To identify how social return on investment (SROI) analysis—traditionally used by business consultants—has been interpreted, used and innovated by academics in the health and social care sector and to assess the quality of peer-reviewed SROI studies in this sector.
Community and residential settings.
A wide range of demographic groups and age groups.
The following databases were searched: Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, Econlit, Medline, PsychINFO, Embase, Emerald, Social Care Online and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Limited uptake of SROI methodology by academics was found in the health and social care sector. From 868 papers screened, 8 studies met the criteria for inclusion in this systematic review. Study quality was found to be highly variable, ranging from 38% to 90% based on scores from a purpose-designed quality assessment tool. In general, relatively high consistency and clarity was observed in the reporting of the research question, reasons for using this methodology and justifying the need for the study. However, weaknesses were observed in other areas including justifying stakeholders, reporting sample sizes, undertaking sensitivity analysis and reporting unexpected or negative outcomes. Most papers cited links to additional materials to aid in reporting. There was little evidence that academics had innovated or advanced the methodology beyond that outlined in a much-cited SROI guide.
Academics have thus far been slow to adopt SROI methodology in the evaluation of health and social care interventions, and there is little evidence of innovation and development of the methodology. The word count requirements of peer-reviewed journals may make it difficult for authors to be fully transparent about the details of their studies, potentially impacting the quality of reporting in those studies published in these journals.
Despite the publication of hundreds of trials on gout and hyperuricemia, management of these conditions remains suboptimal. We aimed to assess the quality and consistency of guidance documents for gout and hyperuricemia.
Systematic review and quality assessment using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation (AGREE) II methodology.
PubMed and EMBASE (27 October 2016), two Chinese academic databases, eight guideline databases, and Google and Google scholar (July 2017).
We included the latest version of international and national/regional clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements for diagnosis and/or treatment of hyperuricemia and gout, published in English or Chinese.
Two reviewers independently screened searched items and extracted data. Four reviewers independently scored documents using AGREE II. Recommendations from all documents were tabulated and visualised in a coloured grid.
Twenty-four guidance documents (16 clinical practice guidelines and 8 consensus statements) published between 2003 and 2017 were included. Included documents performed well in the domains of scope and purpose (median 85.4%, range 66.7%–100.0%) and clarity of presentation (median 79.2%, range 48.6%–98.6%), but unsatisfactory in applicability (median 10.9%, range 0.0%–66.7%) and editorial independence (median 28.1%, range 0.0%–83.3%). The 2017 British Society of Rheumatology guideline received the highest scores. Recommendations were concordant on the target serum uric acid level for long-term control, on some indications for urate-lowering therapy (ULT), and on the first-line drugs for ULT and for acute attack. Substantially inconsistent recommendations were provided for many items, especially for the timing of initiation of ULT and for treatment for asymptomatic hyperuricemia.
Methodological quality needs improvement in guidance documents on gout and hyperuricemia. Evidence for certain clinical questions is lacking, despite numerous trials in this field. Promoting standard guidance development methods and synthesising high-quality clinical evidence are potential approaches to reduce recommendation inconsistencies.
To investigate the relationship between gay app use and HIV testing among men who have sex with men (MSM).
Serial cross-sectional study.
A newly well-developed city in China.
4935 MSM were recruited through offline sampling methods from 2015 to 2017.
The primary outcome is the difference in HIV testing between app and non-app users.
2872 (58.2%) and 2159 (43.7%) participated MSM had been tested for HIV within lifetime and the past year, respectively. Compared with non-app-using MSM, app-using MSM had a significantly higher prevalence of HIV testing within lifetime (adjusted OR (AOR): 1.48, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.72) and the past year (AOR: 1.36, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.57). App-using MSM were more likely to take an HIV test at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (AOR: 1.48, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.76) and community-based organisations (AOR: 1.71, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.03), but less often at gay venues (AOR: 0.49, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.63). Meanwhile, app-using MSM were more likely to take self-testing (AOR: 1.61, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.14). Predictors of HIV testing in the past year were: having an education level of college or higher (AOR: 1.29, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.65), being self-identified as a homosexual (AOR: 1.23, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.46), being recruited through clinic-based sampling (AOR: 1.30, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.60), using gay app (AOR: 1.49, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.83), engaging in group sex (AOR: 1.64, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.19), having received HIV-related service (AOR: 5.49, 95% CI 4.57 to 6.60), having a high level of HIV-related knowledge (AOR: 1.33, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.61) and high-risk perception (AOR: 2.95, 95% CI 1.40 to 6.23).
Gay app use was significantly associated with increased HIV testing among MSM hard to reach by traditional outreach. Therefore, it is imperative to expand HIV testing among non-app-using MSM. Continued efforts, innovative strategies and increased resource are highly needed to realise the first ‘90’ target.
Studies suggest that the prevalence of food allergy may be increasing worldwide. Results regarding the prevalence and features of adverse food reactions older people have, however, scarcely been analysed in the literature. Thus, the objective of the present systematic review will be to describe the prevalence of food allergy in older individuals, its risk factors, clinical features, as well as the most frequently and commonly involved foods.
We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence, prevalence and risk factors for food allergy in older individuals. We will search international electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, AMED and ISI Web of Science for published, unpublished and ongoing studies from 1980 toJanuary 2019. There will be no restriction on the language or geography of publication. We will use the critical appraisal skills programme quality assessment tool to appraise the methodological quality of included studies. A descriptive summary with data tables will be elaborated, and if deemed clinically relevant and statistically adequate, meta-analysis using random-effects modelling will be carried out, given the expected clinical, methodological and statistical heterogeneity of studies. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist will guide reporting of the systematic review.
Since this systematic review will be solely based on published and retrievable literature, no ethics approval will be obtained. This study will allow us to draw up-to-date estimates of the prevalence of adverse food reactions in older individuals, worldwide, besides allowing the identification of its major risk factors, clinical manifestations and predominant foods responsible for such reactions. A multidisciplinary team has been assembled for this systematic review and will participate in relevant dissemination activities, namely reports, publications and presentations.