| Literature DB >> 36100303 |
Josephine Chidinma Okurame1, Lisa Cannon2,3, Emily Carter4, Sue Thomas4, Elizabeth J Elliott2,5, Lauren J Rice2.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: People with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) encounter a range of health and allied health providers and require specialised support to ensure health services are provided safely and effectively. Not all health professionals possess the knowledge or expertise required for the identification, assessment, referral and management of FASD. Accessible resources for understanding and managing FASD can help create awareness in health professionals and ensure patients receive the correct diagnosis and timely access to the necessary supports and services. The aim of this scoping review is to identify and analyse FASD resources for health professionals. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A comprehensive search of eight databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, PsycINFO, CINAHL, PubMED, EMBASE, Web of Science and Trip Medical Database) and nine grey literature databases (FASD Hub, NOFASD Australia, National Organisation for FASD, FASD United, HealthInfoNet, Proof Alliance, Child Family Community Australia, Foundation for Alcohol Research & Education and the Australian Department of Health websites) will be conducted using three search engines including PubMed, Ovid and Google advanced search (search dates: October 2021 to May 2022). Consultations will also be carried out with international and national experts in the diagnosis/management of FASD to obtain any additional relevant published or unpublished resources. Inclusion criteria were developed to guide the selection of resources that are publicly available, primarily focused on FASD and curated for health professionals for the identification, management or referral of FASD. Critical appraisal process will be executed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool to assess the quality of selected resources. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for the scoping review. Scoping review results will be presented at relevant national and international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. Search results will be made available to ensure reproducibility and transparency. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Entities:
Keywords: community child health; fetal medicine; medical education & training
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36100303 PMCID: PMC9472138 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065327
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 3.006
Stages of the scoping review process
| Stage number | Process |
| Stage 1 | Define the research question and objectives |
| Stage 2 | Develop the inclusion criteria in alignment with the research question(s) and objective(s) |
| Stage 3 | Planned approach to evidence searching (search strategy) |
| Stage 4 | Search the evidence (evidence screening) |
| Stage 5 | Evidence selection |
| Stage 6 | Evidence extraction |
| Stage 7 | Evidence analysis |
| Stage 8 | Evidence reporting and presentation |
| Stage 9 | Evidence summary in relation to review purpose, making conclusions and highlighting implications of findings. Each stage of the current methodological framework is discussed in further detail |
Inclusion criteria for resources
| Availability | Resource must be publicly available and searchable online, with an ISBN or PMID number, or in printed format |
| Topic or focus | Primary focus of content should be FASD |
| Target group | Resource should target healthcare professionals including medical practitioners, allied healthcare practitioners and nurses |
| Aim/objective | Resource should aim to aid in the identification, management, and referral of FASD |
| Language | Resource should be published in English |
| Time frame | None. All resources can be included provided the terminologies and classifications of FASD and ELT (Early Life Trauma) from older resources are not outdated |
| Resource development location | Resources may be developed both internationally or nationally that is, within Australia |
FASD, fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.
Information sources for search or consultation
| Date of engagement | ||
| Databases | MEDLINE, Scopus, PsycINFO, CINAHL, PubMED, EMBASE, Web of Science and Trip Medical Database | Initial Search: October to November 2021 |
| Grey literature | FASD Hub, NOFASD Australia, National Organisation for FASD (UK), FASD United (previously known as The National Organization for Fetal Alcohol Syndrome) (USA), HealthInfoNet, Proof Alliance, Child Family Community Australia (CFCA), Foundation for Alcohol Research & Education (FARE), Australian Department of Health websites Australian Department of Health: National ACT NSW NT QLD TAS VIC WA | November 2021 to February 2022 |
| Consultation | Experts in diagnosis/management of FASD. Including paediatricians and allied health professionals working in FASD assessment clinics and child development units | Estimated for November 2022 |
| Search engines | PubMed, OVID and Google advanced search* | – |
*As per other review protocols,5 25 the first 100 results from the Google advanced search will be screened to determine eligibility for inclusion.
FASD, fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.
Search category, terms and synonyms
| Search category | Search terms and synonyms |
| FASD | ‘Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder’ OR ‘Fetal alcohol syndrome’ OR ‘Fetal alcohol exposure’ OR ‘Prenatal alcohol exposure’ FASD OR FAS OR ‘Alcohol related neurodevelopmental disorder’ OR ARND OR ‘Alcohol related birth defects’ |
| ‘Resources | ‘Factsheets’ OR ‘Policy’ OR ‘Guidelines’ OR ‘Information Sheet’ OR ‘Referral’ OR ‘Management’ OR ‘Identification’ OR ‘Assessment’ OR ‘Video’ OR ‘Podcasts’ OR ‘Media’ OR ‘Webcast’ OR ‘professional development’ ? textbook/book, ? video ? online resources ? Guide |
| Target population | ‘Health professionals’ OR ‘Health practitioners’ OR ‘healthcare professionals’ OR ‘Allied health practitioners’ OR ‘Allied health professionals’ OR ‘Nurses’ OR ‘Medical Practitioners’ OR ‘Doctor’ OR ‘Physicians’ OR ‘Health personnel’ OR Psychologists |
*Different spellings for some words will be taken into consideration during the search for example, ‘fetal versus ‘foetal’.
FASD, fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.
Figure 1Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram for the scoping review process.
Draft data extraction/charting table for health professionals’ FASD resources
| Category | Details |
| Author(s) | Resource developers |
| Year of publication | |
| Country of origin | Source country of origin |
| Resource source | Eg, Peer-reviewed articles, HealthInfoNet, FASD portal, Health promotion resources, expert recommendations, grey literature, Google search engines, etc. |
| Study population | Target sample details-type of health professional for example, medical practitioners, allied healthcare practitioners, nurses and others |
| Resource purpose/category | Primary objective or aim of the resource to be categorised into either (1) Identification, (2) Management or (3) Referral of FASD or any combination of the 3 |
| Type of resource | Guidelines, worksheets, policy documents, information-based resources, screening and/or assessment tools |
| Resource outcome measure | Measurement variables |
| Resource delivery method | Online, paper/ print material, interview-style, audio-visual, resource packages, social media campaigns, training course, etc |
| Resource evaluation | Impact evaluation, effectiveness, reported outcomes, validation |
| Evidence-base of the resource | Published findings, formal evaluation, evidence that informed resource development |
| Resource information | Resource reference, weblink, any costs associated with the resource for example, free online download or paid purchase with cost details specified. Resource versions (English only or transcribed in other languages) |
| Other relevant information |
FASD, fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.
The AGREE II quality appraisal tool (summarised from the original AGREE II document)21
| Domain | Domain title | Item description (Total 23) |
| Domain 1 | SCOPE AND PURPOSE | 3 Items |
| Covers the overall aims of the resource, specific heath questions and target populations | 1. Overall objective(s) of the resource is (are) specifically described | |
| 2. Health question(s) covered by the resource is (are) specifically described | ||
| 3. The population (patients, public, etc) to whom the resource is meant to apply is specifically described | ||
| Domain 2 | STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT | 3 Items |
| Focuses on the extent to which the resource was developed by the appropriate stakeholders and represents the views of its intended users | 4. The resource development group includes individuals from all relevant professional groups | |
| 5. The views and preferences of the target population (patients, public, etc.) have been sought | ||
| 6. The target users of the resource are clearly defined | ||
| Domain 3 | RIGOUR OF DEVELOPMENT | 8 Items |
| Relates to the process used to gather and synthesise the evidence, the methods to formulate the recommendations and to update them | 7. Systematic methods were used to search for evidence | |
| 8. Criteria for selecting the evidence are clearly described | ||
| 9. Strengths and limitations of the body of evidence are clearly described | ||
| 10. Methods for formulating recommendations are clearly described | ||
| 11. Health benefits, side effects, and risks have been considered in formulating the recommendations | ||
| 12. There is an explicit link between the recommendations and the supporting evidence | ||
| 13. The resource has been externally reviewed by experts prior to its publication | ||
| 14 . A procedure for updating the resource is provided | ||
| Domain 4 | CLARITY OF PRESENTATION | 3 Items |
| Deals with the language, structure, and format of the resource | 15. Recommendations are specific and unambiguous | |
| 16. Different options for management of the condition or health issue are clearly presented | ||
| 17. Key recommendations are easily identifiable | ||
| Domain 5 | APPLICABILITY | 4 Items |
| Pertains to the likely barriers and facilitators to implementation, strategies to improve uptake and resource implications of applying the resource | 18. Describes facilitators and barriers to its application | |
| 19. Provides advice and/or tools on how the recommendations can be put into practice | ||
| 20. Potential resource implications of applying the recommendations have been considered | ||
| 21. Presents monitoring and/or auditing criteria | ||
| Domain 6 | EDITORIAL INDEPENDENCE | 2 Items |
| Formulation of recommendations not being unduly biased with competing interests | 22. Views of the funding body have not influenced the content of the resource | |
| 23. Competing interests of resource development group members have been recorded and addressed |
Two overall resource assessment questions: rate the overall quality of this resource—Likert Scale 1–7: Lowest possible quality (1) to Highest possible quality (7). I would recommend this resource for use: Yes, Yes with modifications, No.
The term guideline has been changed to resource to encompass all the output from the data search.