MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4311475651 · doi:10.1111/1460-6984.12817

Optimizing our evidence map for cognitive–communication interventions: How it can guide us to better outcomes for adults living with acquired brain injury

2022· review· en· W4311475651 sur OpenAlexaff
Sheila MacDonald, Elyse Shumway

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal of Language & Communication Disorders · 2022
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Établissements canadiensCanadian Association of GastroenterologyToronto Rehabilitation InstituteMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoWestern University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPsychological interventionKnowledge translationCognitionEvidence-based practicePsychologyCategorizationMedical educationApplied psychologyKnowledge managementMedicineNursingComputer sciencePsychiatryArtificial intelligenceAlternative medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Speech and language therapists (SLTs) share a collective goal of ensuring that adults with cognitive-communication disorders (CCD) due to acquired brain injuries (ABI) attain their highest possible level of participation and satisfaction in family, community, social, work and academic communications through evidence-based interventions. While there is a considerable evidence base to support SLT cognitive-communication interventions, there are also numerous barriers to its implementation. AIMS: The first aim is to describe the development of a comprehensive knowledge translation tool that synthesizes evidence-based practice recommendations for SLT cognitive-communication interventions across the care continuum. The second aim is to critically analyse the barriers to implementation of these interventions and to explore how this knowledge translation tool might assist in overcoming these challenges. METHODS & PROCEDURES: We developed a map of 148 clinical practice recommendations extracted from 129 reviews and guidelines called the Cognitive-Communication Evidence Application for SLTs (CCEAS-Map). The process of developing the CCEAS-Map included: (1) examination of implementation science frameworks to inform knowledge tool creation; (2) search and synthesis of the evidence provided in reviews and guidelines that met specific criteria; (3) development of a framework to critically analyse and categorize the barriers and facilitators affecting the implementation of these clinical recommendations; (4) consultation with potential end users of the CCEAS-Map, including 16 expert SLTs and eight persons with lived experience (PWLE), regarding the tool's construction, barriers and facilitators to implementation, and the potential of the CCEAS-Map to address evidence-practice gaps; and (5) refining the CCEAS-Map based on expert input. MAIN CONTRIBUTION: To our knowledge this is the first synthesis of all available clinical recommendations for SLT cognitive-communication interventions for ABI, across all severities of injury, stages along the continuum of care, and areas of CCD practice. The paper presents a novel approach to analysing knowledge-practice gaps: drawing on implementation science tools, analysing barriers and facilitators, and collaborating with end users in designing a knowledge translation tool. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: The CCEAS-Map provides a comprehensive synthesis of the available evidence in a format that can facilitate clinical application of the evidence, provide education for all stakeholders, serve as a basis for CCD pathway development, support researcher-clinician collaboration and encourage advocacy at the system level. As a knowledge translation tool, the CCEAS-Map can promote the availability of SLT services and has the potential to ultimately improve the lives of those with CCD. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject A great deal is known about cognitive-communication deficits incurred after ABI, including their impact on daily functioning, optimal methods for sensitive and ecologically valid assessment, and the efficacy of various speech-language therapy interventions along the care continuum. However, considerable constraints remain that interfere with the application of this evidence to daily SLT practice. A need was identified to develop a knowledge translation tool to help close these evidence-practice gaps. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study describes the development of the CCEAS-Map, a critical synthesis of 129 reviews and guidelines, leading to 148 evidence-based clinical recommendations, which can be used to guide SLT cognitive-communication practice and education, as well as clinical pathway development, and advocacy for systemic changes and other healthcare policy improvements. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The CCEAS-Map is a clinical knowledge translation tool designed to guide cognitive-communication interventions by linking practice recommendations directly to the current evidence. This paper also offers insights into barriers to SLT intervention across the care continuum and strategies for improving implementation of cognitive-communication best practices, to improve the lives of those living with ABI related disabilities.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Autre devis · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,969
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,010
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0030,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,155
Tête enseignante GPT0,485
Écart entre enseignants0,329 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeAutre devis
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations12
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational Journal of Language & Communication DisordersMême sujetTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchTravaux en français237 207