Explore the vast range of titles available.

To develop an evidence-based guideline for Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS) for systematic reviews (SRs), health technology assessments, and other evidence syntheses. An SR, Web-based survey of experts, and consensus development forum were undertaken to identify checklists that evaluated or validated electronic literature search strategies and to determine which of their elements related to search quality or errors. Systematic review: No new search elements were identified for addition to the existing (2008–2010) PRESS 2015 Evidence-Based Checklist, and there was no evidence refuting any of its elements. Results suggested that structured PRESS could identify search errors and improve the selection of search terms. Web-based survey of experts: Most respondents felt that peer review should be undertaken after the MEDLINE search had been prepared but before it had been translated to other databases. Consensus development forum: Of the seven original PRESS elements, six were retained: translation of the research question; Boolean and proximity operators; subject headings; text word search; spelling, syntax and line numbers; and limits and filters. The seventh (skilled translation of the search strategy to additional databases) was removed, as there was consensus that this should be left to the discretion of searchers. An updated PRESS 2015 Guideline Statement was developed, which includes the following four documents: PRESS 2015 Evidence-Based Checklist, PRESS 2015 Recommendations for Librarian Practice, PRESS 2015 Implementation Strategies, and PRESS 2015 Guideline Assessment Form. The PRESS 2015 Guideline Statement should help to guide and improve the peer review of electronic literature search strategies.

A significant portion of neurology literature is published in general medicine journals. Despite this, a detailed examination of publication patterns of neurology articles in these journals has not yet been carried out. To examine the publication patterns of neurology articles in general medicine journals during a 10-year period using a bibliometric approach. This cross-sectional bibliometric analysis identified the top 5 general medicine journals using the 2017 Journal Citations Report. Four other medical subspecialties (ie, immunology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, and pulmonology) were selected for comparison of publication patterns with neurology. Using MEDLINE, the 5 journals were searched for articles published between 2009 and 2018 that were indexed with the following MeSH terms: nervous system diseases, immune system diseases, endocrine system diseases, gastrointestinal diseases, and respiratory tract diseases. Data analysis was conducted from February 2019 to December 2020. Publications were characterized by journal, specialty, and study design. These variables were used for comparison of publication numbers. The general medicine journals with the 5 highest journal impact factors (JIF) were New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM; JIF 79.3), Lancet (JIF 53.3), JAMA (JIF 47.7), BMJ (JIF 23.6), and PLOS Medicine (JIF 11.7). Our bibliometric search yielded 3719 publications, of which 1098 (29.5%) were in neurology. Of these 1098 neurology publications, 317 (28.9%) were published in NEJM, 205 (18.7%) in Lancet, 284 (25.9%) in JAMA, 214 (19.5%) in BMJ, and 78 (7.1%) in PLOS Medicine. Randomized clinical trials were the most frequent neurology study type in general medicine journals (519 [47.3%]). The number of publications in each of the other specialties were as follows: immunology, 817; endocrinology, 633; gastroenterology, 353; and pulmonology, 818. The results of this study provide some guidance to authors regarding where they may wish to consider submitting their neurology research. Compared with other specialties, neurology-based articles are published more frequently in general medicine journals.

Background For optimal health benefits, the Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Children and Youth (aged 5–17 years) recommend an achievement of high levels of physical activity (≥60 min of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity), low levels of sedentary behaviour (≤2 h of recreational screen time), and sufficient sleep (9–11 h for children or 8–10 h for adolescents) each day. The objective of this systematic review was to examine how combinations of physical activity, sedentary time, and sleep duration relate to depressive symptoms and other mental health indicators among children and adolescents. Methods Literature was obtained through searching Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and SportDiscus up to September 30, 2019. Peer-reviewed studies published in English or French were included if they met the following criteria: population (apparently healthy children and adolescents with a mean age of 5–17 years), intervention/exposure (combinations of physical activity, sedentary time, and sleep duration), and outcomes (depressive symptoms and other mental health indicators). A risk of bias assessment was completed for all included studies using the methods described in the Cochrane Handbook. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to assess the quality of evidence for each health indicator. Narrative syntheses were employed to describe the results due to high levels of heterogeneity across studies. Results A total of 13 cross-sectional studies comprised in 10 papers met inclusion criteria. Data across studies involved 115,540 children and adolescents from 12 countries. Overall, the findings indicated favourable associations between meeting all 3 recommendations and better mental health indicators among children and adolescents when compared with meeting none of the recommendations. There was evidence of a dose-response gradient between an increasing number of recommendations met and better mental health indicators. Meeting the screen time and sleep duration recommendations appeared to be associated with more mental health benefits than meeting the physical activity recommendation. The quality of evidence reviewed was “very low” according to GRADE. Conclusions The findings indicate favourable associations between meeting all 3 movement behaviour recommendations in the 24-h guidelines and better mental health indicators among children and adolescents. There is a clear need for high-quality studies that use robust measures of all movement behaviours and validated measures of mental health to increase our understanding in this topic area.

Background The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the relationships between sedentary behaviour (SB) and health indicators in children aged 0 to 4 years, and to determine what doses of SB (i.e., duration, patterns [frequency, interruptions], and type) were associated with health indicators. Methods Online databases were searched for peer-reviewed studies that met the a priori inclusion criteria: population (apparently healthy, 1 month to 4.99 years), intervention/exposure and comparator (durations, patterns, and types of SB), and outcome/health indicator (critical: adiposity, motor development, psychosocial health, cognitive development; important: bone and skeletal health, cardiometabolic health, fitness, risks/harm). The quality of the evidence was assessed by study design and outcome using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Results Due to heterogeneity, meta-analyses were not possible; instead, narrative syntheses were conducted, structured around the health indicator and type of SB. A total of 96 studies were included (195,430 participants from 33 countries). Study designs were: randomized controlled trial ( n  = 1), case-control ( n  = 3), longitudinal ( n  = 25), longitudinal with additional cross-sectional analyses ( n  = 5), and cross-sectional ( n  = 62). Evidence quality ranged from “very low” to “moderate”. Associations between objectively measured total sedentary time and indicators of adiposity and motor development were predominantly null. Associations between screen time and indicators of adiposity, motor or cognitive development, and psychosocial health were primarily unfavourable or null. Associations between reading/storytelling and indicators of cognitive development were favourable or null. Associations between time spent seated (e.g., in car seats or strollers) or in the supine position, and indicators of adiposity and motor development, were primarily unfavourable or null. Data were scarce for other outcomes. Conclusions These findings continue to support the importance of minimizing screen time for disease prevention and health promotion in the early years, but also highlight the potential cognitive benefits of interactive non-screen-based sedentary behaviours such as reading and storytelling. Additional high-quality research using valid and reliable measures is needed to more definitively establish the relationships between durations, patterns, and types of SB and health indicators, and to provide insight into the appropriate dose of SB for optimal health in the early years.

Background Given the rapid development during the early years (0-4 years), an understanding of the health implications of physical activity is needed. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the relationships between objectively and subjectively measured physical activity and health indicators in the early years. Methods Electronic databases were originally searched in April, 2016. Included studies needed to be peer-reviewed, written in English or French, and meet a priori study criteria. The population was apparently healthy children aged 1 month to 59.99 months/4.99 years. The intervention/exposure was objectively and subjectively measured physical activity. The comparator was various volumes, durations, frequencies, patterns, types, and intensities of physical activity. The outcomes were health indicators ranked as critical (adiposity, motor development, psychosocial health, cognitive development, fitness) and important (bone and skeletal health, cardiometabolic health, and risks/harm). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to assess the quality of evidence for each health indicator by each study design. Results Ninety-six studies representing 71,291 unique participants from 36 countries were included. Physical activity interventions were consistently (>60% of studies) associated with improved motor and cognitive development, and psychosocial and cardiometabolic health. Across observational studies, physical activity was consistently associated with favourable motor development, fitness, and bone and skeletal health. For intensity, light- and moderate-intensity physical activity were not consistently associated with any health indicators, whereas moderate- to vigorous-intensity, vigorous-intensity, and total physical activity were consistently favourably associated with multiple health indicators. Across study designs, consistent favourable associations with health indicators were observed for a variety of types of physical activity, including active play, aerobic, dance, prone position (infants; ≤1 year), and structured/organized. Apart from ≥30 min/day of the prone position for infants, the most favourable frequency and duration of physical activity was unclear. However, more physical activity appeared better for health. Evidence ranged from “very low” to “high” quality. Conclusions Specific types of physical activity, total physical activity, and physical activity of at least moderate- to vigorous-intensity were consistently favourably associated with multiple health indicators. The majority of evidence was in preschool-aged children (3-4 years). Findings will inform evidence-based guidelines.

Systematic reviews (SRs) can help decision makers interpret the deluge of published biomedical literature. However, a SR may be of limited use if the methods used to conduct the SR are flawed, and reporting of the SR is incomplete. To our knowledge, since 2004 there has been no cross-sectional study of the prevalence, focus, and completeness of reporting of SRs across different specialties. Therefore, the aim of our study was to investigate the epidemiological and reporting characteristics of a more recent cross-section of SRs. We searched MEDLINE to identify potentially eligible SRs indexed during the month of February 2014. Citations were screened using prespecified eligibility criteria. Epidemiological and reporting characteristics of a random sample of 300 SRs were extracted by one reviewer, with a 10% sample extracted in duplicate. We compared characteristics of Cochrane versus non-Cochrane reviews, and the 2014 sample of SRs versus a 2004 sample of SRs. We identified 682 SRs, suggesting that more than 8,000 SRs are being indexed in MEDLINE annually, corresponding to a 3-fold increase over the last decade. The majority of SRs addressed a therapeutic question and were conducted by authors based in China, the UK, or the US; they included a median of 15 studies involving 2,072 participants. Meta-analysis was performed in 63% of SRs, mostly using standard pairwise methods. Study risk of bias/quality assessment was performed in 70% of SRs but was rarely incorporated into the analysis (16%). Few SRs (7%) searched sources of unpublished data, and the risk of publication bias was considered in less than half of SRs. Reporting quality was highly variable; at least a third of SRs did not report use of a SR protocol, eligibility criteria relating to publication status, years of coverage of the search, a full Boolean search logic for at least one database, methods for data extraction, methods for study risk of bias assessment, a primary outcome, an abstract conclusion that incorporated study limitations, or the funding source of the SR. Cochrane SRs, which accounted for 15% of the sample, had more complete reporting than all other types of SRs. Reporting has generally improved since 2004, but remains suboptimal for many characteristics. An increasing number of SRs are being published, and many are poorly conducted and reported. Strategies are needed to help reduce this avoidable waste in research.

Background The objective of this systematic review was to examine for the first time the associations between sleep duration and a broad range of health indicators in children aged 0 to 4 years. Methods Electronic databases were searched with no limits on date or study design. Included studies (published in English or French) were peer-reviewed and met the a priori determined population (apparently healthy children aged 1 month to 4.99 years), intervention/exposure/comparator (various sleep durations), and outcome criteria (adiposity, emotional regulation, cognitive development, motor development, growth, cardiometabolic health, sedentary behaviour, physical activity, quality of life/well-being, and risks/injuries). The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Due to high levels of heterogeneity across studies, narrative syntheses were employed. Results A total of 69 articles/studies (62 unique samples) met inclusion criteria. Data across studies included 148,524 unique participants from 23 countries. The study designs were randomized trials ( n  = 3), non-randomized interventions ( n  = 1), longitudinal studies ( n  = 16), cross-sectional studies ( n  = 42), or longitudinal studies that also reported cross-sectional analyses ( n  = 7). Sleep duration was assessed by parental report in 70% of studies ( n  = 48) and was measured objectively (or both objectively and subjectively) in 30% of studies ( n  = 21). Overall, shorter sleep duration was associated with higher adiposity (20/31 studies), poorer emotional regulation (13/25 studies), impaired growth (2/2 studies), more screen time (5/5 studies), and higher risk of injuries (2/3 studies). The evidence related to cognitive development, motor development, physical activity, and quality of life/well-being was less clear, with no indicator showing consistent associations. No studies examined the association between sleep duration and cardiometabolic biomarkers in children aged 0 to 4 years. The quality of evidence ranged from “very low” to “high” across study designs and health indicators. Conclusions Despite important limitations in the available evidence, longer sleep duration was generally associated with better body composition, emotional regulation, and growth in children aged 0 to 4 years. Shorter sleep duration was also associated with longer screen time use and more injuries. Better-quality studies with stronger research designs that can provide information on dose-response relationships are needed to inform contemporary sleep duration recommendations.

Complex and highly sensitive electronic literature search strategies are required for systematic reviews; however, no guidelines exist for their peer review. Poor searches may fail to identify existing evidence because of inadequate recall (sensitivity) or increase the resource requirements of reviews as a result of inadequate precision. Our objective was to create an annotated checklist for electronic search strategy peer review. A systematic review of the library and information retrieval literature for important elements in electronic search strategies was conducted, along with a survey of individuals experienced in systematic review searching. Six elements with a strong consensus as to their importance in peer review were accurate translation of the research question into search concepts, correct choice of Boolean operators and of line numbers, adequate translation of the search strategy for each database, inclusion of relevant subject headings, and absence of spelling errors. Seven additional elements had partial support and are included in this guideline. This evidence-based guideline facilitates the improvement of search quality through peer review, and thus the improvement in quality of systematic reviews. It is relevant for librarians/information specialists, journal editors, developers of knowledge translation tools, research organizations, and funding bodies.

Evidence syntheses adhering to systematic literature searching techniques are a cornerstone of evidence based healthcare. Beyond term based searching in electronic databases, citation searching is a prevalent search technique to identify relevant sources of evidence. However, for decades, citation searching methodology and terminology has not been standardised. An evidence guided, four round Delphi consensus study was conducted with 27 international methodological experts in order to develop the Terminology, Application, and Reporting of Citation Searching (TARCiS) statement. TARCiS comprises 10 specific recommendations, each with a rationale and explanation on when and how to conduct and report citation searching in the context of systematic literature searches. The statement also presents four research priorities, and it is hoped that systematic review teams are encouraged to incorporate TARCiS into standardised workflows.

Background The Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology convened representatives of national organizations, research experts, methodologists, stakeholders, and end-users who followed rigorous and transparent guideline development procedures to create the Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for the Early Years (0–4 years): An Integration of Physical Activity, Sedentary Behaviour, and Sleep . These novel guidelines for children of the early years embrace the natural and intuitive integration of movement behaviours across the whole day (24-h period). Methods The development process was guided by the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. Four systematic reviews (physical activity, sedentary behaviour, sleep, combined behaviours) examining the relationships within and among movement behaviours and several health indicators were completed and interpreted by a Guideline Development Panel. The systematic reviews that were conducted to inform the development of the guidelines, and the framework that was applied to develop the recommendations, followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Complementary compositional analyses were performed using data from the Canadian Health Measures Survey to examine the relationships between movement behaviours and indicators of adiposity. A review of the evidence on the cost effectiveness and resource use associated with the implementation of the proposed guidelines was also undertaken. A stakeholder survey ( n  = 546), 10 key informant interviews, and 14 focus groups ( n  = 92 participants) were completed to gather feedback on draft guidelines and their dissemination. Results The guidelines provide evidence-informed recommendations as to the combinations of light-, moderate- and vigorous-intensity physical activity, sedentary behaviours, and sleep that infants (<1 year), toddlers (1–2 years) and preschoolers (3–4 years) should achieve for a healthy day (24 h). Proactive dissemination, promotion, implementation, and evaluation plans were prepared to optimize uptake and activation of the new guidelines. Conclusions These guidelines represent a sensible evolution of public health guidelines whereby optimal health is framed within the balance of movement behaviours across the whole day, while respecting preferences of end-users. Future research should consider the integrated relationships among movement behaviours, and similar integrated guidelines for other age groups should be developed.