Background: Internet gaming disorder (IGD) was included in the DSM-5 in 2013 as a condition requiring further research, and gaming disorder (GD) was included in the ICD-11 in 2018. Given the importance of including these conditions in diagnostic guidelines, a review was conducted to describe their prevalence. Methods: Using guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR), we conducted a rapid scoping review. MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane library were searched for literature published from inception to July 2018. All review stages were pilot-tested to calibrate reviewers. The titles/abstracts and full-text articles were screened by one reviewer to include quantitative primary studies that reported GD or IGD prevalence. Excluded citations were screened by a second reviewer to confirm exclusion. Charting was conducted by one reviewer and verified by another, to capture relevant data. Results were summarized descriptively in tables or text. Results: We assessed 5550 potentially relevant citations. No studies on GD were identified. We found 160 studies of various designs that used 35 different methods to diagnose IGD. The prevalence of IGD ranged from 0.21-57.50% in general populations, 3.20-91.00% in clinical populations, and 50.42-79.25% in populations undergoing intervention (severe cases). Most studies were conducted in the Republic of Korea (n = 45), China (n = 29), and the USA (n = 20). Results are also presented for severe IGD and by geographic region, gender/sex, and age groups (child, adolescent, adult). The five most frequently reported health-related variables were depression (67 times), Internet addiction (54 times), anxiety (48 times), impulsiveness (37 times), and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (24 times). Conclusions: Due to the variability in diagnostic approaches, knowledge users should interpret the wide IGD prevalence ranges with caution. In addition to further research on GD, consensus on the definition of IGD and how it is measured is needed, to better understand the prevalence of these conditions.

Background The objective of this review was to examine the current guidelines for infection prevention and control (IPAC) of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) or other coronaviruses in adults 60 years or older living in long-term care facilities (LTCF). Methods EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane library, pre-print servers, clinical trial registries, and relevant grey literature sources were searched until July 31, 2020, using database searching and an automated method called Continuous Active Learning® (CAL®). All search results were processed using CAL® to identify the most likely relevant citations that were then screened by a single human reviewer. Full-text screening, data abstraction, and quality appraisal were completed by a single reviewer and verified by a second. Results Nine clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) were included. The most common recommendation in the CPGs was establishing surveillance and monitoring systems followed by mandating the use of PPE; physically distancing or cohorting residents; environmental cleaning and disinfection; promoting hand and respiratory hygiene among residents, staff, and visitors; and providing sick leave compensation for staff. Conclusions Current evidence suggests robust surveillance and monitoring along with support for IPAC initiatives are key to preventing the spread of COVID-19 in LTCF. However, there are significant gaps in the current recommendations especially with regard to the movement of staff between LTCF and their role as possible transmission vectors. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020181993

Abstract.This article is the introduction to a 12-paper supplement on global trends in typhoid fever. The Tackling Typhoid (T2) project was initiated in 2015 to synthesize the existing body of literature on typhoidal salmonellae and study national and regional typhoid fever trends. In addition to a global systematic review, eight case studies were undertaken to examine typhoid and paratyphoid fever trends in endemic countries alongside changes in relevant contextual factors. Incidence variations exist both within and between regions with large subnational differences as well, suggesting that public health changes impacting typhoid and paratyphoid fevers in one setting may not have similar impacts in another. This supplement also brings to light the lack of national typhoid fever surveillance systems, inconsistencies in diagnostics, and the lack of typhoid fever associated morbidity and mortality data in many countries, making it difficult to accurately quantify and track burden of disease. To better understand typhoid fever there is a need for more high-quality data from resource-poor settings. The implementation of typhoid surveillance systems alongside the transition to blood-culture confirmation of cases, where possible, would aid in the improvement of data quality in low-income settings. The following supplement includes the results of our global systematic review, eight-country case study articles, a qualitative article informed by semistructured interviews, and a conclusion article on potential ways forward for typhoid control.

Abstract.Typhoid and paratyphoid fever continue to significantly contribute to global morbidity and mortality. Disease burden is higher in low-and middle-income settings where surveillance programs are rare and little systematic information exists at population level. This review evaluates national, regional, and global trends in the incidence of typhoid fever and of related morbidity and mortality. A literature search in Medline, Embase, and Web of Science was conducted in June 2016, followed by screening and data extraction in duplicate. Studies reporting blood culture estimates of typhoid or paratyphoid morbidity and mortality were included in the analysis. Our search yielded 5,563 unique records, of which 1978 were assessed for relevance with 219 records meeting the eligibility criteria. Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi was the most commonly reported organism (91%), with the occurrence of typhoidal Salmonella (either incidence or prevalence) being the most commonly reported outcome (78%), followed by typhoid fever mortality, ileal perforation morbidity, and perforation mortality, respectively. Fewer than 50% of studies stratified outcomes by age or urban/rural locality. Surveillance data were available from 29 countries and patient-focused studies were available from 32 countries. Our review presents a mixed picture with declines reported in many regions and settings but with large gaps in surveillance and published data. Regional trends show generally high incidence rates in South Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, and East Asia and Pacific where the disease is endemic in many countries. Significant increases have been reported in certain countries but should be explored in the context of long-term trends and underlying at-risk populations.

BackgroundOver 240 million children live in countries affected by conflict or fragility, and such settings are known to be linked to increased psychological distress and risk of mental disorders. While guidelines are in place, high-quality evidence to inform mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) interventions in conflict settings is lacking. This systematic review aimed to synthesise existing information on the delivery, coverage and effectiveness of MHPSS for conflict-affected women and children in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).MethodsWe searched Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Psychological Information Database (PsycINFO)databases for indexed literature published from January 1990 to March 2018. Grey literature was searched on the websites of 10 major humanitarian organisations. Eligible publications reported on an MHPSS intervention delivered to conflict-affected women or children in LMICs. We extracted and synthesised information on intervention delivery characteristics, including delivery site and personnel involved, as well as delivery barriers and facilitators, and we tabulated reported intervention coverage and effectiveness data.ResultsThe search yielded 37 854 unique records, of which 157 were included in the review. Most publications were situated in Sub-Saharan Africa (n=65) and Middle East and North Africa (n=36), and many reported on observational research studies (n=57) or were non-research reports (n=53). Almost half described MHPSS interventions targeted at children and adolescents (n=68). Psychosocial support was the most frequently reported intervention delivered, followed by training interventions and screening for referral or treatment. Only 19 publications reported on MHPSS intervention coverage or effectiveness.DiscussionDespite the growing literature, more efforts are needed to further establish and better document MHPSS intervention research and practice in conflict settings. Multisectoral collaboration and better use of existing social support networks are encouraged to increase reach and sustainability of MHPSS interventions.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019125221.

BackgroundIt is essential to provide comprehensive sexual and reproductive health (SRH) interventions to women affected by armed conflict, but there is a lack of evidence on effective approaches to delivering such interventions in conflict settings. This review synthesised the available literature on SRH intervention delivery in conflict settings to inform potential priorities for further research and additional guidance development.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases using terms related to conflict, women and children, and SRH. We searched websites of 10 humanitarian organisations for relevant grey literature. Publications reporting on conflict-affected populations in low-income and middle-income countries and describing an SRH intervention delivered during or within 5 years after the end of a conflict were included. Information on population, intervention and delivery characteristics were extracted and narratively synthesised. Quantitative data on intervention coverage and effectiveness were tabulated, but no meta-analysis was undertaken.Results110 publications met our eligibility criteria. Most focused on sub-Saharan Africa and displaced populations based in camps. Reported interventions targeted family planning, HIV/STIs, gender-based violence and general SRH. Most interventions were delivered in hospitals and clinics by doctors and nurses. Delivery barriers included security, population movement and lack of skilled health staff. Multistakeholder collaboration, community engagement and use of community and outreach workers were delivery facilitators. Reporting of intervention coverage or effectiveness data was limited.DiscussionThere is limited relevant literature on adolescents or out-of-camp populations and few publications reported on the use of existing guidance such as the Minimal Initial Services Package. More interventions for gender-based violence were reported in the grey than the indexed literature, suggesting limited formal research in this area. Engaging affected communities and using community-based sites and personnel are important, but more research is needed on how best to reach underserved populations and to implement community-based approaches.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019125221.

BackgroundAccess to safe water and sanitation facilities and the adoption of effective hygiene practices are fundamental to reducing maternal and child morbidity and mortality globally. In armed conflict settings, inadequate water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) infrastructure poses major health risks for women and children. This review aimed to synthesise the existing information on WASH interventions being delivered to women and children in conflict settings in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) and to identify the personnel, sites and platforms being used to deliver such interventions.MethodsWe conducted a systematic search for publications indexed in four databases, and grey literature was searched through the websites of humanitarian agencies and organisations. Eligible publications reported WASH interventions delivered to conflict-affected women or children. We extracted and synthesised information on intervention delivery characteristics, as well as barriers and facilitators.ResultsWe identified 58 eligible publications reporting on the delivery of WASH interventions, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa. Non-Governmental Organization (NGO)/United Nations (UN) agency staff were reported to be involved in delivering interventions in 62% of publications, with the most commonly reported delivery site being community spaces (50%). Only one publication reported quantitative data on intervention effectiveness among women or children.DiscussionThis review revealed gaps in the current evidence on WASH intervention delivery in conflict settings. Little information is available on the delivery of water treatment or environmental hygiene interventions, or about the sites and personnel used to deliver WASH interventions. Limited quantitative data on WASH intervention coverage or effectiveness with respect to women or children are important gaps, as multiple factors can affect how WASH services are accessed differently by women and men, and the hygiene needs of adolescent girls and boys differ; these factors must be taken into account when delivering interventions in conflict settings.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019125221

BackgroundWhile much progress was made throughout the Millennium Development Goals era in reducing maternal and neonatal mortality, both remain unacceptably high, especially in areas affected by humanitarian crises. While valuable guidance on interventions to improve maternal and neonatal health in both non-crisis and crisis settings exists, guidance on how best to deliver these interventions in crisis settings, and especially in conflict settings, is still limited. This systematic review aimed to synthesise the available literature on the delivery on maternal and neonatal health interventions in conflict settings.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases using terms related to conflict, women and children, and maternal and neonatal health. We searched websites of 10 humanitarian organisations for relevant grey literature. Publications reporting on conflict-affected populations in low-income and middle-income countries and describing a maternal or neonatal health intervention delivered during or within 5 years after the end of a conflict were included. Information on population, intervention, and delivery characteristics were extracted and narratively synthesised. Quantitative data on intervention coverage and effectiveness were tabulated but no meta-analysis was undertaken.Results115 publications met our eligibility criteria. Intervention delivery was most frequently reported in the sub-Saharan Africa region, and most publications focused on displaced populations based in camps. Reported maternal interventions targeted antenatal, obstetric and postnatal care; neonatal interventions focused mostly on essential newborn care. Most interventions were delivered in hospitals and clinics, by doctors and nurses, and were mostly delivered through non-governmental organisations or the existing healthcare system. Delivery barriers included insecurity, lack of resources and lack of skilled health staff. Multi-stakeholder collaboration, the introduction of new technology or systems innovations, and staff training were delivery facilitators. Reporting of intervention coverage or effectiveness data was limited.DiscussionThe relevant existing literature focuses mostly on maternal health especially around the antenatal period. There is still limited literature on postnatal care in conflict settings and even less on newborn care. In crisis settings, as much as in non-crisis settings, there is a need to focus on the first day of birth for both maternal and neonatal health. There is also a need to do more research on how best to involve community members in the delivery of maternal and neonatal health interventions.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019125221.