommendation document guiding weekend allied health resource allocation decisions, or (3) Implementation Group 2: received the same policy recommendation document guiding weekend allied health resource allocation decisions with support from a knowledge broker. Serial focus groups were conducted with a sample of over 80 allied health managers recruited to Implementation Group 2 only. Out of 6 waves of recruitment, up to four focus groups were conducted with each wave during the 12 months study period. In total 17 health services participated in serial focus groups according to their allocated wave, over a 12-month study period. Data were analysed using an inductive thematic approach with constant comparison. Thematic saturation was achieved.ResultsResults provide insights into resource allocation and decision-making, including the interplay between barriers and facilitators concerning implementation of recommendations outlined in evidence-based policy recommendation document. Five key themes emerged: (1) Local data trumps, or is more influential; (2) How good is the evidence and does it apply to us; (3) It is difficult to change things; (4) Historically that’s how we have done things; and (5) What if we get complaints?ConclusionsThis study explored implementation of strategies to bridge gaps in evidence-informed decision-making. Results provide insight into barriers, which prevent the implementation of evidence base practice from fully, and successfully occurring such as attitudes towards evidence, limited skills in critical appraisal, and lack of authority to promote change. In addition, strategies are needed to manage the risk of confirmation biases in decision-making processes.

show abstract

“…We should add that, although any secondary study like ours seeks to apply comprehensive search processes and measures to ensure that we are "not missing relevant [primary] studies" [72], one can only minimize the chance of missing related primary studies, and there is no absolute guarantee that we find all papers. Indeed, there are papers outside the SE discipline that focus on the issue of effectiveness of search approaches, e.g., [72][73][74]. For example, Cooper et al mention in [72] that: "… comprehensive literature searching is implicitly linked to not missing relevant studies".…”

Section: Figure 4-a Screenshot From the Search Activity Using Google mentioning

confidence: 99%

Software-testing education: A systematic literature mapping

Garousi

Rainer

Lauvås

et al. 2020

Journal of Systems and Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: With the rising complexity and scale of software systems, there is an ever-increasing demand for sophisticated and cost-effective software testing. To meet such a demand, there is a need for a highly-skilled software testing work-force (test engineers) in the industry. To address that need, many university educators worldwide have included software-testing education in their software engineering (SE) or computer science (CS) programs. Many papers have been published in the last three decades (as early as 1992) to share experience from such undertakings.Objective: Our objective in this paper is to summarize the body of experience and knowledge in the area of software-testing education to benefit the readers (both educators and researchers) in designing and delivering software testing courses in university settings, and to also conduct further education research in this area. Method: To address the above need, we conducted a systematic literature mapping (SLM) to synthesize what the community of educators have published on this topic. After compiling a candidate pool of 307 papers, and applying a set of inclusion/exclusion criteria, our final pool included 204 papers published between 1992 and 2019.Results: The topic of software-testing education is becoming more active, as we can see by the increasing number of papers. Many pedagogical approaches (how to best teach testing), course-ware, and specific tools for testing education have been proposed. Many challenges in testing education and insights on how to overcome those challenges have been proposed.Conclusion: This paper provides educators and researchers with a classification of existing studies within software-testing education. We further synthesize challenges and insights reported when teaching software testing. The paper also provides a reference ("index") to the vast body of knowledge and experience on teaching software testing. Our mapping study aims to help educators and researchers to identify the best practices in this area to effectively plan and deliver their software testing courses, or to conduct further education-research in this important area.

show abstract

Systematic Reviews: Challenges for Their Justification, Related Comprehensive Searches, and Implications

Cited by 29 publications

References 27 publications

Individual Responses to Heat Stress: Implications for Hyperthermia and Physical Work Capacity

Individual Responses to Heat Stress: Implications for Hyperthermia and Physical Work Capacity

Translating evidence into practice: A longitudinal qualitative exploration of allied health decision making.

Software-testing education: A systematic literature mapping

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About