OBJECTIVE: In this systematic review, we aimed to measure and analyze 4 dimensions of pervasive games through development, technology, experience, and evaluation. Moreover, we also aimed to discover and interpret their relationship with game, interaction, experience, and service design.
METHODS: We first chose 3 well-known databases, Web of Science, Scopus, and EBSCO, and searched from 2013 to April 2022. A strictly thorough Boolean search for research keywords such as "pervasive game," "design," and "interactive" resulted in 394 relevant articles. These articles were identified, screened, and checked for eligibility to find valid and useful articles, which were then categorized and analyzed using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) method.
RESULTS: The systematic selection was finally left with 40 valid and valuable articles. After categorization and analysis, all articles were classified according to 4 main themes, which were design and development (11/40, 28%), interaction and technology (15/40, 38%), users and experience (9/40, 23%), and evaluation and service (5/40, 13%). These 4 main areas can be subdivided into several smaller areas.
CONCLUSIONS: In the 4 areas of game design, interaction design, experience design, and service design, many scholars have studied pervasive games and made contributions. Although the development and technology of pervasive games have evolved with the times, there is still a need to strengthen emerging design concepts within pervasive games.
METHODS: This systematic review searched MEDLINE, CINAHL+, Econlit, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database and the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry from inception to 31 December, 2022, for relevant economic evaluations, which were critically appraised using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and Bias in Economic Evaluation (ECOBIAS) criteria. The costs, quality-adjusted life-years, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and cost-effectiveness thresholds were qualitatively analysed. Net monetary benefits at different decision thresholds were also computed. Subgroup analyses addressing the heterogeneity of economic outcomes were conducted. All costs were adjusted to 2023 international dollar (US$) values using the CCEMG-EPPI-Centre cost converter.
RESULTS: Thirty-nine economic evaluations that evaluated dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in patients with heart failure were found: 32 for the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 40% and seven for LVEF > 40%. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors were cost-effective in all but two economic evaluations for LVEF > 40%. Economic outcomes varied widely, but favoured SGLT2i use in LVEF ≤ 40% over LVEF > 40% and upper-middle income over high-income countries. At a threshold of US$30,000/quality-adjusted life-year, ~ 90% of high to upper-middle income countries would consider SGLT2i cost-effective for heart failure treatment. The generalisability of study findings to low- and low-middle income countries is limited because of insufficient evidence.
CONCLUSIONS: Using SGLT2i to treat heart failure is cost-effective, with more certainty in LVEF ≤ 40% compared to LVEF > 40%. Policymakers in jurisdictions where economic evaluations are not available could potentially use this study's findings to make informed decisions about treatment adoption.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: This study protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42023388701).
METHODS: Systematic review of qualitative studies from MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed and Scopus databases (2008-2022) was conducted to identify the challenges and solutions of healthcare transition specific to ARM and HD. Thematic analyses are reported with reference to patient, healthcare provider and healthcare system.
RESULTS: Sixteen studies from 234 unique articles were included. Fourteen themes related to challenges and solutions, each, are identified. Most challenges identified are patient related. The key challenges pertain to: (1) patient's lack of understanding of their disorder, resulting in over-reliance on the pediatric surgical team and reluctance towards transitioning to adult services; (2) a lack of education and awareness among adult colorectal surgeons in caring for pediatric colorectal conditions and inadequate communication between pediatric and adult teams; and (3) a lack of structured transition program and joint-clinic to meet the needs of the transitioning patients. The key solutions are: (1) fostering young adult patient's autonomy and independence; (2) conducting joint pediatric-adult transition clinics; and (3) ensuring a structured and coordinated transition program is available using a standardized guideline.
CONCLUSION: A comprehensive framework related to barriers and solutions for pediatric colorectal transition is established to help benchmark care quality of transitional care services.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
TYPE OF STUDY: Systematic review without meta-analysis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study aims to develop and validate a questionnaire measuring the KAP of clinicians towards maternal medicine. Literature reviews, item generation and multiple experts' reviews were conducted during the questionnaire development phase. Convenient sampling was undertaken for this cross-sectional survey. A total of 168 clinicians from one tertiary hospital and three health clinics participated in thepilot testing using the modified questionnaire. In addition, test-retest was performed on 30 participants to examine its reliability, whilst exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was undertaken to determine its construct validity.
RESULTS: This finalised questionnaire contained 36 items with excellent content validity. Pertaining to test-retest reliability, all knowledge domain items showed Kappa values > 0.20, except item K29; attitude domain items overall Cronbach's alpha was 0.787 with corrected item-total correlation > 0.300 and lastly, all items in practice domain achieved intra-class correlation index > 0.700, except P2.5. EFA supported four factor structures, but six items were removed due to the following reasons: cross loading, negative or poor loading factor (< 0.3).
CONCLUSION: Overall, this instrument has an acceptable psychometric property, content validity, internal reliability and construct validity. It is hope that this questionnaire would be validated in other populations and be used in future research to enrich our understanding of clinicians' KAP towards maternal medicine.