Risultati per: Colite ulcerosa negli adulti: review

Stroke, Ahead of Print. Background:To compare safety and efficacy between carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in treating asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis based on results from randomized controlled trials.Methods:Randomized controlled trials comparing CAS and CEA in treating asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis were searched from databases of the EMBASE, PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane libraries. Two independent reviewers identified eligible studies, extracted relevant data, and used the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess quality. Mantel-Haenszel method random-effects models were used to estimate odds ratio (OR) regarding perioperative risks between CAS and CEA. Kaplan-Meier curve data were extracted and analyzed through Exp[(O-E)/Var] fixed-effect models to calculate the Peto odds ratio (OR) regarding long-term outcomes.Results:Sixteen articles from 7 randomized controlled trials were included, reporting relevant outcomes for 7230 asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis patients (CAS: n=3920; CEA: n=3198). Compared with the CEA group, CAS group had no difference in perioperative composite end point events including stroke, death, and myocardial infarction (MI; OR, 1.13 [95% CI, 0.87–1.47];P=0.37, I2=0%). Compared with CEA, CAS had a higher risk of any stroke during the perioperative period (OR, 1.62 [95% CI, 1.16–2.24];P=0.004, I2=0%) and an increased risk of nondisabling stroke (OR, 1.81 [95% CI, 1.23–2.65];P=0.003, I2=0%), but there was no significant difference in disabling stroke and death between groups (OR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.50–1.65];P=0.76, I2=0%). For long-term outcomes, no difference regarding the composite outcome of any stroke, death, and myocardial infarction existed between CEA and CAS (Peto OR, 1.18 [95% CI, 0.94–1.48];P=0.14, I2=0%). Individual-level patient data would be important to verify the long-term outcome results.Conclusions:When treating asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis, CAS has comparable perioperative and long-term composite outcomes compared with CEA. However, CAS may have a higher risk of any stroke and nondisabling stroke in the perioperative period.

Objectives
To appraise the existing literature reporting an association between retinal markers and cognitive impairment in adults aged 65 years and over and to provide directions for future use of retinal scanning as a potential tool for dementia diagnosis.

Design
Systematic review of peer-reviewed empirical articles investigating the association of retinal markers in assessing cognitive impairment.

Data sources
Three electronic databases, Medline, PsycINFO and EMBASE were searched from inception until March 2022.

Eligibility criteria
All empirical articles in English investigating the association between retinal markers and cognition in humans aged ≥65 years using various retinal scanning methodologies were included. Studies with no explicit evaluation of retinal scanning and cognitive outcomes were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool.

Data extraction and synthesis
Data extraction was conducted by two authors (VJ, RS) and reviewed by another author (JS). Results were synthesised and described narratively.

Results
Sixty-seven eligible studies examining 6815 older adults were included. Majority of studies were cross-sectional (n=60; 89.6%). Optical coherence tomography (OCT) was the most commonly used retinal scanning methodology to measure the thickness of retinal nerve fibre layer, the ganglion cell complex, choroid and macula. 51.1% of cross-sectional studies using OCT reported an association between the thinning of at least one retinal parameter and poor cognition. Longitudinal studies (n=6) using OCT also mostly identified significant reductions in retinal nerve fibre layer thickness with cognitive decline. Study quality was overall moderate.

Conclusion
Retinal nerve fibre layer thickness is linked with cognitive performance and therefore may have the potential to detect cognitive impairment in older adults. Further longitudinal studies are required to validate our synthesis and understand underlying mechanisms before recommending implementation of OCT as a dementia screening tool in clinical practice.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42020176757.

Objective
This review aimed to investigate the effects of the maternal and child health (MCH) handbook and other home-based records on mothers’ non-health outcomes.

Design
Systematic review.

Data sources
PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Academic Search Complete, PsycArticles, PsycINFO, SocINDEX, CENTRAL, NHS EED, HTA, DARE, Ichuushi and J-STAGE through 26 March 2022.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies
Original research articles examining home-based records and mothers’ non-health outcomes published in English or Japanese across various study designs.

Data extraction and synthesis
Two independent reviewers extracted relevant data and assessed the risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence for each study using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Due to the heterogeneity of the included studies, we conducted a narrative synthesis of their findings.

Results
Of the 4199 articles identified, we included 47 articles (20 in Japanese) in the review. Among the different types of home-based records, only the MCH handbook provided essential information about the mother–child relationship, and its use facilitated the mother–child bonding process. Mothers reported generally feeling satisfied with the use of home-based records; although their satisfaction with health services was influenced by healthcare providers’ level of commitment to using these records. While home-based records positively affected communication within the household, we observed mixed effects on communication between mothers/caregivers and healthcare providers. Barriers to effective communication included a lack of satisfactory explanations regarding the use of home-based records and personalised guidance from healthcare providers. These records were also inconsistently used across different health facilities and professionals.

Conclusions
The MCH handbook fostered the mother–child bond. Mothers were generally satisfied with the use of home-based records, but their engagement depended on how these records were communicated and used by healthcare providers. Additional measures are necessary to ensure the implementation and effective use of home-based records.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42020166545.

Introduction
The prevalence of eye diseases has been increasing worldwide. In China, in addition to conventional medicine, Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) plays an important role in maintaining people’s vision health. Although less flexible and targeted than TCM decoction, Chinese Patent Medicines (CPMs) are stable and well used. In recent years, CPMs have been increasingly used in ophthalmology clinics by TCM practitioners and by Western doctors in general hospitals. However, comprehensive evidence for using CPMs in ophthalmology is lacking.

Aim
We will apply the methodology of scoping review to systematically search and sort out the available evidence on oral CPMs for the treatment of eye diseases, identify the distribution of evidence in this field and provide a basis for clinical practice and medical decisions.

Methods
The scoping review will be implemented in the following seven steps: (1) defining the research question; (2) searching National Essential Medicines List (2018 edition), National Basic Medical Insurance, Work Injury Insurance and Maternity Insurance Drug Catalog (2020 edition) and Chinese Pharmacopoeia (2020 edition) for oral CPMs for the treatment of eye diseases; (3) searching Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Chongqing VIP Chinese Scientific Journals Database, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database and Wanfang Database for relevant literature published from inception to December 2021; (4) developing eligibility criteria; (5) screening the studies based on inclusion criteria; (6) extracting relevant data and lastly, (7) collating, summarising and reporting the results.

Ethics and dissemination
Since the scoping review aims at collecting data from publicly available publications, this study does not require ethical approval. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific conferences.

Introduction
The COVID-19 outbreak poses a significant threat to the patients with tuberculosis (TB). TB and COVID-19 (TB–COVID) coinfection means the disease caused by both Mycobacterium tuberculosis and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Currently, the prevalence status, treatment and outcomes of the coinfection are poorly characterised. We aimed to systematically review the evidence on this topic and provide comprehensive information to guide the control and treatment of TB–COVID coinfection.

Methods
An extensive screening was conducted using six electronic databases to search eligible studies from 1 November 2019 to 19 March 2021. Prevalence rate, treatment and outcomes of TB–COVID coinfection were extracted. Random-effects models were used to calculate mean fatality rates of coinfection with 95% CIs. The risks of bias were assessed with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Study Reporting Prevalence Data and JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Report. A meta-analysis was conducted for subgroups on in-hospital fatality rate.

Results
Forty-two studies were included into the analysis (35 case reports and 7 retrospective cohort studies). Nineteen countries reported coinfected patients, including high and low TB prevalence countries. The only study revealing prevalence rate came from West Cape Province, South Africa (people aged above 20 years, 0.04% until 1 June 2020 and 0.06% until 9 June 2020). The treatment regimens for coinfected patients were highly heterogeneous. The mean overall and in-hospital fatality rates of coinfection were 13.9% (95% CI: 1.6% to 26.2%) and 17.5% (95% CI: 8.9% to 26.0%). The mean in-hospital fatality rates for high-income countries (Italy and Argentina) and low/middle-income countries (LMICs) (India, Philippines, South Africa) were 6.5% (95% CI: –0.8% to ~13.9%) and 22.5% (95% CI: 19.0% to ~26.0%).

Conclusion
TB–COVID coinfection is common globally, and the coinfected patients suffer from higher fatality risk than patients with normal COVID-19. Outcomes shared significant differences between high-income countries and LMICs.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42021253660.

Introduction
Clinical research broadly aims to influence decision-making in order to promote appropriate healthcare. Funding agencies should prioritise research projects according to needed research topics, methodological and cost-effectiveness considerations, and expected social value. In Chile, there is no local diagnosis regarding recent clinical research that might inform prioritisation for future research funding. This research aims to comprehensively identify and classify Chilean health research studies, elaborating evidence gap maps for the most burdensome local conditions.

Methods and analysis
We will search in electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS and WoS) and perform hand searches to retrieve, identify and classify health research studies conducted in Chile or by authors whose affiliations are based in Chile, from 2000 onwards. We will elaborate evidence matrices for the 20 conditions with the highest burden in Chile (according to the Global Burden of Disease 2019) selected from those defined under the General Regime of the Health Guarantees Act. To elaborate the evidence gap maps, we will consider prioritised interventions and core outcome sets. To identify knowledge gaps and estimate redundant research, we will contrast these gap maps with the available international evidence of high or moderate certainty of evidence, for each specific clinical question. For this purpose, we will search systematic reviews using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

Ethics and dissemination
No ethical approval is required to conduct this project. We will submit our results in both peer-reviewed journals and scientific conferences. We will aim to disseminate our findings through different academic platforms, social media, local press, among others. The final results will be communicated to local funding agencies and government stakeholders.

Discussion
We aim to provide an accurate and up-to-date picture of the research gaps—to be filled by new future findings—and the identification of redundant research, which will constitute relevant information for local decision-makers.

Introduction
Canadian youth (aged 15–24) have the highest rates of cannabis use globally. There are increasing concerns about the adverse effects of cannabis use on youth physical and mental health. However, there are gaps in our understanding of risks and harms to youth. This scoping review will synthesise the literature related to youth cannabis use in Canada. We will examine the relationship between youth cannabis use and physical and mental health, and the relationship with use of other substances. We will also examine prevention strategies for youth cannabis use in Canada and how the literature addresses social determinants of health.

Methods and analysis
Using a scoping review framework developed by Arksey and O’Malley, we will conduct our search in five academic databases: MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo, CINAHL and Web of Science’s Core Collection. We will include articles published between 2000 and 2021, and articles meeting the inclusion criteria will be charted to extract relevant themes and analysed using a qualitative thematic analysis approach.

Ethics and dissemination
This review will provide relevant information about youth cannabis use and generate recommendations and gaps in the literature. Updated research will inform policies, public education strategies and evidence-based programming. Results will be disseminated through an infographic, peer-reviewed publication and presentation at a mental health and addiction conference. Ethics approval is not required for this scoping review.

Introduction
Chronic pain affects millions of individuals worldwide. Healthcare provider gender bias in the management of these individuals has societal and individual ramifications. Yet, a thorough and comprehensive literature summary on this topic is lacking. Therefore, this study aims to systematically: (1) identify and map the available scientific and grey literature as it relates to healthcare provider gender bias in the assessment, diagnosis and management of (chronic) musculoskeletal pain and (2) identify current gaps that necessitate further research.

Methods and analysis
This scoping review will be conducted in accordance with recent guidelines, and the results will be reported via the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. The following databases will be searched: PubMed (National Library of Medicine), Embase (Elsevier), Scopus (Elsevier), CINAHL Complete (Ovid), Academic Search Complete (Ebscohost), Pre-Prints Database (National Library of Medicine) and Rehabilitation Reference Center from inception to August 2022. Additionally, relevant grey literature will be identified. All screening will be done by two independent reviewers during two stages: first title/abstract screening followed by full-text screening. Data will be extracted from the bibliometric, study characteristics, and pain science families of variables. Results will be descriptively mapped, and the frequency of concepts, population, characteristics and other details will be narratively reported. Additionally, results will be presented in tabular and graphical form.

Ethics and dissemination
As this study will neither involve human subject participation nor utilisation of protected data, ethical approval is not required. This study’s methodological approach follows current recommendations. Study findings will be disseminated through conference presentations and international peer-review journal publication. In addition, infographics available in English, Spanish and German will be disseminated.

Registration details
This project will be registered in Open Science Framework prior to data collection.

Objective
To identify and summarise evaluated interventions aiming to improve the communication of palliative care (PC) and end-of-life (EoL) issues in physicians caring for cancer patients. Such interventions are needed with regard to the aim of an earlier communication of those issues in oncology daily practice, which is associated with a range of benefits for patients and caregivers but is often impeded by physicians’ communication insecurities.

Design
Systematic review based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

Data sources
Relevant publications were systematically searched in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science databases in September 2020 with an update in July 2021.

Eligibility criteria
We included publications reporting a quantitative evaluation of a communication intervention on one or more PC/EoL issues with a communication-related main outcome. Target group had to be physicians caring for cancer patients non-specialist in PC.

Data extraction and synthesis
Two independent raters extracted intervention characteristics, publication characteristics and publication quality. Results were narratively synthesised.

Results
24 publications reporting 22 interventions were included. 13 publications reported randomised controlled trials. A majority of the interventions addressed one specific PC/EoL issue, most often breaking bad news. Teaching strategies mostly involved role-plays. Target group were mainly oncologists. In addition to self-reported outcome measurements for evaluation, most publications also reported the use of external rating data. All but one publication reported significant intervention effects on at least one outcome parameter. Publication quality was overall moderate.

Conclusions
The empirically tested communication interventions on PC/EoL issues seem to effectively improve physicians’ communication. Future interventions should focus on other issues than breaking bad news, such as preparing for the future. Target group should also be organ-specific oncologists, as all primary caring physicians are responsible for timely communication. Our risk-of-bias assessment revealed some weaknesses, indicating that more high-quality studies for evaluation are needed.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42020191054.

Introduction
The sustainable employment outcomes and cost-effectiveness of Supported Employment (SE) and Individual Placement and Support (IPS) have been well reported. Research has also focused on various target groups, compliance with the quality criteria for the implementation of the SE/IPS method in diverse work life and social security contexts. However, the impact of employers’ interests and the quality and opportunities of jobs or the work itself for sustainable working careers have not been studied extensively. The objective of the proposed scoping review is to systematically explore what is known about sustainable employability in SE and IPS interventions in the context of the characteristics of work and perspectives of the employers.

Methods and analyses
The scoping review methodological framework by Arksey and O’Malley and its recently enhanced versions are used as guidelines in this study. The literature search, which was conducted in Medline, Scopus, PsycINFO, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Social Science Premium Collection (ProQuest), identified a total of 2706 articles after the removal of duplicates. Key findings of selected studies will be charted, analysed and reported.

Ethics and dissemination
The study does not require ethics approval, as the data are collected from secondary sources. The final version of the scoping review will be published in a peer-reviewed academic journal. Findings of the review will be used in the upcoming ethnographic observation at work study, which is part of the Finnish Work Ability Programme Evaluation Study (2020–2023).

Introduction
Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) makes up the majority of lung cancer cases. Currently, surgical resection is the gold standard of treatment. However, as patients are becoming medically more complex presenting with advanced disease, minimally invasive image-guided percutaneous ablations are gaining popularity. Therefore, comparison of surgical, ablative and second-line external beam therapies will help clinicians, as management of NSCLC changes. We will conduct a meta-analysis, reviewing literature investigating these therapies in adult patients diagnosed with stage 1 NSCLC, with neither hilar nor mediastinal nodal involvement, confirmed either through cytology or histology regardless of type.

Methods and analysis
We will search electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane) from their inception to January 2021 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs and cohort studies comparing survival and clinical outcomes between any two interventions (lobectomy, wedge resection, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery/robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery, radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation, cryoablation and consolidated radiation therapies (external beam radiation therapy, stereotactic body radiation therapy, and 3D conformal radiation therapy). The primary outcomes will include cancer-specific survival, lung disease-free survival, locoregional recurrence, death, toxicity and non-target organ injury. We will also search published and unpublished studies in trial registries and will review references of included studies for possible inclusion. Risk of bias will be assessed using tools developed by the Cochrane collaboration. Two reviewers will independently assess the eligibility of studies and conduct the corresponding risk of bias assessments. For each outcome, given enough studies, we will conduct a network meta-analysis. Finally, we will use the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis tool to assess quality of the evidence for each of the primary outcomes.

Ethics and dissemination
We aim to share our findings through high-impact peer review. As interventional techniques become more popular, it will be important for providers in multidisciplinary teams caring for these patients to receive continuing medical education related to these interventions. Data will be made available to readers.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42021276629.

Background
A growing number of meta-analyses reviewed the existing associations between modifiable factors and stroke. However, the methodological quality of them and quality of evidence remain to be assessed by validated tools. Thus, this umbrella review was conducted to consolidate evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses of cohort studies investigating the association between modifiable factors and incidence of stroke.

Methods
PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Wanfang and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of cohort studies from inception until March 2021. Assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews 2 was used to evaluate the methodological quality of each included published meta-analysis. Excess significance test was used to investigate whether the observed number of studies (O) with nominally significant results (‘positive’ studies, p

Background
Guideline developers are encouraged to engage patients, carers and their representatives (‘consumers’) from diverse backgrounds in guideline development to produce more widely applicable guidelines. However, consumers from diverse backgrounds are infrequently included in guidelines and there is scant research to support guideline developers to do this.

Objectives
To identify principles and approaches to broaden the diversity of consumers engaged in guideline development.

Design
Scoping review and semi-structured interviews.

Methods
We conducted comprehensive searches to March 2020 for studies, reports and guidance documents. Inclusion criteria included the terms ‘consumer’ (patients, carers and their representatives), ‘diversity’ (defined using the PROGRESS-PLUS mnemonic) and ‘consumer engagement’ (the active involvement of consumers at any stage of guideline development). We also conducted four interviews with consumers and guideline developers. We used descriptive synthesis to identify themes, and summarised information about implemented approaches used to broaden diversity of consumers in guidelines.

Results
From 10 included documents, we identified eight themes. Themes covered general engagement concepts (Respectful partnerships; Recruitment; Expectations, process and review); specific concepts about guideline development group (GDG) engagement (Characteristics of guideline personnel; Consumers’ role, characteristics and prominence; Preparing and supporting consumers); and other (non-GDG) approaches (Online methods; Consultations and research-based approaches). The most commonly included PROGRESS-PLUS categories were Disability, Race/culture/ethnicity/language, Place of residence and Other vulnerable (eg, ‘disadvantaged groups’). Each theme included the views of both consumers and guideline developers. We found descriptions of 12 implemented engagement approaches to broaden diversity of consumers in guidelines.

Conclusions
Relationship-building, mitigating power imbalances and meeting consumers where they are at underpin our findings. Engaging with diverse groups may require greater attention to building formal, respectful partnerships and employing inclusive engagement methods.

Objectives
In November 2020, a series of reports, In Plain Sight, described widespread Indigenous-specific stereotyping, racism and discrimination limiting access to medical treatment and negatively impacting the health and wellness of Indigenous Peoples in British Columbia, Canada. To address the health inequalities experienced by Indigenous peoples, Indigenous healing practices must be integrated within the delivery of care. This rapid scoping review aimed to identify and synthesise strategies used to integrate Indigenous healing practices within collaborative care models available in community-based primary healthcare, delivered by regulated health professionals in Canada.

Eligibility criteria
We included quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies conducted in community-based primary healthcare practices that used strategies to integrate Indigenous healing practices within collaborative care models.

Sources of evidence
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Indigenous Studies Portal, Informit Indigenous Collection and Native Health Database for studies published from 2015 to 2021.

Charting methods
Our data extraction used three frameworks to categorise the findings. These frameworks defined elements of integrated healthcare (ie, functional, organisational, normative and professional), culturally appropriate primary healthcare and the extent of community engagement. We narratively summarised the included study characteristics.

Results
We identified 2573 citations and included 31 in our review. Thirty-nine per cent of reported strategies used functional integration (n=12), 26% organisational (n=8), 19% normative (n=6) and 16% professional (n=5). Eighteen studies (58%) integrated all characteristics of culturally appropriate Indigenous healing practices into primary healthcare. Twenty-four studies (77%) involved Indigenous leadership or collaboration at each phase of the study and, seven (23%) included consultation only or the level of engagement was unclear.

Conclusions
We found that collaborative and Indigenous-led strategies were more likely to facilitate and implement the integration of Indigenous healing practices. Commonalities across strategies included community engagement, elder support or Indigenous ceremony or traditions. However, we did not evaluate the effectiveness of these strategies.

Introduction
Knowledge translation platforms (KTPs) are intermediary organisations, initiatives or networks whose intent is to bridge the evidence into action divide. Strategies and tools include collaborative knowledge production, capacity building, information exchange and dialogue to facilitate relevant and timely engagement between researchers and decision-makers and other relevant stakeholders. With the wide range of definitions and descriptions of KTPs, there is a need to (1) provide a nuanced understanding of characteristics of KTPs and (2) assess and consolidate research methods used in mapping and evaluating KTPs to inform standardised process and impact evaluation.

Methods and analysis
This scoping review will follow the recommended and accepted methods for scoping reviews and reporting guidelines. Eligibility for inclusion is any conceptual or empirical health-related qualitative, quantitative and/or mixed method studies including (1) definitions, descriptions and models or frameworks of KTPs (including those that do not self-identify as KTPs, eg, university research centres) and (2) research methods for mapping and/or evaluating KTPs. Searches will be carried out in PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Embase, Global Health and Web of Science using a predetermined search strategy, without any date, language or geographical restrictions. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts. One reviewer will complete data extraction for all included studies, and another will check a sample of 50% of the included studies. The analysis and synthesis will provide (1) an understanding of the various characteristics of KTPs; (2) insight into characteristics or factors that make them resilient and/or adaptive to facilitate impact (ie, influence policy and practice); and (3) an overview of the various methods for mapping and evaluating KTPs. We will explore enhancing an existing framework for classifying KTPs, or perhaps even developing a new framework for identifying and monitoring KTPs if necessary and relevant.

Ethics and dissemination
This scoping review does not require ethics approval, as we will only include information from previously conducted studies and we will not involve human participants. The results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed scientific journal for publication and as conference presentations.

Objectives
Incentives have been effectively used in several healthcare contexts. This systematic review aimed to ascertain whether incentives can improve antipsychotic adherence, what ethical and practical issues arise and whether existing evidence resolves these issues.

Design
Systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO. Searches on 13 January 2021 (no start date) found papers on incentives for antipsychotics. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, qualitative research and ethical analyses were included. Papers measuring impact on adherence were synthesised, then a typology of ethical and policy issues was compiled, finally the empirical literature was compared with this typology to describe current evidence and identify remaining research questions.

Results
26 papers were included. 2 RCTs used contingent financial incentives for long-acting injectable antipsychotic preparations. Over 12 months, there were significantly larger increases in adherence among the intervention groups versus control groups in both RCTs. There were no consistently positive secondary outcomes. 39 ethical and practical issues were identified. 12 of these are amenable to empirical study but have not been researched and for 7 the current evidence is mixed.

Conclusions
In keeping with other areas of healthcare, antipsychotic adherence can be increased with financial incentives. Payments of 2.5 times minimum wage changed behaviour. The typology of issues reported in this systematic review provides a template for future policy and ethical analysis. The persistence of the effect and the impact of incentives on intrinsic motivation require further research.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42020222702.