Doel van de workshop: Hoe kun je een ‘systematic review’ opzetten en uitvoeren. Programma: Welke stappen moeten er gezet worden Zelf een vraag formuleren en uitwerken Eerste search doen
DOCUMENT
Although systematic reviews are considered as central components in evidence-based practice, they currently face an important challenge to keep up with the exponential publication rate of clinical trials. After initial publication, only a minority of the systematic reviews are updated, and it often takes multiple years before these results become accessible. Consequently, many systematic reviews are not up to date, thereby increasing the time-gap between research findings and clinical practice. A potential solution is offered by a living systematic reviews approach. These types of studies are characterized by a workflow of continuous updates which decreases the time it takes to disseminate new findings. Although living systematic reviews are specifically designed to continuously synthesize new evidence in rapidly emerging topics, they have also considerable potential in slower developing domains, such as rehabilitation science. In this commentary, we outline the rationale and required steps to transition a regular systematic review into a living systematic review. We also propose a workflow that is designed for rehabilitation science.
LINK
Abstract: Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma have a high prevalence and disease burden. Blended self-management interventions, which combine eHealth with face-to-face interventions, can help reduce the disease burden. Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to examine the effectiveness of blended self-management interventions on health-related effectiveness and process outcomes for people with COPD or asthma. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, COCHRANE Library, Emcare, and Embase were searched in December 2018 and updated in November 2020. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias (ROB) 2 tool and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Results: A total of 15 COPD and 7 asthma randomized controlled trials were included in this study. The meta-analysis of COPD studies found that the blended intervention showed a small improvement in exercise capacity (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.48; 95% CI 0.10-0.85) and a significant improvement in the quality of life (QoL; SMD 0.81; 95% CI 0.11-1.51). Blended intervention also reduced the admission rate (relative ratio [RR] 0.61; 95% CI 0.38-0.97). In the COPD systematic review, regarding the exacerbation frequency, both studies found that the intervention reduced exacerbation frequency (RR 0.38; 95% CI 0.26-0.56). A large effect was found on BMI (d=0.81; 95% CI 0.25-1.34); however, the effect was inconclusive because only 1 study was included. Regarding medication adherence, 2 of 3 studies found a moderate effect (d=0.73; 95% CI 0.50-0.96), and 1 study reported a mixed effect. Regarding self-management ability, 1 study reported a large effect (d=1.15; 95% CI 0.66-1.62), and no effect was reported in that study. No effect was found on other process outcomes. The meta-analysis of asthma studies found that blended intervention had a small improvement in lung function (SMD 0.40; 95% CI 0.18-0.62) and QoL (SMD 0.36; 95% CI 0.21-0.50) and a moderate improvement in asthma control (SMD 0.67; 95% CI 0.40-0.93). A large effect was found on BMI (d=1.42; 95% CI 0.28-2.42) and exercise capacity (d=1.50; 95% CI 0.35-2.50); however, 1 study was included per outcome. There was no effect on other outcomes. Furthermore, the majority of the 22 studies showed some concerns about the ROB, and the quality of evidence varied. Conclusions: In patients with COPD, the blended self-management interventions had mixed effects on health-related outcomes, with the strongest evidence found for exercise capacity, QoL, and admission rate. Furthermore, the review suggested that the interventions resulted in small effects on lung function and QoL and a moderate effect on asthma control in patients with asthma. There is some evidence for the effectiveness of blended self-management interventions for patients with COPD and asthma; however, more research is needed. Trial Registration: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42019119894; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=119894
DOCUMENT
The research proposal aims to improve the design and verification process for coastal protection works. With global sea levels rising, the Netherlands, in particular, faces the challenge of protecting its coastline from potential flooding. Four strategies for coastal protection are recognized: protection-closed (dikes, dams, dunes), protection-open (storm surge barriers), advancing the coastline (beach suppletion, reclamation), and accommodation through "living with water" concepts. The construction process of coastal protection works involves collaboration between the client and contractors. Different roles, such as project management, project control, stakeholder management, technical management, and contract management, work together to ensure the project's success. The design and verification process is crucial in coastal protection projects. The contract may include functional requirements or detailed design specifications. Design drawings with tolerances are created before construction begins. During construction and final verification, the design is measured using survey data. The accuracy of the measurement techniques used can impact the construction process and may lead to contractual issues if not properly planned. The problem addressed in the research proposal is the lack of a comprehensive and consistent process for defining and verifying design specifications in coastal protection projects. Existing documents focus on specific aspects of the process but do not provide a holistic approach. The research aims to improve the definition and verification of design specifications through a systematic review of contractual parameters and survey methods. It seeks to reduce potential claims, improve safety, enhance the competitiveness of maritime construction companies, and decrease time spent on contractual discussions. The research will have several outcomes, including a body of knowledge describing existing and best practices, a set of best practices and recommendations for verifying specific design parameters, and supporting documents such as algorithms for verification.
Worldwide, a third of all adults is suffering from feelings of loneliness, with a peak at young adulthood (15-25 years old). Loneliness has serious consequences for mental and physical health and should therefore be urgently addressed. However, existing interventions targeting loneliness mainly focus on older adults [1], and rarely consider the physical living environment, while studies prove that the physical environment (e.g. amenities, green, walkability, liveliness) has a significant impact on loneliness. Collaboration between the psychosocial and physical domains is key, to gain insight into the mechanisms and pathways linking characteristics of the physical living environment and loneliness among young adults and which spatial interventions are effective in managing loneliness. The main research questions are thus: how are physical environment and loneliness related, and which interventions should be implemented? The I BELONG proposal aims to build a European consortium that will address these questions. WP1 encompasses collaboration and networking activities that will form the basis for future collaboration, for instance a European research grant application. WP2 will provide insight in the pathways linking spatial attributes and loneliness. This will be achieved by doing a systematic literature review, a photovoice and interview study to collect data on specific locations that affect young people’s experiences with loneliness, and Group Model Building with experts. Building on this, WP3 aims to co-create spatial interventions with partners and young adults, and test ‘proof of concept’ interventions with virtual environments among young adults. WP3 will result in a spatial intervention toolkit. This project has both societal and scientific impact, as it will provide knowledge on pathways between physical environment characteristics and feelings of loneliness among young people, evidence of what spatial interventions work, and design guidelines that can be used in urban design and management that can contribute to managing loneliness and related health risks.
