Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Care | Protocol

Evidence on scaling in health and social care: protocol for a living umbrella review

Authors: France Légaré, Karine V. Plourde, Ali Ben Charif, Amédé Gogovor, Francesca Katherine Brundisini, Robert K. D. McLean, Andrew Milat, Nathalie Rheault, Luke Wolfenden, Hervé Tchala Vignon Zomahoun

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2021

Abstract

Background

There is a growing interest in scaling effective health innovations to promote equitable access to high-quality health services worldwide. However, multiple challenges persist in scaling innovations. In this study, we aim to summarize the scaling evidence in the health and social care literature and identify current knowledge gaps.

Methods

We will conduct a living umbrella review according to the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual. We will consider all knowledge syntheses addressing scaling in health or social care (e.g., any setting, any clinical area) and conducted in a systematic way. We will search the following electronic databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, PsychINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, Sociological Abstract (Proquest), Academic Search Premier (EBSCO), and Proquest Dissertations & Theses Global, from inception. Furthermore, we will conduct searches of the grey literature. No restriction regarding date or language will be applied. Each phase of the review will be processed by two independent reviewers. We will develop a data extraction form on Covidence. We will assess the methodological quality of the included reviews using AMSTAR2 and the risk of bias using ROBIS. Results will be presented in tabular form and accompanied by a narrative synthesis covering the traditional themes of scaling science that emerge from the analysis, such as coverage, range, and sustainability, as well as themes less covered in the literature, including reporting guidance, models, tools, barriers, and/or facilitators to scaling innovations, evidence regarding application in high-income or low-income countries, and end-user engagement. We will disseminate the findings via publications and through relevant networks.

Discussion

The findings of the umbrella review will facilitate access to scaling evidence in the literature and help strengthen the science of scaling for researchers, policy makers, and program managers. Finally, this work will highlight important knowledge gaps and help prioritize future research questions.

Systematic review registration

This protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on November 11, 2020 (registration number: CRD42020183774).

Available only for authorised users

Greenhalgh T, Papoutsi C. Spreading and scaling up innovation and improvement. BMJ. 2019;365:l2068. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l2068.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

WHO. Nine steps for developing a scaling-up strategy. ExpandNet. 2010.

Barker PM, Reid A, Schall MW. A framework for scaling up health interventions: lessons from large-scale improvement initiatives in Africa. Implement Sci. 2016;11(1):12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0374-x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Milat AJ, Newson R, King L, Rissel C, Wolfenden L, Bauman A, et al. A guide to scaling up population health interventions. Public Health Res Pract. 2016;26(1):e2611604. https://doi.org/10.17061/phrp2611604.

McLean R, Gargani J. Scaling impact: innovation for the public good. 1st ed. London; New York: Routledge; 2019. p. 256. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429468025.CrossRef

McLean R, Gargani J. In Brief: Scaling Science. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre; 2020. http://hdl.handle.net/10625/59067. Accessed 11 Feb 2021.

Gogovor A, Zomahoun HTV, Ben Charif A, McLean RKD, Moher D, Milat A, et al. Essential items for reporting of scaling studies of health interventions (SUCCEED): protocol for a systematic review and Delphi process. Syst Rev. 2020;9(1):11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1258-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Milat AJ, Bauman A, Redman S. Narrative review of models and success factors for scaling up public health interventions. Implement Sci. 2015;10(1):113. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0301-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Milat AJ, King L, Bauman A, Redman S. Scaling up health promotion interventions: an emerging concept in implementation science. Health Promot J Austr. 2011;22(3):238. https://doi.org/10.1071/HE11238.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Ben Charif A, Zomahoun HTV, LeBlanc A, Langlois L, Wolfenden L, Yoong SL, et al. Effective strategies for scaling up evidence-based practices in primary care: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):139. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0672-y.

11.

Zakiyah N, van Asselt AD, Roijmans F, Postma MJ. Economic evaluation of family planning interventions in low and middle income countries; a systematic review. PLoS One. 2016;11(12):e0168447. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168447.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

McCrabb S, Lane C, Hall A, Milat A, Bauman A, Sutherland R, et al. Scaling-up evidence-based obesity interventions: a systematic review assessing intervention adaptations and effectiveness and quantifying the scale-up penalty. Obes Rev. 2019;20(7):964–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.12845.

13.

Hempel S, O'Hanlon C, Lim YW, Danz M, Larkin J, Rubenstein L. Spread tools: a systematic review of components, uptake, and effectiveness of quality improvement toolkits. Implement Sci. 2019;14(1):83. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-019-0929-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Bulthuis SE, Kok MC, Raven J, Dieleman MA. Factors influencing the scale-up of public health interventions in low- and middle-income countries: a qualitative systematic literature review. Health Policy Plan. 2020;35(2):219–34. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czz140.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Carroll G, Safon C, Buccini G, Vilar-Compte M, Teruel G, Perez-Escamilla R. A systematic review of costing studies for implementing and scaling-up breastfeeding interventions: what do we know and what are the gaps? Health Policy Plan. 2020;35(4):461–501. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czaa005.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Elliott JH, Turner T, Clavisi O, Thomas J, Higgins JP, Mavergames C, et al. Living systematic reviews: an emerging opportunity to narrow the evidence-practice gap. PLoS Med. 2014;11(2):e1001603. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001603.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.08.010.

18.

Aromataris E, Fernandez R, Godfrey C, Holly C, Khalil H. P. T. Chapter 10: Umbrella reviews. In: Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis; 2020. Available from: https://synthesismanual.jbi.global.CrossRef

19.

Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info Libr J. 2009;26(2):91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Sutton A, Clowes M, Preston L, Booth A. Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. Health Info Libr J. 2019;36(3):202–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12276.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Evans D. The provision of health and social care services for older people by respite providers. Contemp Nurse. 2013;45(2):255–63. https://doi.org/10.5172/conu.2013.45.2.255.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Burge P, Netten A, Gallo F. Estimating the value of social care. J Health Econ. 2010;29(6):883–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2010.08.006.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Strings Attached: CADTH’s Database Search Filter. CADTH Evidence Driven. 2020.

25.

McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, Cogo E, Foerster V, Lefebvre C. PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;75:40–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.01.021.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Bramer WM, Giustini D, de Jonge GB, Holland L, Bekhuis T. De-duplication of database search results for systematic reviews in EndNote. J Med Libr Assoc. 2016;104(3):240–3. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.104.3.014.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

EndNote, version X9. Clarivate analytics. 2018.

28.

Covidence systematic review software. Melbourne: Veritas Health Innovation. Available from: www.covidence.org. Accessed 11 Feb 2021.

29.

Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, Thuku M, Hamel C, Moran J, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ. 2017;358:j4008.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Whiting P, Savovic J, Higgins JP, Caldwell DM, Reeves BC, Shea B, et al. ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;69:225–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.06.005.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336(7650):924–6. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD.

32.

Andrews JC, Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD, Pottie K, Meerpohl JJ, Coello PA, et al. GRADE guidelines: 15. Going from evidence to recommendation-determinants of a recommendation’s direction and strength. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(7):726–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.02.003.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):1006–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.005.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Pollock M, Fernandes R, Becker L, Pieper D, Hartling L. Chapter V: Overviews of reviews. In: Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page M, et al., editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 60 (updated March 2020); 2020. Available from: www.training.cochrane.org/handbook.

35.

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;91:31–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.08.011.

36.

Simmonds M, Salanti G, McKenzie J, Elliott J, Living Systematic Review N. Living systematic reviews: 3. Statistical methods for updating meta-analyses. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;91:38–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.08.008.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Akl EA, Meerpohl JJ, Elliott J, Kahale LA, Schunemann HJ, Living systematic review N. Living systematic reviews: 4. Living guideline recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;91:47–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.08.009.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Millard T, Synnot A, Elliott J, Green S, McDonald S, Turner T. Feasibility and acceptability of living systematic reviews: results from a mixed-methods evaluation. Syst Rev. 2019;8(1):325. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1248-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Evidence on scaling in health and social care: protocol for a living umbrella review
Authors: France Légaré
Karine V. Plourde
Ali Ben Charif
Amédé Gogovor
Francesca Katherine Brundisini
Robert K. D. McLean
Andrew Milat
Nathalie Rheault
Luke Wolfenden
Hervé Tchala Vignon Zomahoun
Publication date: 01-12-2021
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keyword: Care
Published in: Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01813-3

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Evidence on scaling in health and social care: protocol for a living umbrella review

Abstract

Background

Methods

Discussion

Systematic review registration

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Discussion

Systematic review registration

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Effect of home-based pulmonary rehabilitation on functional capacity in people with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis—a systematic review protocol

Post-abortion family planning use, method preference, and its determinant factors in Eastern Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Mapping evidence on standards and quality of care for older persons in long-term care facilities: a scoping review protocol

Impact of abortion law reforms on women’s health services and outcomes: a systematic review protocol

The impacts of health systems financing fragmentation in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review protocol

Iterative guided machine learning-assisted systematic literature reviews: a diabetes case study