General Practice and Primary Care - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15
-
ItemAn online healthy relationship tool and safety decision aid for women experiencing intimate partner violence (I-DECIDE): a randomised controlled trial(ELSEVIER SCI LTD, 2019-06)BACKGROUND: Evidence for online interventions to help women experiencing intimate partner violence is scarce. We assessed whether an online interactive healthy relationship tool and safety decision aid (I-DECIDE) would increase women's self-efficacy and improve depressive symptoms compared with an intimate partner violence information website. METHODS: In this two-group pragmatic randomised controlled trial, we enrolled women who had screened positive for any form of intimate partner violence or fear of a partner in the 6 months before recruitment. Women aged 16-50 years currently residing in Australia, who had safe access to a computer and an internet connection, and who answered positively to one of the screening questions in English were eligible for inclusion. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by computer to receive either the intervention or control website. The intervention website consisted of modules on healthy relationships, abuse and safety, and relationship priority setting, and a tailored action plan. The control website was a static intimate partner violence information website. As the initial portion of the website containing the baseline questions was identical for both groups, there was no way for women to tell which group they had been allocated to, and the research team were also masked to participant allocation until after analysis of the 12-month data. Data were collected at baseline, immediately after completion of the website, at 6 months, and 12 months. Primary outcomes were mean general self-efficacy score (immediately after website completion, and at 6 months and 12 months) and mean depression score (at 6 months and 12 months). Data analyses were done according to intention-to-treat principles, accounting for missing data, and adjusted for outcome baseline scores. This trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN 12614001306606. FINDINGS: Between Jan 16, and Aug 28, 2015, 584 patients registered for the study and were assessed for eligibility. 422 eligible participants were randomly allocated to the intervention group (227 patients) or control group (195 patients). 179 (79%) participants in the intervention group and 156 (80%) participants in the control group completed 12-month follow-up. Mean self-efficacy at 6 months and 12 months was lower for participants in the intervention group than for participants in the control group, although this did not meet the prespecified mean difference (6 months: 27·5 [SD 5·1] vs 28·1 [4·4], imputed mean difference 1·3 [95% CI 0·3 to 2·3]; 12 months: 27·8 [SD 5·4] vs 29·0 [5·0], imputed mean difference 1·6 [95% CI 0·5 to 2·7]). We found no difference between groups in depressive symptoms at 6 months or 12 months (6 months: 22·5 [SD 17·1] vs 24·2 [17·2], imputed mean difference -0·3 [95% CI -3·5 to 3·0]; 12 months: 21·9 [SD 19·3] vs 21·5 [19·3], imputed mean difference -1·9 [95% CI -5·6 to 1·7]). Qualitative findings indicated that participants found the intervention supportive and a motivation for action. INTERPRETATION: Our findings highlight the need for further research, development, and refinement of online interventions for women experiencing intimate partner violence, particularly into the duration needed for interventions. Although we detected no meaningful differences between groups, our qualitative results indicated that some women find an online tool a helpful source of motivation and support. FUNDING: Australian Research Council.
-
ItemHARMONY: a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial of a culturally competent systems intervention to prevent and reduce domestic violence among migrant and refugee families in general practice: study protocol(BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2021)INTRODUCTION: Domestic violence and abuse (DVA) is prevalent, harmful and more dangerous among diaspora communities because of the difficulty accessing DVA services, language and migration issues. Consequently, migrant/refugee women are common among primary care populations, but evidence for culturally competent DVA primary care practice is negligible. This pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial aims to increase DVA identification and referral (primary outcomes) threefold and safety planning (secondary outcome) among diverse women attending intervention vs comparison primary care clinics. Additionally, the study plans to improve recording of DVA, ethnicity, and conduct process and economic evaluations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Recruitment of ≤28 primary care clinics in Melbourne, Australia with high migrant/refugee communities. Eligible clinics need ≥1 South Asian general practitioner (GP) and one of two common software programmes to enable aggregated routine data extraction by GrHanite. Intervention staff undertake three DVA training sessions from a GP educator and bilingual DVA advocate/educator. Following training, clinic staff and DVA affected women 18+ will be supported for 12 months by the advocate/educator. Comparison clinics are trained in ethnicity and DVA data entry and offer routine DVA care. Data extraction of DV identification, safety planning and referral from routine GP data in both arms. Adjusted regression analysis by intention-to-treat by staff blinded to arm. Economic evaluation will estimate cost-effectiveness and cost-utility. Process evaluation interviews and analysis with primary care staff and women will be framed by Normalisation Process Theory to maximise understanding of sustainability. Harmony will be the first primary care trial to test a culturally competent model for the care of diverse women experiencing DVA. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval from La Trobe University Human Ethics Committee (HEC18413) and dissemination by policy briefs, journal articles and conference and community presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ANZCTR- ACTRN12618001845224; Pre-results.
-
ItemTwo-year follow up of a cluster randomised controlled trial for women experiencing intimate partner violence: effect of screening and family doctor-delivered counselling on quality of life, mental and physical health and abuse exposure(BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2020)OBJECTIVES: This was a 2-year follow-up study of a primary care-based counselling intervention (weave) for women experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV). We aimed to assess whether differences in depression found at 12 months (lower depression for intervention than control participants) would be sustained at 24 months and differences in quality in life, general mental and physical health and IPV would emerge. DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial. Researchers blinded to allocation. Unit of randomisation: family doctors. SETTING: Fifty-two primary care clinics, Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Baseline: 272 English-speaking, female patients (intervention n=137, doctors=35; control n=135, doctors=37), who screened positive for fear of partner in past 12 months. Twenty-four-month response rates: intervention 59% (81/137), control 63% (85/135). INTERVENTIONS: Intervention doctors received training to deliver brief, woman-centred counselling. Intervention patients were invited to receive this counselling (uptake rate: 49%). Control doctors received standard IPV information; delivered usual care. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Twenty-four months primary outcomes: WHO Quality of Life-Bref dimensions, Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) mental health. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: SF-12 physical health and caseness for depression and anxiety (Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale), post-traumatic stress disorder (Check List-Civilian), IPV (Composite Abuse Scale), physical symptoms (≥6 in last month). Data collected through postal survey. Mixed-effects regressions adjusted for location (rural/urban) and clustering. RESULTS: No differences detected between groups on quality of life (physical: 1.5, 95% CI -2.9 to 5.9; psychological: -0.2, 95% CI -4.8 to 4.4,; social: -1.4, 95% CI -8.2 to 5.4; environmental: -0.8, 95% CI -4.0 to 2.5), mental health status (-1.6, 95% CI -5.3 to 2.1) or secondary outcomes. Both groups improved on primary outcomes, IPV, anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Intervention was no more effective than usual care in improving 2-year quality of life, mental and physical health and IPV, despite differences in depression at 12 months. Future refinement and testing of type, duration and intensity of primary care IPV interventions is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12608000032358.
-
ItemEnhanced maternal and child health nurse care for women experiencing intimate partner/family violence: protocol for MOVE, a cluster randomised trial of screening and referral in primary health care(BMC, 2012-09-20)BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) can result in significant harm to women and families and is especially prevalent when women are pregnant or recent mothers. Maternal and child health nurses (MCHN) in Victoria, Australia are community-based nurse/midwives who see over 95% of all mothers with newborns. MCHN are in an ideal position to identify and support women experiencing IPV, or refer them to specialist family violence services. Evidence for IPV screening in primary health care is inconclusive to date. The Victorian government recently required nurses to screen all mothers when babies are four weeks old, offering an opportunity to examine the effectiveness of MCHN IPV screening practices. This protocol describes the development and design of MOVE, a study to examine IPV screening effectiveness and the sustainability of screening practice. METHODS/DESIGN: MOVE is a cluster randomised trial of a good practice model of MCHN IPV screening involving eight maternal and child health nurse teams in Melbourne, Victoria. Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) was incorporated into the design, implementation and evaluation of the MOVE trial to enhance and evaluate sustainability. Using NPT, the development stage combined participatory action research with intervention nurse teams and a systematic review of nurse IPV studies to develop an intervention model incorporating consensus guidelines, clinical pathway and strategies for individual nurses, their teams and family violence services. Following twelve months' implementation, primary outcomes assessed include IPV inquiry, IPV disclosure by women and referral using data from MCHN routine data collection and a survey to all women giving birth in the previous eight months. IPV will be measured using the Composite Abuse Scale. Process and impact evaluation data (online surveys and key stakeholders interviews) will highlight NPT concepts to enhance sustainability of IPV identification and referral. Data will be collected again in two years. DISCUSSION: MOVE will be the first randomised trial to determine IPV screening effectiveness in a community based nurse setting and the first to examine sustainability of an IPV screening intervention. It will further inform the debate about the effectiveness of IPV screening and describe IPV prevalence in a community based post-partum and early infant population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12609000424202.
-
ItemMothers' AdvocateS In the Community (MOSAIC)-non-professional mentor support to reduce intimate partner violence and depression in mothers: a cluster randomised trial in primary care(BMC, 2011-03-23)BACKGROUND: Effective interventions to increase safety and wellbeing of mothers experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV) are scarce. As much attention is focussed on professional intervention, this study aimed to determine the effectiveness of non-professional mentor support in reducing IPV and depression among pregnant and recent mothers experiencing, or at risk of IPV. METHODS: MOSAIC was a cluster randomised trial in 106 primary care (maternal and child health nurse and general practitioner) clinics in Melbourne, Australia. 63/106 clinics referred 215 eligible culturally and linguistically diverse women between January 2006 and December 2007. 167 in the intervention (I) arm, and 91 in the comparison (C) arm. 174 (80.9%) were recruited. 133 (76.4%) women (90 I and 43 C) completed follow-up at 12 months. INTERVENTION: 12 months of weekly home visiting from trained and supervised local mothers, (English & Vietnamese speaking) offering non-professional befriending, advocacy, parenting support and referrals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes; IPV (Composite Abuse Scale CAS) and depression (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale EPDS); secondary measures included wellbeing (SF-36), parenting stress (PSI-SF) and social support (MOS-SF) at baseline and follow-up. ANALYSIS: Intention-to-treat using multivariable logistic regression and propensity scoring. RESULTS: There was evidence of a true difference in mean abuse scores at follow-up in the intervention compared with the comparison arm (15.9 vs 21.8, AdjDiff -8.67, CI -16.2 to -1.15). There was weak evidence for other outcomes, but a trend was evident favouring the intervention: proportions of women with CAS scores ≥ 7, 51/88 (58.4%) vs 27/42 (64.3%) AdjOR 0.47, CI 0.21 to 1.05); depression (EPDS score ≥ 13) (19/85, 22% (I) vs 14/43, 33% (C); AdjOR 0.42, CI 0.17 to 1.06); physical wellbeing mean scores (PCS-SF36: AdjDiff 2.79; CI -0.40 to 5.99); mental wellbeing mean scores (MCS-SF36: AdjDiff 2.26; CI -1.48 to 6.00). There was no observed effect on parenting stress. 82% of women mentored would recommend mentors to friends in similar situations. CONCLUSION: Non-professional mentor mother support appears promising for improving safety and enhancing physical and mental wellbeing among mothers experiencing intimate partner violence referred from primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12607000010493http://www.anzctr.org.au.
-
ItemWomen's evaluation of abuse and violence care in general practice: a cluster randomised controlled trial (weave)(BMC, 2010-01-02)BACKGROUND: Intimate partner abuse (IPA) is a major public health problem with serious implications for the physical and psychosocial wellbeing of women, particularly women of child-bearing age. It is a common, hidden problem in general practice and has been under-researched in this setting. Opportunities for early intervention and support in primary care need to be investigated given the frequency of contact women have with general practice. Despite the high prevalence and health consequences of abuse, there is insufficient evidence for screening in primary care settings. Furthermore, there is little rigorous evidence to guide general practitioners (GPs) in responding to women identified as experiencing partner abuse. This paper describes the design of a trial of a general practice-based intervention consisting of screening for fear of partner with feedback to GPs, training for GPs, brief counselling for women and minimal practice organisational change. It examines the effect on women's quality of life, mental health and safety behaviours. METHODS/DESIGN: weave is a cluster randomised controlled trial involving 40 general practices in Victoria, Australia. Approximately 500 women (16-50 years) seen by the GP in the previous year are mailed a short lifestyle survey containing an item to screen for IPA. Women who indicate that they were afraid of a partner/ex-partner in the last year and provide contact details are invited to participate. Once baseline data are collected, GPs are randomly assigned to either a group involving healthy relationship and responding to IPA training plus inviting women for up to 6 sessions of counselling or to a group involving basic education and usual care for women. Outcomes will be evaluated by postal survey at 6 and 12 months following delivery of the intervention. There will be an economic evaluation, and process evaluation involving interviews with women and GPs, to inform understanding about implementation and outcomes. DISCUSSION: The weave trial responds to an urgent need for more evidence on what can be achieved in primary care with regard to responding to women who experience IPA. It will provide important knowledge about the effectiveness of a brief method of screening, professional IPA training program and brief counselling for women. TRIAL REGISTRATION: [ACTRN12608000032358].
-
ItemMOSAIC (MOthers' Advocates In the Community): protocol and sample description of a cluster randomised trial of mentor mother support to reduce intimate partner violence among pregnant or recent mothers(BMC, 2009-05-27)BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is prevalent globally, experienced by a significant minority of women in the early childbearing years and is harmful to the mental and physical health of women and children. There are very few studies with rigorous designs which have tested the effectiveness of IPV interventions to improve the health and wellbeing of abused women. Evidence for the separate benefit to victims of social support, advocacy and non-professional mentoring suggested that a combined model may reduce the levels of violence, the associated mental health damage and may increase a woman's health, safety and connection with her children. This paper describes the development, design and implementation of a trial of mentor mother support set in primary care, including baseline characteristics of participating women. METHODS/DESIGN: MOSAIC (MOtherS' Advocates In the Community) was a cluster randomised trial embedded in general practice and maternal and child health (MCH) nursing services in disadvantaged suburbs of Melbourne, Australia. Women who were pregnant or with infants, identified as abused or symptomatic of abuse, were referred by IPV-trained GPs and MCH nurses from 24 general practices and eight nurse teams from January 2006 to December 2007. Women in the intervention arm received up to 12 months support from trained and supported non-professional mentor mothers. Vietnamese health professionals also referred Vietnamese women to bilingual mentors in a sub-study. Baseline and follow-up surveys at 12 months measured IPV (CAS), depression (EPDS), general health (SF-36), social support (MOS-SF) and attachment to children (PSI-SF). Significant development and piloting occurred prior to trial commencement. Implementation interviews with MCH nurses, GPs and mentors assisted further refinement of the intervention. In-depth interviews with participants and mentors, and follow-up surveys of MCH nurses and GPs at trial conclusion will shed further light on MOSAIC's impact. DISCUSSION: Despite significant challenges, MOSAIC will make an important contribution to the need for evidence of effective partner violence interventions, the role of non-professional mentors in partner violence support services and the need for more evaluation of effective health professional training and support in caring for abused women and children among their populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12607000010493.
-
ItemUsing reflexivity to enhance in-depth interviewing skills for the clinician researcher(BIOMED CENTRAL LTD, 2008-11-09)BACKGROUND: Primary health care clinicians are being encouraged to undertake qualitative research, however the in-depth interviewing skills required are not as straightforward as might be first supposed. While there are benefits and certain skills that clinicians can bring to interview-based research, there are important new skills to develop. To date there has been neither discussion about these new skills, nor any preparatory guidelines for clinicians entering into interview-based research in the qualitative research literature. In the absence of formal guidelines, we suggest the use of reflexivity throughout the interview process as a means to become more accomplished in this area. We present our own experiences as a novice general practitioner (GP) researcher undertaking a PhD study and her experienced supervisors. The PhD study used critical phenomenology through in-depth interviews to understand the experience of the patient-doctor relationship between same-sex attracted women and their usual GP in Australia. RESULTS: We used reflexivity to improve the rigour of the data collection. This enabled improved probing, fewer assumptions, avoidance of premature interpretation, and an accentuated sense of curiosity during interviews. We also enlisted reciprocity between interviewer and interviewee as a tool to improve engagement and trust, share interview control, and ultimately improve the depth of the interview content. CONCLUSION: Preparatory recommendations for novice clinician research interviewers include the importance of recognising the multiple identities that they bring to the interview. In this setting in particular this involves acknowledging the clinician interviewer as a potential insider in relation to interviewees and negotiating shared understanding to avoid insider assumptions. Other essential requirements are having an experienced research supervisor, arranging pilot interviews that include active feedback on interviewing style from interviewees, and being reflexive during interviews. More formal guidelines for in-depth interviewing skills development are needed.
-
ItemPsychological therapies for women who experience intimate partner violence.(Wiley, 2020-07-01)BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) against women is prevalent and strongly associated with mental health problems. Women experiencing IPV attend health services frequently for mental health problems. The World Health Organization recommends that women who have experienced IPV and have a mental health diagnosis should receive evidence-based mental health treatments. However, it is not known if psychological therapies work for women in the context of IPV and whether they cause harm. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of psychological therapies for women who experience IPV on the primary outcomes of depression, self-efficacy and an indicator of harm (dropouts) at six- to 12-months' follow-up, and on secondary outcomes of other mental health symptoms, anxiety, quality of life, re-exposure to IPV, safety planning and behaviours, use of healthcare and IPV services, and social support. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register (CCMDCTR), CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and three other databases, to the end of October 2019. We also searched international trials registries to identify unpublished or ongoing trials and handsearched selected journals, reference lists of included trials and grey literature. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, cluster-RCTs and cross-over trials of psychological therapies with women aged 16 years and older who self-reported recent or lifetime experience of IPV. We included trials if women also experienced co-existing mental health diagnoses or substance abuse issues, or both. Psychological therapies included a wide range of interventions that targeted cognition, motivation and behaviour compared with usual care, no treatment, delayed or minimal interventions. We classified psychological therapies according to Cochrane Common Mental Disorders's psychological therapies list. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors extracted data and undertook 'Risk of Bias' assessment. Treatment effects were compared between experimental and comparator interventions at short-term (up to six months post-baseline), medium-term (six to under 12 months, primary outcome time point), and long-term follow-up (12 months and above). We used standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous and odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous outcomes, and used random-effects meta-analysis, due to high heterogeneity across trials. MAIN RESULTS: We included 33 psychological trials involving 5517 women randomly assigned to experimental (2798 women, 51%) and comparator interventions (2719 women, 49%). Psychological therapies included 11 integrative therapies, nine humanistic therapies, six cognitive behavioural therapy, four third-wave cognitive behavioural therapies and three other psychologically-orientated interventions. There were no trials classified as psychodynamic therapies. Most trials were from high-income countries (19 in USA, three in Iran, two each in Australia and Greece, and one trial each in China, India, Kenya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Spain and UK), among women recruited from healthcare, community, shelter or refuge settings, or a combination of any or all of these. Psychological therapies were mostly delivered face-to-face (28 trials), but varied by length of treatment (two to 50 sessions) and staff delivering therapies (social workers, nurses, psychologists, community health workers, family doctors, researchers). The average sample size was 82 women (14 to 479), aged 37 years on average, and 66% were unemployed. Half of the women were married or living with a partner and just over half of the participants had experienced IPV in the last 12 months (17 trials), 6% in the past two years (two trials) and 42% during their lifetime (14 trials). Whilst 20 trials (61%) described reliable low-risk random-sampling strategies, only 12 trials (36%) described reliable procedures to conceal the allocation of participant status. While 19 trials measured women's depression, only four trials measured depression as a continuous outcome at medium-term follow-up. These showed a probable beneficial effect of psychological therapies in reducing depression (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.01; four trials, 600 women; moderate-certainty evidence). However, for self-efficacy, there may be no evidence of a difference between groups (SMD -0.12, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.09; one trial with medium-term follow-up data, 346 women; low-certainty evidence). Further, there may be no difference between the number of women who dropped out from the experimental or comparator intervention groups, an indicator of no harm (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.44; five trials with medium-term follow-up data, 840 women; low-certainty evidence). Although no trials reported adverse events from psychological therapies or participation in the trial, only one trial measured harm outcomes using a validated scale. For secondary outcomes, trials measured anxiety only at short-term follow-up, showing that psychological therapies may reduce anxiety symptoms (SMD -0.96, 95% CI -1.29 to -0.63; four trials, 158 women; low-certainty evidence). However, within medium-term follow-up, low-certainty evidence revealed that there may be no evidence between groups for the outcomes safety planning (SMD 0.04, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.25; one trial, 337 women), post-traumatic stress disorder (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.54 to 0.06; four trials, 484 women) or re-exposure to any form of IPV (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.2; two trials, 547 women). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence that for women who experience IPV, psychological therapies probably reduce depression and may reduce anxiety. However, we are uncertain whether psychological therapies improve other outcomes (self-efficacy, post-traumatic stress disorder, re-exposure to IPV, safety planning) and there are limited data on harm. Thus, while psychological therapies probably improve emotional health, it is unclear if women's ongoing needs for safety, support and holistic healing from complex trauma are addressed by this approach. There is a need for more interventions focused on trauma approaches and more rigorous trials (with consistent outcomes at similar follow-up time points), as we were unable to synthesise much of the research.
-
ItemVoices from low-income and middle income countries: a systematic review protocol of primary healthcare interventions within public health systems addressing intimate partner violence against women(BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2018-03)INTRODUCTION: Intimate partner violence (IPV) considerably harms the health, safety and well-being of women. In response, public health systems around the globe have been gradually implementing strategies. In particular, low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC) have been developing innovative interventions in primary healthcare (PHC) addressing the problem. This paper describes a protocol for a systematic review of studies addressing the impacts and outcomes of PHC centre interventions addressing IPV against women from LMIC. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic search for studies will be conducted in African Index Medicus, Africa Portal Digital Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Embase, Index Medicus for the Southeast Asia Region, IndMed, Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Literature Database (LILACS), Medecins Sans Frontieres, MEDLINE, Minority Health and Health Equity Archive, ProQuest, PsycINFO, Scientific Electronic Library Online, (SciELO) and Social Policy and Practice. Studies will be in English, Spanish and Portuguese, published between 2007 and 2017, addressing IPV against women from LMIC, whose data quantitatively report on the impacts and outcomes for survivors and/or workers and/or public health systems preintervention and postintervention. Two trilingual reviewers will independently screen for study eligibility and data extraction, and a librarian will cross-check for compliance. Risk of bias and quality assessment of studies will be measured according to: (1) the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias for randomised controlled trials and (2) the Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies (MINORS). Data will be analysed and summarised using meta-analysis and narrative description of the evidence across studies. This systematic review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols(PRISMA P) guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This systematic review will be based on published studies, thus not requiring ethical approval. Findings will be presented in conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017069261.