Background: Cancer is a growing public health concern in Africa and Asia, where access to effective healthcare and resources is often limited. There is an urgent need for evidence-based cancer control policies in Africa and Asia, along with systems for prevention, early detection, diagnosis and treatment, and palliative care. This emerging issue has garnered growing interest from international institutions but there has been little visible action, and the existing knowledge remains scattered and fragmented. This scoping review aims to explore the breadth and scope of evidence regarding knowledge transfer interventions to enhance cancer care in Africa and Asia. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of Embase, Emcare, ERIC, APA PsycInfo, Medline, and Google Scholar, supplemented by expert bibliographies and references. Peer-reviewed empirical studies in English or French from January 1978 to September 2024 were included. Data were organised using the AIMD (Aims, Ingredients, Mechanism & Delivery) framework. Study quality was presented using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Results: The scoping review examined seven articles providing evidence on five unique interventions. The interventions included target both decision-makers and health professionals and aim to strengthen evidence-based cancer control policies and implementation strategies. The interventions documented have all been initiated by external actors, mainly international institutions or researchers from high-income countries, in collaboration with African and Asian stakeholders. In addition, some researchers have been involved in participatory research projects designed to enable decision-makers to implement evidence-based cancer control policies and programmes. Conclusions: This scoping review highlights a critical lack of evidence on knowledge transfer interventions in cancer care across Africa and Asia, partly due to limited funding for non-communicable diseases. It calls for the integration of knowledge transfer components into all cancer research and interventions, supported by robust evaluation strategies, to develop evidence-based, economically feasible, and culturally appropriate policies, guidelines and interventions that can be used in nations with limited healthcare resources to improve cancer outcomes.

BackgroundMathematical models and advanced analytics play an important role in policy decision making and mobilizing action. The Imperial College Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Response Team (ICCRT) provided continuous, timely and robust epidemiological analyses to inform the policy responses of governments and public health agencies around the world. This study aims to quantify the policy impact of ICCRT outputs, and understand which evidence was considered policy-relevant during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe collated all outputs published by the ICCRT between 01-01-2020 and 24-02-2022 and conducted inductive thematic analysis. A systematic search of the Overton database identified policy document references, as an indicator of policy impact.ResultsWe identified 620 outputs including preprints (16%), reports (29%), journal articles (37%) and news items (18%). More than half (56%) of all reports and preprints were subsequently peer-reviewed and published as a journal article after 202 days on average. Reports and preprints were crucial during the COVID-19 pandemic to the timely distribution of important research findings. One-fifth of ICCRT outputs (21%) were available to or considered by United Kingdom government meetings. Policy documents from 41 countries in 26 different languages referenced 43% of ICCRT outputs, with a mean time between publication and reference in the policy document of 256 days. We analysed a total of 1746 policy document references. Two-thirds (61%) of journal articles, 39% of preprints, 31% of reports and 16% of news items were referenced in one or more policy documents (these 217 outputs had a mean of 8 policy document references per output). The most frequent themes of the evidence produced by the ICCRT reflected the evidence-need for policy decision making, and evolved accordingly from the pre-vaccination phase [severity, healthcare demand and capacity, and non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs)] to the vaccination phase of the epidemic (variants and genomics).ConclusionThe work produced by the ICCRT affected global and domestic policy during the COVID-19 pandemic. The focus of evidence produced by the ICCRT corresponded with changing policy needs over time. The policy impact from ICCRT news items highlights the effectiveness of this unique communication strategy in addition to traditional research outputs, ensuring research informs policy decisions more effectively.

Background: Evidence-based practice is defined as using the best available research and clinical evidence by incorporating patients' values and preferences for their health needs. The use of evidence-based intrapartum care practices is an essential tool to improve the quality of obstetrics care. Objective: The primary objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of evidence-based intrapartum care and associated factors among obstetrics care providers in Ethiopia. Method: Important articles were retrieved from universally accepted and used databases, including Cochran, PubMed, HINARI, Google Scholar, Web of Science, African OnLine, and repositories of Ethiopian Universities. We extracted articles by using a standard JOANNA Briggs Institute data extraction sheet. To determine the existence of heterogeneity in studies, I 2 statistics and Cochran Q tests were used. The publication bias of the included studies was checked using Egger's test and a Funnel plot. Result: A total of 2035 obstetrics care providers were involved in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The estimated overall rate of evidence-based intrapartum care practice in Ethiopia was 54.45% (95% CI: 43.06, 65.83); I 2 = 96.6%, p < 0.001). The studies with a sample size greater than 300 count for 47.25% (95% CI: 36.14, 65.83). Whereas obstetrics care providers have a decent knowledge of intrapartum care evidence 3.31 times, a positive attitude toward evidence 3.34 times, training 2.21 times, and work experience ⩾5 years 3.31 times associated with the practice of evidence-based intrapartum care. Conclusion: The overall practice of evidence-based intrapartum care among obstetrics workers in Ethiopia is estimated to be low. Therefore, there should be a focused effort on training and disseminating protocols and guidelines to enhance knowledge and foster a positive attitude among obstetrics care providers. Additionally, the Ethiopian government should prioritize the implementation of the 2021 to 2025 National Health Equity Strategic Plan to achieve its objective of improving the quality of health services.

Background: Achievement of evidence-informed decision making (EIDM) requires the integration of evidence into all practice decisions by identifying and synthesizing evidence, then developing and executing plans to implement and evaluate changes to practice. This rapid systematic review synthesizes evidence for strategies for the implementation of EIDM across organizations, mapping facilitators and barriers to the COM-B (capability, opportunity, motivation, behaviour) model for behaviour change. The review was conducted to support leadership at organizations delivering public health services (health promotion, communicable disease prevention) to drive change toward evidence-informed public health. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in multiple databases and by reviewing publications of key authors. Articles that describe interventions to drive EIDM within teams, departments, or organizations were eligible for inclusion. For each included article, quality was assessed, and details of the intervention, setting, outcomes, facilitators and barriers were extracted. A convergent integrated approach was undertaken to analyze both quantitative and qualitative findings. Results: Thirty-seven articles are included. Studies were conducted in primary care, public health, social services, and occupational health settings. Strategies to implement EIDM included the establishment of Knowledge Broker-type roles, building the EIDM capacity of staff, and research or academic partnerships. Facilitators and barriers align with the COM-B model for behaviour change. Facilitators for capability include the development of staff knowledge and skill, establishing specialized roles, and knowledge sharing across the organization, though staff turnover and subsequent knowledge loss was a barrier to capability. For opportunity, facilitators include the development of processes or mechanisms to support new practices, forums for learning and skill development, and protected time, and barriers include competing priorities. Facilitators identified for motivation include supportive organizational culture, expectations for new practices to occur, recognition and positive reinforcement, and strong leadership support. Barriers include negative attitudes toward new practices, and lack of understanding and support from management. Conclusion: This review provides a comprehensive analysis of facilitators and barriers for the implementation of EIDM in organizations for public health, mapped to the COM-B model for behaviour change. The existing literature for strategies to support EIDM in public health illustrates several facilitators and barriers linked to realizing EIDM. Knowledge of these factors will help senior leadership develop and implement EIDM strategies tailored to their organization, leading to increased likelihood of implementation success. Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42022318994.

Background: Evidence networks facilitate the exchange of information and foster international relationships among researchers and stakeholders. These networks are instrumental in enabling the integration of scientific evidence into decision-making processes. While there is a global emphasis on evidence-based decision-making at policy and organisational levels, there exists a significant gap in our understanding of the most effective activities to exchange scientific knowledge and use it in practice. The objective of this rapid review was to explore the strategies employed by evidence networks to facilitate the translation of evidence into decision-making processes. This review makes a contribution to global health policymaking by mapping the landscape of knowledge translation in this context and identifying the evidence translation activities that evidence networks have found effective. Methods: The review was guided by standardised techniques for conducting rapid evidence reviews. Document searching was based on a phased approach, commencing with a comprehensive initial search strategy and progressively refining it with each subsequent search iterations. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement was followed. Results: The review identified 143 articles, after screening 1135 articles. Out of these, 35 articles were included in the review. The studies encompassed a diverse range of countries, with the majority originating from the United States (n = 14), followed by Canada (n = 5), Sweden (n = 2), and various other single locations (n = 14). These studies presented a varied set of implementation strategies such as research-related activities, the creation of teams/task forces/partnerships, meetings/consultations, mobilising/working with communities, influencing policy, activity evaluation, training, trust-building, and regular meetings, as well as community-academic-policymaker engagement. Conclusions: Evidence networks play a crucial role in developing, sharing, and implementing high-quality research for policy. These networks face challenges like coordinating diverse stakeholders, international collaboration, language barriers, research consistency, knowledge dissemination, capacity building, evaluation, and funding. To enhance their impact, sharing network efforts with wider audiences, including local, national, and international agencies, is essential for evidence-based decision-making to shape evidence-informed policies and programmes effectively.

Objectives: Systematic reviews (SRs) are becoming essential evidence in the decision-making process within the field of social sci-ences. This study aimed to investigate how Campbell SRs were cited and explore their specific application roles.Study Design and Setting: We included Campbell SRs published between 2016 and 2020 by searching the Wiley online library, and retrieved the articles and documents citing Campbell SRs from the Web of Science and Google Scholar by December 31, 2021. We described the characteristics of the SRs and citations, and formulated a set of application roles by analyzing the sentences or paragraphs where the SRs were cited.Results: Sixty nine Campbell SRs were published between 2016 and 2020; they were cited in 641 articles or documents a total of 1,289 times. The primary types of articles that cited Campbell SRs were cross-sectional studies (n = 226, 35.3%), SRs (n = 112, 17.5%), ran-domized controlled trials (n = 77, 12.0%), and policy reports (n = 57, 8.8%). Articles utilizing Campbell SRs were predominantly led by authors from the United States (n = 184, 28.7%), the United Kingdom (n = 98, 15.3%), and Australia (n = 51, 8.0%). We formulated a set of 10 application roles for the Campbell SRs, of which the most frequent were: describing the current status in the field of interest (n = 691, 53.6%), corroboration of the results (n = 140, 10.9%), identifying research gaps (n = 130, 10.1%), and providing methodological refer-ences (n = 126, 9.8%); the role of supporting policy recommendations or decisions accounted for 6.0% (n = 77) of the citations. Approx-imately 12% of Campbell SRs were used to support policy recommendations or decisions.Conclusion: Campbell SRs are widely applied, particularly in scientific research, to describe the current status in the field of interest. Although the current application of Campbell SRs in supporting policy recommendations and decisions may not be predominant, there is a growing recognition of their value in using Campbell SRs to inform decision-making.(c) 2023 Published by Elsevier Inc.

Objective: This study aimed to determine whether targeting specific implementation determinants is associated with allied health clinicians' uptake of evidence when implemented within stroke rehabilitation settings. Data sources: 7 key databases were searched to identify articles published between 1990 and 2022 for inclusion. Reference lists of relevant articles were hand searched. Study selection: Studies were independently screened by 2 authors and included if the implementation intervention targeted allied health clinical practice in any stroke rehabilitation context and reported at least 1 quantitative measure of evidence uptake. Thirty studies met inclusion criteria. Data extraction: Data were independently extracted by the first and second author. Implementation outcomes for each study were categorized as either mostly successful, partially successful, or not successful based on the degree of evidence uptake achieved. Determinants targeted were categorized using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Data synthesis: Patterns between the degree of evidence uptake and determinants targeted across studies were analyzed by the first and second authors in 1 of 3 groups: A (pre-post statistical analysis), B (pre-post descriptive analysis), or C (post-only descriptive analysis). Patterns between evidence uptake and determinants targeted were first identified within groups A and B, with group C consulted to support findings. All studies categorized as "mostly successful" targeted facilitation in combination with establishing face-to-face networks and communication strategies. Conversely, no studies rated "not successful" targeted either of these determinants. Studies rated "partially successful" targeted either 1, but seldom both, of these determinants. Conclusions: This review has provided descriptive evidence of determinants which may be important to target for allied health clinicians' uptake of evidence within stroke rehabilitation settings.

Objectives: There is increasing recognition of the value and capabilities of design in healthcare. Beyond the development of medical devices, design is increasingly being applied to intangible, complex and systemic healthcare problems. However, there is limited evidence on the use of design specifically in the field of oral health. This systematic mapping study aims to collate and catalogue evidence of design in oral health. Methods: A systematic search of academic databases and grey literature was performed. Duplicate results were removed, and publications relating to the same project were grouped. Reviewers from design and oral health independently screened a sample of the dataset. Projects of both relevance to oral health, and with input from a designer or clear implementation of a design methodology or approach were included. Projects were coded and plotted on a novel interactive evidence map. Results: 119 design and oral health projects were included between 1973 and 2022. Interventional (n = 94, 79%), empirical (n = 46, 39%), methodological (n = 35, 29%) and theoretical (n = 7, 6%) design contributions were identified across the projects. The projects were categorized by four orders of design: first-graphics (n = 6, 5%), second-products (n = 41, 34%), third-interactions (n = 70, 59%), and fourth-systems (n = 2, 2%). Design was found in a diverse range of contexts in oral health; most commonly being relevant to general patients (n = 61, 51%), and for use in general dental practice (n = 56, 47%). Further design outcome categories (digital material; printed material; object; room or space; apparel; process; smart device; tangible interface; graphical interface; virtual reality; service; policy; system) and oral health themes (oral health literacy; oral care training; dental clinic design; dental instruments and equipment; personal oral care; dental appliance; clinician health and productivity; clinical information systems; informed consent; oral health promotion and prevention; oral care training; patient interactions and experience) were identified. Conclusions: The novel interactive evidence map of design in oral health created enables ongoing and open-ended multivariant documentation and analysis of the evidence, as well as identification of strategic opportunities. Future research and policy implications include; recognition and engagement with the full capabilities of design; integration of design experts; fostering inclusive engagement and collaboration; disentangling patient and public involvement; advancing human-centred systems approaches; adopting design-led approaches for policy-making.

Evidence-based information is essential for effective mental health care, yet the extent and accessibility of the scientific literature are critical barriers for professionals and policymakers. To map the necessities and make validated resources accessible, we undertook a systematic review of scientific evidence on child and adolescent mental health in Greece encompassing three research topics: prevalence estimates, assessment instruments, and interventions. We searched Pubmed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Google Scholar, and IATPOTEK from inception to December 16th, 2021. We included studies assessing the prevalence of conditions, reporting data on assessment tools, and experimental interventions. For each area, manuals informed data extraction and the methodological quality were ascertained using validated tools. This review was registered in protocols.io [68583]. We included 104 studies reporting 533 prevalence estimates, 223 studies informing data on 261 assessment instruments, and 34 intervention studies. We report the prevalence of conditions according to regions within the country. A repository of locally validated instruments and their psychometrics was compiled. An overview of interventions provided data on their effectiveness. The outcomes are made available in an interactive resource online [ https://rpubs.com/camhi/sysrev_table ]. Scientific evidence on child and adolescent mental health in Greece has now been cataloged and appraised. This timely and accessible compendium of up-to-date evidence offers valuable resources for clinical practice and policymaking in Greece and may encourage similar assessments in other countries.

Background: The clinical efficacy and safety of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) treatment for COVID-19 remain controversial. This study aimed to map the current status and gaps of available evidence, and conduct a meta-analysis to further investigate the benefit of IVIg in COVID-19 patients. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SR/MAs), primary studies with control groups, reporting on the use of IVIg in patients with COVID-19. A random-effects meta-analysis with subgroup analyses regarding study design and patient disease severity was performed. Our outcomes of interest determined by the evidence mapping, were mortality, length of hospitalization (days), length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (days), number of patients requiring mechanical ventilation, and adverse events. Results: We included 34 studies (12 SR/MAs, 8 prospective and 14 retrospective studies). A total of 5571 hospitalized patients were involved in 22 primary studies. Random-effects meta-analyses of very low to moderate evidence showed that there was little or no difference between IVIg and standard care or placebo in reducing mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.91; 95% CI 0.78-1.06; risk difference [RD] 3.3% fewer), length of hospital (mean difference [MD] 0.37; 95% CI - 2.56, 3.31) and ICU (MD 0.36; 95% CI - 0.81, 1.53) stays, mechanical ventilation use (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.68-1.24; RD 2.8% fewer), and adverse events (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.84-1.14; RD 0.5% fewer) of patients with COVID-19. Sensitivity analysis using a fixed-effects model indicated that IVIg may reduce mortality (RR 0.76; 95% CI 0.60-0.97), and increase length of hospital stay (MD 0.68; 95% CI 0.09-1.28). Conclusion: Very low to moderate certainty of evidence indicated IVIg may not improve the clinical outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Given the discrepancy between the random- and fixed-effects model results, further large-scale and well-designed RCTs are warranted

Background: Knowledge translation (KT) strategies are widely used to facilitate the implementation of EBIs into healthcare practices. However, it is unknown what and how KT strategies are used to facilitate the sustainability of EBIs in institutional healthcare settings. Objectives: This scoping review aimed to consolidate the current evidence on (i) what and how KT strategies are being used for the sustainability of EBIs in institutional healthcare settings; (ii) the reported KT strategy outcomes (e.g., acceptability) for EBI sustainability, and (iii) the reported EBI sustainability outcomes (e.g., EBI activities or component of the intervention continue). Methods: We conducted a scoping review of five electronic databases. We included studies describing the use of specific KT strategies to facilitate the sustainability of EBIs (more than 1-year post-implementation). We coded KT strategies using the clustered ERIC taxonomy and AIMD framework, we coded KT strategy outcomes using Tierney et al.'s measures, and EBI sustainability outcomes using Scheirer and Dearing's and Lennox's taxonomy. We conducted descriptive numerical summaries and a narrative synthesis to analyze the results. Results: The search identified 3776 studies for review. Following the screening, 25 studies (reported in 27 papers due to two companion reports) met the final inclusion criteria. Most studies used multi-component KT strategies for EBI sustainability (n = 24). The most common ERIC KT strategy clusters were to train and educate stakeholders (n = 38) and develop stakeholder interrelationships (n = 34). Education was the most widely used KT strategy (n = 17). Many studies (n = 11) did not clearly report whether they used different or the same KT strategies between EBI implementation and sustainability. Seven studies adapted KT strategies from implementation to sustainability efforts. Only two studies reported using a new KT strategy for EBI sustainability. The most reported KT strategy outcomes were acceptability (n = 10), sustainability (n = 5); and adoption (n = 4). The most commonly measured EBI sustainability outcome was the continuation of EBI activities or components (n = 23), followed by continued benefits for patients, staff, and stakeholders (n = 22). Conclusions: Our review provides insight into a conceptual problem where initial EBI implementation and sustainability are considered as two discrete time periods. Our findings show we need to consider EBI implementation and sustainability as a continuum and design and select KT strategies with this in mind. Our review has emphasized areas that require further research (e.g., KT strategy adaptation for EBI sustainability). To advance understanding of how to employ KT strategies for EBI sustainability, we recommend clearly reporting the dose, frequency, adaptations, fidelity, and cost of KT strategies. Advancing our understanding in this area would facilitate better design, selection, tailored, and adapted use of KT strategies for EBI sustainability, thereby contributing to improved patient, provider, and health system outcomes.

ObjectivesTo systematically collect and analyse diverse definitions of 'evidence' in both health and social sciences, and help users to correctly use the term 'evidence' and rethink what is the definition of 'evidence' in scientific research.DesignScoping review.MethodsDefinitions of evidence in the health sciences and social sciences were included. We have excluded the definition of evidence applied in the legal field, abstracts without full text, documents not published in either Chinese or English and so on. We established a multidisciplinary working group and systematically searched five electronic databases including Medline, Web of Science, EBSCO, the Chinese Social Sciences Citation Index and the Chinese Science Citation Database from their inception to 26 February 2022. We also searched websites and reviewed the reference lists of the identified studies. Six reviewers working in pairs, independently, selected studies according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and extracted information. Any differences were discussed in pairs, and if there was disagreement, it was resolved via discussion or with the help of a third reviewer. Reviewers extracted document characteristics, the original content for the definitions of 'evidence', assessed definitions as either intensional or extensional, and any citations for the given definition.ResultsForty-nine documents were finally included after screening, and 68 definitions were obtained. After excluding duplicates, a total of 54 different definitions of 'evidence' were identified. There were 42 intensional definitions and 12 extensional definitions. The top three definiens were 'information', 'fact' and 'research/study'. The definition of 'evidence' differed between health and social sciences. The term 'research' appeared most frequently in the definitions.ConclusionsThe definition of 'evidence' has gradually attracted the attention of many scholars and decision-makers in health and social sciences. Nevertheless, there is no widely recognised and accepted definition in scientific research. Given the wide use of the term, we need to think about whether, or under what circumstances, a standardised, clear, meaningful and widely applicable definition of 'evidence' might be helpful.

Background: Although non-pharmacological smoking cessation measures have been widely used among smokers, current research evidence on the effects of smoking cessation is inconsistent and of mixed quality. Moreover, there is a lack of comprehensive evidence synthesis. This study seeks to systematically identify, describe, and evaluate the available evidence for non-pharmacological interventions in smoking populations through evidence mapping (EM), and to search for best-practice smoking cessation programs. Methods: A comprehensive search for relevant studies published from the establishment of the library to January 8, 2023, was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, CBM, Wan Fang, and VIP. Two authors independently assessed eligibility and extracted data. The PRISMA statement and AMSTAR 2 tool were used to evaluate the report quality and methodology quality of systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs), respectively. Bubble plots were utilized to display information, such as the study population, intervention type, evidence quality, and original study sample size. Results: A total of 145 SRs/MAs regarding non-pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation were investigated, with 20 types of interventions identified. The most commonly used interventions were cognitive behaviour education (n = 32, 22.07%), professional counselling (n = 20, 13.79%), and non-nicotine electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) (n = 13, 8.97%). Among them, counselling and behavioural support can improve smoking cessation rates, but the effect varies depending on the characteristics of the support provided. These findings are consistent with previous SRs/MAs. The general population (n = 108, 74.48%) was the main cohort included in the SRs/MAs. The total score of PRISMA for the quality of the reports ranged from 8 to 27, and 13 studies (8.97%) were rated as high confidence, and nine studies (6.21%) as moderate confidence, in the AMSTAR 2 confidence rating. Conclusions: The abstinence effect of cognitive behaviour education and money incentive intervention has advantages, and non-nicotine e-cigarettes appear to help some smokers transition to less harmful replacement tools. However, the methodological shortcomings of SRs/MAs should be considered. Therefore, to better guide future practice in the field of non-pharmacological smoking cessation, it is essential to improve the methodological quality of SRs and carry out high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Background: Health evidence needs to be communicated and disseminated in a manner that is clearly understood by decision-makers. As an inherent component of health knowledge translation, communicating results of scientific studies, effects of interventions and health risk estimates, in addition to understanding key concepts of clinical epidemiology and interpreting evidence, represent a set of essential instruments to reduce the gap between science and practice. The advancement of digital and social media has reshaped the concept of health communication, introducing new, direct and powerful communication platforms and gateways between researchers and the public. The objective of this scoping review was to identify strategies for communicating scientific evidence in healthcare to managers and/or population. Methods: We searched Cochrane Library, Embase®, MEDLINE® and other six electronic databases, in addition to grey literature, relevant websites from related organizations for studies, documents or reports published from 2000, addressing any strategy for communicating scientific evidence on healthcare to managers and/or population. Results: Our search identified 24 598 unique records, of which 80 met the inclusion criteria and addressed 78 strategies. Most strategies focused on risk and benefit communication in health, were presented by textual format and had been implemented and somehow evaluated. Among the strategies evaluated and appearing to yield some benefit are (i) risk/benefit communication: natural frequencies instead of percentages, absolute risk instead relative risk and number needed to treat, numerical instead nominal communication, mortality instead survival; negative or loss content appear to be more effective than positive or gain content; (ii) evidence synthesis: plain languages summaries to communicate the results of Cochrane reviews to the community were perceived as more reliable, easier to find and understand, and better to support decisions than the original summaries; (iii) teaching/learning: the Informed Health Choices resources seem to be effective for improving critical thinking skills. Conclusion: Our findings contribute to both the knowledge translation process by identifying communication strategies with potential for immediate implementation and to future research by recognizing the need to evaluate the clinical and social impact of other strategies to support evidence-informed policies. Trial registration protocol is prospectively available in MedArxiv (doi.org/10.1101/2021.11.04.21265922).

IntroductionHealth information literacy is critical for individuals to obtain, understand, screen, and apply health information. However, there is currently no specific tool available to evaluate all four dimensions of health information literacy in China. Public health emergencies can present an opportunity to evaluate and monitor the health information literacy level of residents. Therefore, this study aimed to develop a questionnaire to evaluate the level of health information literacy and to measure the reliability and validity. MethodsThe development process of the questionnaire consisted of the determination of questionnaire items, expert consultation, and validation. Based on the National Residents Health Literacy Monitoring Questionnaire (2020) and the 2019 Informed Health Choices key concepts, the researchers drafted the questionnaire, including all four dimensions of health information literacy. Experts in relevant fields were invited to evaluate the draft questionnaire, and revisions were made accordingly. Finally, the reliability and validity of the finalized version were examined in Gansu Province, China. ResultsThe research team preliminarily formulated 14 items encompassing the four dimensions of health information literacy. After consulting with 28 experts, modifications were made. A convenience sample of 185 Chinese residents was invited to participate. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.715 and McDonald's omega was 0.739 for internal consistency, and the test-retest intra-class correlation coefficient after 4 weeks was 0.906, indicating that the questionnaire content and measurement structure was relatively stable. ConclusionThis questionnaire is the first evidence-based assessment tool developed for monitoring health information literacy in China, and it has shown good reliability and validity. It can help to monitor the health information literacy levels of Chinese residents, promote evidence-based decision-making, and guide interventions to improve health information literacy.

Objectives: (i) To analyze trends and gaps in evidence of health effects on pollutants and extreme temperatures by evidence mapping; (ii) to conduct a cross-sectional survey on the use of the Grades of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) in systematic reviews or meta-analyses (SR/MAs) of health effects on pollutants and extreme temperatures. Study Design and Setting: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) were searched until July 7, 2022. SR/MAs investigated health effects of pollutants and extreme temperatures were included.Results: Out of 22,658 studies, 312 SR/MAs were included in evidence mapping, and the effects of pollutants on cancer and congenital malformations were new research hotspots. Among 16 SR/MAs involving 108 outcomes that were rated using GRADE, the certainty of evidence was mostly downgraded for inconsistency (50, 42.7%), imprecision (33, 28.2%), and risk of bias (24, 20.5%). In contrast, concentration-response gradient (26, 65.0%) was the main upgrade factor.Conclusion: GRADE is not widely used in SR/MAs of health effects on pollutants and extreme temperatures. The certainty of evidence is generally low, mainly because of the serious inconsistency or imprecision. Use of the GRADE in SR/MAs of health effects on pollutants and extreme temperatures should strengthen.& COPY; 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Objectives: To systematically analyze the use of evidence assessment tools in systematic reviews of management and education. Study design and setting: We systematically searched selected literature databases and websites to identify systematic reviews on management and education. We extracted general information of the included studies and information about the evidence assessment tool they applied, including whether it was used for methodological quality assessment, reporting quality assessment or evidence grading, as well as the name, reference, publication year, version and original intended use of the tool, the role of the tool in the systematic review, and whether the quality determination criteria were given. Results: A total of 299 systematic reviews were included, of which only 34.8% used evidence assessment tools. A total of 66 different evidence assessment tools were used, of which Risk of Bias (ROB) and its updated version (n = 16, 15.4%) were the most frequent. The specific roles of the evidence assessment tools were reported clearly in 57 reviews, and 27 reviews used two tools. Conclusion: Evidence assessment tools were seldom used in systematic reviews in social sciences. The understanding and reporting of evidence assessment tools among the researchers and users still needs improvement.

Background and ObjectiveConsidering that physicians and patients widely use acupuncture, it is necessary to explore its adverse effects during treatment. Herein, an evidence map was generated based on published studies to identify acupuncture-induced adverse effects and assess their severity, with the overarching goal of providing references for safe and effective implementation.MethodsA comprehensive literature search was performed in four public databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of science, and the Cochrane Library) to identify relevant studies published up to 15(th) June 2022. In addition, relevant studies were explored in the Epistemonikos database and reference lists were retrieved as a supplement. A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews, Version 2 (AMSTAR-2) quality assessment tool was applied to determine the methodological quality of included systematic reviews (SRs) and/or meta-analysis (MAs), whereas Microsoft Excel 2019 tool was used for data extraction and coding. Heatmaps were generated to display disease type, countries of origin for the first authors, and the sample sizes of original studies. Moreover, bubble charts comprehensively presented intervention categories, adverse reaction types, and evidence levels.ResultsA total of 535 SRs involving 33 adverse reactions were included. Among them, 22 studies were rated as high quality, 28 as moderate, 106 as low, and the rest were of critically-low quality. Numerous adverse effects were described in the studies, including syncope (86 SRs), organ or tissue injury (233 SRs), systemic reactions (113 SRs), infection (19 SRs), and other adverse events (373 SRs). Importantly, these adverse reactions were mainly associated with 19 acupuncture techniques, including electroacupuncture (n = 67), manual acupuncture (n = 47) and acupoint catgut embedding (n = 41). Furthermore, the 535 SRs described 23 diseases, among which symptoms, signs or clinical findings (83 SRs), mental, behavioral or neurodevelopmental disorders (67 SRs), and diseases of the nervous system (66 SRs) had the highest incidence.ConclusionThis evidence mapping explores the adverse effects of acupuncture, showing that there are multiple types of adverse reactions to acupuncture, with milder symptoms. The methodological assessment revealed that most of the included studies were of low- or critically low-quality. Therefore, there is a need for future randomized controlled trials and SRs to comprehensively analyze acupuncture-related adverse events in order to provide reliable and credible evidence.

Background: The potential effectiveness of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) against "epidemic diseases " has highlighted the knowledge gaps associated with TCM in COVID-19 management. This study aimed to map the matrix for rigorously assessing, organizing, and presenting evidence relevant to TCM in COVID-19 management.Methods: In this study, we used the methodology of evidence mapping (EM). Nine electronic databases, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, , gray literature, reference lists of articles, and relevant Chinese conference proceedings, were searched for articles published until 23 March 2022. The EndNote X9, Rayyan, EPPI, and R software were used for data entry and management.Results: In all, 126 studies, including 76 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 50 systematic reviews (SRs), met our inclusion criteria. Of these, only nine studies (7.14%) were designated as high quality: four RCTs were assessed as "low risk of bias " and five SRs as "high quality. " Based on the research objectives of these studies, the included studies were classified into treatment (53 RCTs and 50 SRs, 81.75%), rehabilitation (20 RCTs, 15.87%), and prevention (3 RCTs, 2.38%) groups. A total of 76 RCTs included 59 intervention categories and 57 efficacy outcomes. All relevant trials consistently demonstrated that TCM significantly improved 22 outcomes (i.e., consistent positive outcomes) without significantly affecting four (i.e., consistent negative outcomes). Further, 50 SRs included nine intervention categories and 27 efficacy outcomes, two of which reported consistent positive outcomes and two reported consistent negative outcomes. Moreover, 45 RCTs and 38 SRs investigated adverse events; 39 RCTs and 30 SRs showed no serious adverse events or significant differences between groups.Conclusion: This study provides evidence matrix mapping of TCM against COVID-19, demonstrating the potential efficacy and safety of TCM in the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 and rehabilitation of COVID-19 patients, and also addresses evidence gaps. Given the limited number and poor quality of available studies and potential concerns regarding the applicability of the current clinical evaluation standards to TCM, the effect of specific interventions on individual outcomes needs further evaluation.

Aim: To provide an overview of the characteristics, variety and outcomes of knowledge translation (KT) strategies used in nursing care involving adult patients and their family members. Background: The gap in providing family nursing practice could be due to a lack of explicit KT frameworks and understanding of ways to translate evidence-based knowledge into clinical practice. Design: A scoping review conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute. Methods: The review is reported according to PRISMA-ScR. Relevant studies were searched in MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL Complete, ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Premium, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts and Scopus. Grey literature was searched in ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. Search results were imported into the web-based programme Covidence. Studies describing concepts of KT, strategies of implementation, involvement of families and nurses/family caregivers in adult health care and conducted within the last 15 years were included. Results: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Three studies used the KTA Framework to guide the implementation process. The remaining five studies used different frameworks/guidelines to translate a variety of family focused interventions into their clinical practice. Translation strategies were often targeted towards nurse education. Reported outcomes included nurses' attitudes towards and acceptance of involving families in health care. The outcomes were conceptualized and measured differently, showing inconclusive results on effectiveness on family focused care and family health. Conclusion and implications for clinical practice: The application of KT frameworks to implement evidence-based family nursing into clinical practice is limited. The process of KT mainly targets at nurses' adoption of family focused interventions with limited information about short-, intermediate- and long-term efficacy on family health. Clinical leaders should consider time and resources needed to implement family focused care KT strategies before putting it into practice. Patient or public contribution: No Patient or Public Contribution. Data were obtained from other's literature.