Revisões sistemáticas para fortalecer a prática de enfermagem baseada em evidências
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5294/aqui.2021.21.4.5Palavras-chave:
Prática clínica baseada em evidências, enfermagem baseada em evidências, revisão sistemática, psicometria, enfermagemResumo
As revisões sistemáticas são essenciais para o desenvolvimento da prática de enfermagem baseada em evidências. O JBI, conhecido anteriormente como Jhoanna Briggs Institute, contribuiu significativamente para o desenvolvimento da pesquisa mediante o treinamento técnico sobre revisões. As Revisões Sistemáticas Vivas Cochrane e as Revisões Sistemáticas de Instrumentos de Medição vêm sendo abordagens recentemente utilizadas pela comunidade científica. As Revisões Sistemáticas Vivas têm como objetivo gerar atualizações contínuas de temas prioritários e as Revisões Sistemáticas de Instrumentos de Medição contribuem com sínteses de evidências relacionadas com a validade dos instrumentos de medida. Este artigo é um overview, que tem como objetivo proporcionar uma visão geral sobre as abordagens de Revisões Sistemáticas do JBI e oferecer informações-chave sobre as Revisões Sistemáticas Vivas Cochrane e as Revisões Sistemáticas de Instrumentos de Medição. A utilização dessas novas abordagens é necessária para manter a prática de enfermagem baseada em evidências e contribuir para o desenvolvimento do conhecimento em enfermagem.
Downloads
Referências
Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. Seventy-Five Trials and Eleven Systematic Reviews a Day: How Will We Ever Keep Up? PLOS Med. 2010;7(9):e1000326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326
Munn Z, Stern C, Aromataris E, Lockwood C, Jordan Z. What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):1-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0468-4
Aromataris E, Pearson A. The systematic review: An overview. Am J Nurs. 2014;114(3):53-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NAJ.0000444496.24228.2c
Farrah K, Young K, Tunis MC, Zhao L. Risk of bias tools in systematic reviews of health interventions: an analysis of PROSPERO-registered protocols. BMC Syst Rev. 2019;8(1):e280(1-9). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1172-8
Organización Mundial de la Salud [OMS]. Manual para la elaboración de directrices, 2 a.ed. Ginebra: OMS; 2015. Disponible en: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/254669
Mackey A, Bassendowski S. The History of Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing Education and Practice. J Prof Nurs. 2017;33(1):51-55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2016.05.009
Reichembach MT, Pontes L. Escenario e imagen de la Enfermería Basada en la Evidencia. Rev Bras Enferm. 2018;71(6):2858-2859. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7167-2018710601
Choi S. Evidence-Based Research in Nursing Science: A Reproducible Framework. West J Nurs Res. 2021;43(9):828-833. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0193945920977792
Mignone A. Influencia de Cochrane Nursing en la práctica clínica, a nivel global. Enfermería Intensiva. 2020;31(1):1-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enfi.2020.01.001
Piper C. System for the Unified Management, Assessment, and Review of Information (SUMARI). J Med Libr Assoc. 2019;107(4):634-636. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2019.790
Clarke V, Braun V. Teaching thematic analysis: Overcoming challenges and developing strategies for effective learning. The Psychologist. 2013; 26(3):120-123. Disponible en: https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-26/edition-2/methods-teaching-thematic-analysis
Wallace B, MacKinnon K, Marcellus L, Pauly B. International Overdose Awareness Day: a time to remember, a time to act, a time for evidence. JBI Evid Synth. 2021;19(8):1758-1759. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-21-00220
Püschel VA de A, Lockwood C. Trasladando conocimientos: la experticia del Joanna Briggs Institute. Rev da Esc Enferm da USP. 2018;52:e3344. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1980-220X2018ed0103344
Aromataris E, Munn Z. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis [Internet]. 2020. Disponible en: https://jbi-global-wiki.refined.site/space/MANUAL
Jordan Z, Lockwood C, Munn Z, Aromataris E. The updated Joanna Briggs Institute Model of Evidence-Based Healthcare. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2019;17(1):58-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000155
Jordan Z, Lockwood C, Munn Z, Aromataris E. Redeveloping the JBI model of evidence based healthcare. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2018;16(4):227-241. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000139
Püschel VA de A. ¿Como formar o enfermeiro para a prática baseada em evidências? - Aladefe- Rev Educ Investi Enferm. 2018;8(2):4-6. Disponible en: https://www.enfermeria21.com/revistas/aladefe/articulo/281/como-formar-o-enfermeiro-para-a-pratica-baseada-em-evidencias/
The University of Adelaide - Joanna Briggs Institute Education. CSR Training Program |. Disponible en: https://jbi.global/education/systematic-review-training
Püschel VA de A, Oliveira LB de, Gomes ET, Santos KB dos, Carbogim F da C. Educating for the implementation of evidence-based healthcare in Brazil: the JBI methodology. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2021;55:e03718. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1980-220X2020016303718
Brooker J, Synnott A, McDonald S, Elliott J, Turner T, Hodder R et al. Guidance for the production and publication of Cochrane living systematic reviews: Cochrane Reviews in living mode (Version 1.0). 2019. Disponible en: https://community.cochrane.org/sites/default/files/uploads/inline-files/Transform/201912_LSR_Revised_Guidance.pdf
Elliott JH, Synnot A, Turner T, Simmonds M, Akl EA, McDonald S, et al. Living systematic review: 1. Introduction—the why, what, when, and how. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;91:23-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.08.010
Cochrane Community. Living systematic reviews [Internet]. 2021. Disponible en: https://community.cochrane.org/review-production/production-resources/living-systematic-reviews
Benton DC, Watkins MJ, Beasley CJ, Ferguson SL, Holloway A. Evidence-based policy: nursing now and the importance of research synthesis. Int Nurs Rev. 2020;67(1):52-60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12572
Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Chandler J, Welch VA, Higgins JP, et al. Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions - Editorial. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;10:ED000142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.ed000142
Marshall C, Sutton A, O’Keefe H, Johnson E (eds.). The Systematic Review Toolbox. 2021. Disponible en: http://systematicreviewtools.com/index.php
Thomas J, Noel-Storr A, Marshall I, Wallace B, McDonald S, Mavergames C, et al. Living systematic reviews: 2. Combining human and machine effort. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;91:31-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.08.011
Neumann I, Pantoja T, Peñaloza B, Cifuentes L, Rada G. El sistema GRADE: un cambio en la forma de evaluar la calidad de la evidencia y la fuerza de recomendaciones. Rev Med Chil. 2014;142(5):630-635. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0034-98872014000500012
Cochrane TaskExchange. Browse Task [Internet]. 2021. Disponible en: https://taskexchange.cochrane.org/
Pandya R, Dibner KA – National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. Learning through citizen science: Enhancing opportunities by design [Internet]. Washington: The National Academies Press; 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17226/25183
Cochrane Register of Studies. Quick ref guides RCT Classifier. 2021. Disponible en: https://community.cochrane.org/sites/default/files/uploads/QRG_RCT_classifier.pdf
Desterke C, Lorenzo HK, Candelier JJ. Text Mining Gene Selection to Understand Pathological Phenotype Using Biological Big Data. En: Nakaya HI (editor). Bioinformatics [Internet]. Brisbane (Australia): Exon Publications; 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36255/exonpublications.bioinformatics.2021.ch1
O’Mara-Eves A, Thomas J, McNaught J, Miwa M, Ananiadou S. Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: A systematic review of current approaches. BMC Syst Rev. 2015;4:5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-5
Sun W, Cai Z, Li Y, Liu F, Fang S, Wang G. Data Processing and Text Mining Technologies on Electronic Medical Records: A Review. J Healthc Eng. 2018;article ID 4302425. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/4302425
US National Library of Medicine [NHI]. MeSH on Demand [Internet]. 2021. Disponible en: https://meshb.nlm.nih.gov/MeSHonDemand
Bond University - Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare. Systematic Review Accelerator [SRA]. Polyglot [Internet]. 2021. Disponible en: https://sr-accelerator.com/#/polyglot
College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia (CPSBC) and the Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care South West Peninsula (PenCLAHRC). Medline Transpose - Translate a search query between Ovid MEDLINE and PubMed syntax [Internet]. 2021. Disponible en: https://medlinetranspose.github.io/index.html
The Cochrane Collaboration. Cochrane Crowd [Internet]. 2021. Disponible en: https://crowd.cochrane.org/
Crossref. You are Crossref [Internet]. 2021. Disponible en: https://www.crossref.org/
Bond University - Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare. GitHub - IEBH/SRA-Helper: Keyboard shortcuts for EndNote [Internet]. 2021. Disponible en: https://github.com/IEBH/SRA-Helper
Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. BMC Syst Rev. 2016;5:210. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4
RobotReviewer. Automatic Evidence Synthesis [Internet]. 2021. Disponible en: https://www.robotreviewer.net/
Bond University - Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare. GitHub - The ContentMine [Internet]. 2021. Disponible en: https://github.com/ContentMine
Nasa Proceeds to Mars [NPM]. Revman-replicant. [Internet]. 2021. Disponible en: https://www.npmjs.com/package/revman-replicant
The Cochrane Collaboration. RevMan HAL v.4 | Cochrane Schizophrenia. [Internet]. 2021. Disponible en: https://schizophrenia.cochrane.org/revman-hal-v4
The Cochrane Collaboration. Peer review - Cochrane Editorial and Publishing Policy Resource – Confluence. Disponible en: https://documentation.cochrane.org/display/EPPR/Peer+review
Elliott J, Turner T, Clavisi O, Thomas J, Higgins JPT, Mavergames Ch, et al. Living systematic reviews: An emerging opportunity to narrow the evidence-practice gap. PLoS Med. 2014;11(2):e1001603. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001603
Streiner D, Norman G, Cairney J. Health Measurement Scales: A practical guide to their development and use [Internet]. 5a. Ed. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press. 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/med/9780199685219.001.0001
Mokkink L, Terwee C, Knol D, Stratford P, Alonso J, Patrick DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: A clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-22
Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. 7a. Ed. Upper Saddle River (NJ, USA): Pearson; 2010. Disponible en: https://www.pearson.com/uk/educators/higher-education-educators/program/Hair-Multivariate-Data-Analysis-Global-Edition-7th-Edition/PGM916641.html
Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000;25(4);3186-3191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
Machado R S, Fernandes ADBF, Oliveira ALCB, Soares LS, Gouveia MTO, Silva GRF. Métodos de adaptação transcultural de instrumentos na área da enfermagem. Rev Gaucha Enferm. 2018;39:e20170164. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-1447.2018.2017-0164
Davis LL. Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Appl Nurs Res. 1992;5(4):194-197. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0897-1897(05)80008-4
Lawshe CH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Pers Psychol. 1975;28(4):563-575. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x
Howard MC. A Review of Exploratory Factor Analysis Decisions and Overview of Current Practices: What We Are Doing and How Can We Improve?. Int J Hum–Comp Interac. 2016;32(1):51-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2015.1087664
Appelbaum M. Journal article reporting standards for quantitative research in psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board task force report. Am Psychol. 2018;73(7):947. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000389
Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 5a. Ed. Boston (MA, USA): Pearson; 2007. Disponible en: https://www.pearson.com/us/higher-education/product/Tabachnick-Using-Multivariate-Statistics-5th-Edition/9780205459384.html
Brown TA. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford Press; 2015. Disponible en: https://www.guilford.com/books/Confirmatory-Factor-Analysis-for-Applied-Research/Timothy-Brown/9781462515363
Hayton JC, Allen DG, Scarpello V. Factor Retention Decisions in Exploratory Factor Analysis: A Tutorial on Parallel Analysis. Org Res Methods. 2004;7(2):191-205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428104263675. Disponible en: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.890.7652&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Fabrigar LR, Wegener DT, MacCallum RC, Strahan EJ. Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychol Methods. 1999;4(3):272-299. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272
Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychom. 1951;16(3):297-334. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
Sijtsma K, Pfadt JM. Part II: On the Use, the Misuse, and the Very Limited Usefulness of Cronbach’s Alpha: Discussing Lower Bounds and Correlated Errors. Psychom. 2021;1-18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-021-09789-8
Woodhouse B, Jackson PH. Lower bounds for the reliability of the total score on a test composed of non-homogeneous items: II: A search procedure to locate the greatest lower bound. Psychom.1977;42(4):579-591. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02295980
Trizano-Hermosilla I, Alvarado JM. Best Alternatives to Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability in Realistic Conditions: Congeneric and Asymmetrical Measurements. Front Psychol. 2016;7:769. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00769
Putnick DL, Bornstein MH. Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: The state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Dev Rev. 2016;41:71-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2021 Aquichan
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
1. Proposta de Política para Periódicos de Acesso Livre
Autores que publicam nesta revista concordam com os seguintes termos:
- Esta revista e os seus artigos estão publicados com a licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-SemDerivações 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). Você tem o direito de compartilhar, copiar e redistribuir o material em qualquer suporte ou formato. Para que isto ocorra: você deve dar o crédito apropriado, prover um link para a licença e indicar se mudanças foram feitas; você não pode usar o material para fins comerciais; e, se você remixar, transformar ou criar a partir do material, você não pode distribuir o material modificado.
