减轻电子烟错误信息干预措施：系统评价方案。

Interventions to mitigate vaping misinformation: protocol for a scoping review.

机构信息

Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.

BOTEC Analysis, LLC, Woodland Hills, CA, USA.

出版信息

Syst Rev. 2022 Oct 9;11(1):214. doi: 10.1186/s13643-022-02094-0.

DOI:10.1186/s13643-022-02094-0

PMID:36210470

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9548303/

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The impact of misinformation about vapes' relative harms compared with smoking may lead to increased tobacco-related burden of disease. To date, no systematic efforts have been made to chart interventions that mitigate vaping-related misinformation. We plan to conduct a scoping review that seeks to fill gaps in the current knowledge of interventions that mitigate vaping-related misinformation.

METHODS

A scoping review focusing on interventions that mitigate vaping-related misinformation will be conducted. We will search (no date restrictions) MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Global Health, ERIC, and Sociological Abstracts. Gray literature will be identified using Disaster Lit, Google Scholar, Open Science Framework, governmental websites, and preprint servers (e.g., EuropePMC, PsyArXiv, MedRxiv, JMIR Preprints). Study selection will conform to Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers' Manual 2020 Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews. Only English language, original studies will be considered for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. A narrative summary of findings will be conducted. Data analysis will involve quantitative (e.g., frequencies) and qualitative (e.g., content and thematic analysis) methods. Where possible, a single effect size of exposure to the mitigation of vaping-related misinformation will be calculated per sample. Similarly, where possible, each study will be coded for moderating characteristics to find and account for systematic differences in the size of the effect or outcome that is being analyzed. Quality will be appraised with the study quality assessment tools utilized by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Findings will be subjected to several different publication bias tests: Egger's regression test, Begg and Mazumdar's ran correlation test, and generation of a funnel plot with effect sizes plotted against a corresponding standard error.

DISCUSSION

Original research is urgently needed to design interventions to mitigate vaping-related misinformation. The planned scoping review will help to address this gap.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework osf/io/hy3tk.

摘要

背景

与吸烟相比，有关电子烟相对危害的错误信息可能会导致与烟草相关的疾病负担增加。迄今为止，尚未有系统的努力来制定减轻与电子烟相关的错误信息的干预措施。我们计划进行范围界定审查，以填补当前有关减轻与电子烟相关的错误信息的干预措施的知识空白。

方法

将进行一项重点关注减轻与电子烟相关的错误信息的干预措施的范围界定审查。我们将搜索（无日期限制）MEDLINE、Scopus、EMBASE、CINAHL、PsycINFO、Web of Science 核心合集、全球健康、ERIC 和社会学摘要。使用灾难文献、Google 学术、开放科学框架、政府网站和预印本服务器（例如，EuropePMC、PsyArXiv、MedRxiv、JMIR 预印本）确定灰色文献。研究选择将符合 Joanna Briggs 研究所 2020 年 JBI 范围审查评论员手册。仅考虑纳入英语原创研究。两名评审员将独立筛选所有引用、全文文章和摘要数据。将对研究结果进行叙述性总结。数据分析将涉及定量（例如，频率）和定性（例如，内容和主题分析）方法。在可能的情况下，将为每个样本计算接触减轻与电子烟相关的错误信息的单一效果大小。同样，在可能的情况下，将对每项研究进行编码，以找出并说明正在分析的效果或结果的大小存在系统差异的调节特征。将使用美国国立心肺血液研究所使用的研究质量评估工具来评估质量。将对发现进行几种不同的发表偏倚测试：Egger 回归测试、Begg 和 Mazumdar 的 ran 相关测试以及生成一个带有效果大小的漏斗图，该图与相应的标准误差相对应。