To improve the ability of constructed wetlands to remove abamectin (ABM) and nutrients, the influence of four different substrates on constructed wetlands was studied.

No abstract

ObjectiveTo assess the methodology and quality of evidence of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of traditional Chinese medical nursing (TCMN) interventions in Chinese journals. These interventions include acupressure, massage, Tai Chi, Qi Gong, electroacupuncture and use of Chinese herbal medicines—for example, in enemas, foot massage and compressing the umbilicus.DesignA systematic literature search for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of TCMN interventions was performed. Review characteristics were extracted. The methodological quality and the quality of the evidence were evaluated using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approaches.ResultWe included 20 systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and a total of 11 TCMN interventions were assessed in the 20 reviews. The compliance with AMSTAR checklist items ranged from 4.5 to 8 and systematic reviews/meta-analyses were, on average, of medium methodological quality. The quality of the evidence we assessed ranged from very low to moderate; no high-quality evidence was found. The top two causes for downrating confidence in effect estimates among the 31 bodies of evidence assessed were the risk of bias and inconsistency.ConclusionsThere is room for improvement in the methodological quality of systematic reviews/meta-analyses of TCMN interventions published in Chinese journals. Greater efforts should be devoted to ensuring a more comprehensive search strategy, clearer specification of the interventions of interest in the eligibility criteria and identification of meaningful outcomes for clinicians and patients (consumers). The overall quality of evidence among reviews remains suboptimal, which raise concerns about their roles in influencing clinical practice. Thus, the conclusions in reviews we assessed must be treated with caution and their roles in influencing clinical practice should be limited. A critical appraisal of systematic reviews/meta-analyses of TCMN interventions is particularly important to provide sound guidance for TCMN.

AimsA negative association between the lower level of psychological resilience (PR) and increased risk of compassion fatigue (CF) and higher Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) stress has been revealed. However, bibliometric studies have not been performed to comprehensively investigate this topic. This study aimed to identify the status and trends in the CF and PR field from 2008 to 2021 and during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe identified relevant literature from the Web of Science Core Collection® database using “resilience” and “compassion fatigue” on September 30, 2021. All search results were exported in plain text format for collaboration network analysis, reference-based co-citation analysis, analysis of journals, and keywords-based co-occurrence analysis, which were performed using Citespace® 5.8.R1.ResultsA total of 388 publications were identified finally, and there has been an increasing trend in the annual number of publications with light fluctuations. The analysis of journals and keywords indicated that nurses and social workers are the main research targets, and their mental problems are the main research topics. The turnover intention of health care providers has been a research focus, particularly during the COVID-19.ConclusionThe results of the present study help us understand the status of the CF and PR field and its recent developments.

No abstract

No abstract