RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: This study aims to systematically synthesize literature on prognostic factors of changes in either direction (i.e. worsening or improvement) in pain, physical functioning, and participation in patients with knee- and/or hip OA. METHODS: Studies included in two preceding reviews underwent full-text screening for inclusion in the current review. Additionally, an extensive literature search was conducted in five databases. Title/abstract screening was performed using an active learning program. Inclusion criteria comprised patients diagnosed with knee- and/or hip OA, with the dependent variable assessing pain, physical functioning, or participation. Potential associated prognostic factors were measured as independent variables. The methodological quality of studies was assessed with the Hayden criteria. RESULTS: Thirty one studies were included in this systematic review. In knee OA patients, pain worsening is associated with lower physical functioning (strong evidence) and with higher body mass index, ethnicity, and a higher comorbidity count (moderate evidence). Also in knee OA patients, pain improvement is associated with less pain at baseline (moderate evidence). In knee- and/or hip OA patients, worsening of physical functioning exhibited associations with higher body mass index, more pain, more hip pain, a higher comorbidity count, higher avoidance of activities (strong evidence), and ethnicity (moderate evidence). In knee OA patients, improvement in physical functioning showed an association with higher vitality (moderate evidence). Regarding the remaining prognostic factors there is weak, inconclusive, or inconsistent evidence for an association with the outcomes. In hip OA only weak evidence was found for three factors predicting a change in physical functioning. CONCLUSION: This review encompasses prognostic factors associated with changes in either direction (i.e., worsening or improvement) in pain, physical functioning and participation.. The results are consistent with other reviews. Future research should place a stronger emphasis on hip OA patients and participation as an outcome.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Eye contact is one of the most fundamental forms of interhuman communication. However, to date, there has been no comprehensive research comparing how eye contact is made and interpreted in all possible populations worldwide. This study presents a summary of the existing literature on these modalities stratified to social categorizations and psychiatric disorders. METHOD: A scoping review with critical appraisal of the literature according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology. Databases AnthroSource, Medline, CINAHL, the Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection (EBSCO) and PsychInfo were searched. RESULTS: 7068 articles were screened for both the grey literature and reference lists, of which 385 were included, 282 for social categorizations and 103 for psychiatric disorders. In total, 603 thematic clustered outcomes of variations were included. Methodological quality was generally moderate to good. CONCLUSIONS: There is a great degree of variation in the presentation and interpretation of eye contact between and within populations. It remains unclear why specific variations occur in populations. Additionally, no gold standard for how eye contact should be used or interpreted emerged from the studies. Further research into the reason for differences in eye contact between and within populations is recommended.