BACKGROUND: An integral aspect of patient engagement in research, also known as patient and public involvement, is appropriately recognising patient partners for their contributions through compensation (e.g., coauthorship, honoraria). Despite known benefits to compensating patient partners, our previous work suggested compensation is rarely reported and researchers perceive a lack of guidance on this issue. To address this gap, we identified and summarised available guidance and policy documents for patient partner compensation.
METHODS: We conducted this scoping review in accordance with methods suggested by the JBI. We searched the grey literature (Google, Google Scholar) in March 2022 and Overton (an international database of policy documents) in April 2022. We included articles, guidance or policy documents regarding the compensation of patient partners for their research contributions. Two reviewers independently extracted and synthesised document characteristics and recommendations.
RESULTS: We identified 65 guidance or policy documents. Most documents were published in Canada (57%, n = 37) or the United Kingdom (26%, n = 17). The most common recommended methods of nonfinancial compensation were offering training opportunities to patient partners (40%, n = 26) and facilitating patient partner attendance at conferences (38%, n = 25). The majority of guidance documents (95%) suggested financially compensating (i.e., offering something of monetary value) patient partners for their research contributions. Across guidance documents, the recommended monetary value of financial compensation was relatively consistent and associated with the role played by patient partners and/or specific engagement activities. For instance, the median monetary value for obtaining patient partner feedback (i.e., consultation) was $19/h (USD) (range of $12-$50/h). We identified several documents that guide the compensation of specific populations, including youth and Indigenous peoples.
CONCLUSIONS: Multiple publicly available resources exist to guide researchers, patient partners and institutions in developing tailored patient partner compensation strategies. Our findings challenge the perception that a lack of guidance hinders patient partner financial compensation. Future efforts should prioritise the effective implementation of these compensation strategies to ensure that patient partners are appropriately recognised.
UNASSIGNED: The patient partner coauthor informed protocol development, identified data items, and interpreted findings.

OBJECTIVE: Sarcopenia has garnered extensive attention in clinical practice since its high prevalence and significant impact on clinical outcomes. Multiple organizations have published guidance documents on sarcopenia, offering evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice and/or research. We aimed to appraise the methodological quality of the included documents and synthesize available recommendations for the screening, diagnosis, and intervention of sarcopenia.
METHODS: We conducted a search on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, guideline database, and guideline organizations and professional societies websites for clinical practices, consensus statements and position papers in terms of sarcopenia, muscle atrophy or muscle loss published before April 17, 2023. The AGREE II instrument was used by three independent reviewers to assess the methodological quality of these documents.
RESULTS: Thirty-six guidance documents published between 2010 and 2023 were included. Seven documents fulfilled ≥ 50% of all the AGREE II domains. Seven underwent a Delphi process and six graded the strength of the recommendations. The process of screening (n=21), early diagnosis of sarcopenia (n=12), diagnosis of sarcopenia and severe sarcopenia (n=10), and management (n=21) were increasingly recommended. SARC-F (n=14) was the most recommended screening tool, and the assessment of muscle function was considered the first step in diagnosing sarcopenia. The management strategy for both age-related and disease-related sarcopenia mainly focused on exercise and nutrition intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: The guidance documents have provided referential recommendations that have great guiding significance. But the inconsistency in recommendations and variation in methodological rigour suggests that high-quality evidence is lacking yet.

Recognizing the growing interests and benefits of technology-assisted interactive telerehabilitation in various populations, the aim of this review is to systematically review the effects of interactive telerehabilitation with remote monitoring and guidance for improving balance and gait performance in older adults and individuals with neurological conditions. The study protocol for this systematic review was registered with the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) with the unique identifier CRD42024509646. Studies written in English published from January 2014 to February 2024 in Web of Science, Pubmed, Scopus, and Google Scholar were examined. Of the 247 identified, 17 were selected after initial and eligibility screening, and their methodological quality was assessed with the National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-sectional Studies. All 17 studies demonstrated balance and gait performance improvement in older adults and in individuals with stroke, Parkinson\'s disease, and multiple sclerosis following 4 or more weeks of interactive telerehabilitation via virtual reality, smartphone or tablet apps, or videoconferencing. The findings of this systematic review can inform the future design and implementation of interactive telerehabilitation technology and improve balance and gait training exercise regimens for older adults and individuals with neurological conditions.

BACKGROUND: Rare disease registries (RDRs) are valuable tools for improving clinical care and advancing research. However, they often vary qualitatively, structurally, and operationally in ways that can determine their potential utility as a source of evidence to support decision-making regarding the approval and funding of new treatments for rare diseases.
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this research project was to review the literature on rare disease registries and identify best practices to improve the quality of RDRs.
METHODS: In this scoping review, we searched MEDLINE and EMBASE as well as the websites of regulatory bodies and health technology assessment agencies from 2010 to April 2023 for literature offering guidance or recommendations to ensure, improve, or maintain quality RDRs.
RESULTS: The search yielded 1,175 unique references, of which 64 met the inclusion criteria. The characteristics of RDRs deemed to be relevant to their quality align with three main domains and several sub-domains considered to be best practices for quality RDRs: (1) governance (registry purpose and description; governance structure; stakeholder engagement; sustainability; ethics/legal/privacy; data governance; documentation; and training and support); (2) data (standardized disease classification; common data elements; data dictionary; data collection; data quality and assurance; and data analysis and reporting); and (3) information technology (IT) infrastructure (physical and virtual infrastructure; and software infrastructure guided by FAIR principles (Findability; Accessibility; Interoperability; and Reusability).
CONCLUSIONS: Although RDRs face numerous challenges due to their small and dispersed populations, RDRs can generate quality data to support healthcare decision-making through the use of standards and principles on strong governance, quality data practices, and IT infrastructure.

BACKGROUND: Health apps are increasingly recognized as crucial tools for enhancing health care delivery. Many countries, particularly those in sub-Saharan Africa, can substantially benefit from using health apps to support self-management and thus help to achieve universal health coverage and the third sustainable development goal. However, most health apps published in app stores are of unknown or poor quality, which poses a risk to patient safety. Regulatory standards and guidance can help address this risk and promote patient safety.
OBJECTIVE: This review aims to assess the regulatory standards and guidance for health apps supporting evidence-based best practices in sub-Saharan Africa with a focus on self-management.
METHODS: A methodological framework for scoping reviews was applied. A search strategy was built and applied across the following databases, gray literature sources, and institutional websites: PubMed, Scopus, World Health Organization (WHO) African Index Medicus, OpenGrey, WHO Regional Office for Africa Library, ICTworks, WHO Directory of eHealth policies, HIS Strengthening Resource Center, International Telecommunication Union, Ministry of Health websites, and Google. The search covered the period between January 2005 and January 2024. The findings were analyzed using a deductive descriptive content analysis. The policy analysis framework was adapted and used to organize the findings. The Reporting Items for Stakeholder Analysis tool guided the identification and mapping of key stakeholders based on their roles in regulating health apps for self-management.
RESULTS: The study included 49 documents from 31 sub-Saharan African countries. While all the documents were relevant for stakeholder identification and mapping, only 3 regulatory standards and guidance contained relevant information on regulation of health apps. These standards and guidance primarily aimed to build mutual trust; promote integration, inclusion, and equitable access to services; and address implementation issues and poor coordination. They provided guidance on systems quality, software acquisition and maintenance, security measures, data exchange, interoperability and integration, involvement of relevant stakeholders, and equitable access to services. To enhance implementation, the standards highlight that legal authority, coordination of activities, building capacity, and monitoring and evaluation are required. A number of stakeholders, including governments, regulatory bodies, funders, intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations, academia, and the health care community, were identified to play key roles in regulating health apps.
CONCLUSIONS: Health apps have huge potential to support self-management in sub-Saharan Africa, but the lack of regulatory standards and guidance constitutes a major barrier. Hence, for these apps to be safely and effectively integrated into health care, more attention should be given to regulation. Learning from countries with effective regulations can help sub-Saharan Africa build a more robust and responsive regulatory system, ensuring the safe and beneficial use of health apps across the region.
UNASSIGNED: RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025714.

In nursing education, bridging the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical skills is crucial for developing competence in clinical practice. Nursing students encounter challenges in acquiring these essential skills, making self-efficacy a critical component in their professional development. Self-efficacy pertains to individual\'s belief in their ability to perform tasks and overcome challenges, with significant implications for clinical skills acquisition and academic success. Previous research has underscored the strong link between nursing students\' self-efficacy and their clinical competence. Technology has emerged as a promising tool to enhance self-efficacy by enabling personalized learning experiences and in-depth discussions. However, there is a need for a comprehensive literature review to assess the existing body of knowledge and identify research gaps.
The aim of this study is to systematically map and identify gaps in published studies on the use of technology-supported guidance models to stimulate nursing students\' self-efficacy in clinical practice.
This scoping review followed the framework of Arksey and O\'Malley and was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). A systematic, comprehensive literature search was conducted in ERIC, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Web of Science for studies published between January 2011 and April 2023. The reference lists of the included papers were manually searched to identify additional studies. Pairs of authors screened the papers, assessed eligibility, and extracted the data. The data were thematically organized.
A total of 8 studies were included and four thematic groups were identified: (1) technological solutions for learning support, (2) learning focus in clinical practice, (3) teaching strategies and theoretical approaches for self-efficacy, and (4) assessment of self-efficacy and complementary outcomes.
Various technological solutions were adopted in the guidance models to stimulate the self-efficacy of nursing students in clinical practice, leading to positive findings. A total of 7 out of 8 studies presented results that were not statistically significant, highlighting the need for further refinement of the applied interventions. Nurse educators play a pivotal role in applying learning strategies and theoretical approaches to enhance nursing students\' self-efficacy, but the contributions of nurse preceptors and peers should not be overlooked. Future studies should consider involving users in the intervention process and using validated instruments tailored to the studies\' intervention objectives, ensuring relevance and enabling comparisons across studies.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate engagement with and efficacy of guided versus non-guided digital interventions targeting psychological symptoms of cancer via a systematic review of current evidence.
METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, PsychINFO, MEDLINE, and CINAHL databases were searched. Eligible publications were randomised controlled trials of guided or non-guided digital psychological interventions used in cancer settings reporting intervention efficacy and/or engagement. Study methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool. Random effects meta-analyses were performed on outcomes with sufficient data, with sub-group analyses of intervention type and follow-up period.
RESULTS: Forty-three studies were included. Studies varied by level of guidance, type of technology used, duration, and outcomes assessed. Most studies had a high overall RoB. Meta-analysis indicated that guided interventions significantly reduced distress, anxiety, and fatigue, while non-guided did not. For depression and quality of life, both guided and non-guided interventions produced significant improvements. Guided interventions reported higher levels of intervention engagement than non-guided.
CONCLUSIONS: Guided digital psychological interventions were likely to be more effective than non-guided ones for cancer patients, particularly in reducing distress, anxiety, and fatigue. Whilst both types were found to improve depression and life quality, guided interventions were associated with higher patient engagement. These findings suggest digital interventions could supplement traditional cancer care, warranting further research concerning long-term effects and cost-efficiency.

BACKGROUND: Women who use or are in treatment for drug use during the perinatal period often have complex needs and presenting comorbidity. Women who use opioids during pregnancy, and their infants, experience poor outcomes. Drug use by women during pregnancy is a public health priority. This scoping review aimed to (1) map clinical guidelines, treatment protocols and good practice guidance across the UK for women who use or are in treatment for drug use during the perinatal period, (2) identify recommended best practice across health and social care for optimising outcomes and reducing inequalities for these women and (3) identify potential gaps within guidance.
METHODS: We followed the Joanna Briggs International (JBI) guidance on scoping reviews and PRISMA Scr extension. A registered protocol, containing a clear search strategy, inclusion, and exclusion criteria was adhered to. Reviewers double screened 25%, discussing disagreements. Data were extracted using a predefined template and charted in tables. Recommendations for best practice were organised around agreed categories.
RESULTS: Of 968 documents screened, 111 met the inclusion criteria. The documents included UK-wide, national, regional, and organisational policy documents. They varied in the degree they were relevant to women who use or are in treatment for drug use during the perinatal period, the settings to which they applied, and their intended users. Most were created without patient or public involvement and lacked any clear evidence base. Overall, documents recommended an integrated model of care with a lead professional, clear referral pathways and information sharing between agencies. Guidance suggested referrals should be made to specialist midwives, drug, and social care services. A holistic assessment, inclusive of fathers / partners was suggested. Recent documents advocated a trauma-informed care approach. Opioid substitution therapy (OST) was recommended throughout pregnancy where required. Potential gaps were identified around provision of support for women postnatally, especially when their baby is removed from their care.
CONCLUSIONS: This synthesis of recommended practice provides key information for practitioners, service providers and policy makers. It also highlights the need for guidelines to be evidence-based, informed by the experiences of women who use or are in treatment for drug use during the perinatal period, and to address the support needs of postnatal women who have their babies removed from their care.

This scoping review aims to identify and systematically review published mapping reviews to assess their commonality and heterogeneity and determine whether additional efforts should be made to standardise methodology and reporting. The following databases were searched; Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Campbell collaboration database, Social Science Abstracts, Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA). Following a pilot-test on a random sample of 20 citations included within title and abstracts, two team members independently completed all screening. Ten articles were piloted at full-text screening, and then each citation was reviewed independently by two team members. Discrepancies at both stages were resolved through discussion. Following a pilot-test on a random sample of five relevant full-text articles, one team member abstracted all the relevant data. Uncertainties in the data abstraction were resolved by another team member. A total of 335 articles were eligible for this scoping review and subsequently included. There was an increasing growth in the number of published mapping reviews over the years from 5 in 2010 to 73 in 2021. Moreover, there was a significant variability in reporting the included mapping reviews including their research question, priori protocol, methodology, data synthesis and reporting. This work has further highlighted the gaps in evidence synthesis methodologies. Further guidance developed by evidence synthesis organisations, such as JBI and Campbell, has the potential to clarify challenges experienced by researchers, given the magnitude of mapping reviews published every year.

Delivering vaccines in humanitarian response requires rigourous and continuous analysis of evidence. This systematic review mapped the normative landscape of vaccination guidance on vaccine-preventable diseases in crisis-affected settings. Guidance published between 2000 and 2022 was searched for, in English and French, on websites of humanitarian actors, Google, and Bing. Peer-reviewed database searches were performed in Global Health and Embase. Reference lists of all included documents were screened. We disseminated an online survey to professionals working in vaccination delivery in humanitarian contexts. There was a total of 48 eligible guidance documents, including technical guidance (n = 17), descriptive guidance (n = 16), operational guidance (n = 11), evidence reviews (n = 3), and ethical guidance (n = 1). Most were World Health Organization documents (n = 21) targeting children under 5 years of age. Critical appraisal revealed insufficient inclusion of affected populations and limited rigour in guideline development. We found limited information on vaccines including, yellow fever, cholera, meningococcal, hepatitis A, and varicella, as well as human papilloma virus (HPV). There is a plethora of vaccination guidance for vaccine-preventable diseases in humanitarian contexts. However, gaps remain in the critical and systematic inclusion of evidence, inclusion of the concept of \"zero-dose\" children and affected populations, ethical guidance, and specific recommendations for HPV and non-universally recommended vaccines, which must be addressed.