To identify in the international scientific literature the obstacles and potential promoters for the advancement of women academics and researchers in biomedical sciences during their professional careers. PubMed, Scopus, CinahlPlus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycInfo and Sociological Abstracts were systematically searched for articles published in English and Spanish between January 2006 and December 2016 on the phenomenon of the glass ceiling in women academics and researchers in biomedical sciences. The screening was carried out by independent reviewers. A total of 2254 studies were found, of which 23 were included in the review. The obstacles identified for the promotion of women academics and/or researchers in biomedical sciences are: gender bias in the evaluation of research results, individualism and lack of collaboration, women's lack of influence, the existence of gender inequalities in access to employment. The perception of sexism and discrimination in the work environment, and the difficulties in reconciling work and family life. The promoting elements are: examples of women in leadership positions, mentoring, facilitating conciliation, transparency in recruitment, participation in decision-making, gender assessment of research, awareness of gender inequalities in institutions, promoting collaboration, and pay equity. By enhancing the elements favouring the promotion of academic women in biomedical sciences would help to reduce the glass ceiling in the career paths of women academics and health science researchers by increasing their participation, leadership and representation. A change of organizational and institutional values is required to achieve this.

Objective To determine the effectiveness of workplace exercise interventions in the treatment of musculoskeletal disorders. Design Systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Data sources The bibliographical databases PubMed, CINAHL Plus, Cochrane, Scopus, ISI WoS and PeDRO were searched, with studies from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2020 eligible for inclusion. Eligibility criteria We included RCTs, reported in English or Spanish, with at least an intervention group performing workplace exercises among office workers with musculoskeletal disorders. Data extraction and synthesis Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. A narrative synthesis was carried out with a tabular method specifying the study characteristics following the SWiM (Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis) guideline for synthesis without meta-analysis. The revised Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB-2) tool was used to analyse the risk of bias of the included studies. Results Seven studies with a total of 967 participants met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. Due to heterogeneity in different workplace exercise interventions, outcome measures and statistical analyses, it was not possible to conduct a meta-analysis and a narrative synthesis was performed. The interventions were classified into three categories: multiple body regions, neck and shoulder, and lower back. The seven studies concluded that workplace exercise interventions were effective in reducing musculoskeletal disorders and pain compared with other types of interventions or with control groups with no interventions. The RoB-2 tool found a high risk of bias in six of the seven studies. Conclusions The findings of the RCTs on workplace exercise interventions suggest that interventions were effective in treating musculoskeletal disorders among office workers. However, due to the high risk of bias of the included studies, no firm conclusions could be drawn and more high-quality studies are needed. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020177462.

To define the role and scope of nursing practice within the global context of the euthanasia process by reviewing international legislation and scientific literature. Euthanasia is a controversial ethical topic that has been widely discussed. The provision of euthanasia involves a multidisciplinary health care team, in which nurses often have secondary roles. However, nurses play key roles in all major healthcare processes. As increasing numbers of countries are currently regulating or considering the inclusion of euthanasia as a healthcare service, there is an urgent need to define nurses' roles and participation in this process. A scoping review of research published in English, Spanish, French, Dutch, or Portuguese between 1992 and April 2021 was undertaken. Medline (PubMed), CinahlPlus, EMBASE, WoS, PsycInfo, and Scopus were searched for eligible articles. Data were analysed using an adapted version of Arksey and O'Malley's framework methodology. A total of 31 scientific papers, and 11 legislation documents were included. Analyses of current laws showed that few territories have legislation with well-defined nurses' roles. Based on the scientific research, we identified 15 roles and 80 tasks nurses assume during the euthanasia process. We divided our results into five categories: initial care and accompaniment, evaluation of patient's condition, euthanasia procedure, debriefing and notification, and overall role. Nurses perform tasks throughout the euthanasia process. The review of the current legislation and the existing body of scientific literature showed a lack of legislation of the roles nurses assume, thus leading them to participate in practices outside of the legal framework. Policymakers should take into consideration the wide range of roles and tasks nurses assume in the provision of euthanasia to meet their educational and support needs and ensure they are effectively included in this complex process.

Background: Digital health technologies (dHTs) offer a unique opportunity to address some of the major challenges facing health care systems worldwide. However, the implementation of dHTs raises some concerns, such as the limited understanding of their real impact on health systems and people’s well-being or the potential risks derived from their use. In this context, health technology assessment (HTA) is 1 of the main tools that health systems can use to appraise evidence and determine the value of a given dHT. Nevertheless, due to the nature of dHTs, experts highlight the need to reconsider the frameworks used in traditional HTA. Objective: This scoping review (ScR) aimed to identify the methodological frameworks used worldwide for digital health technology assessment (dHTA); determine what domains are being considered; and generate, through a thematic analysis, a proposal for a methodological framework based on the most frequently described domains in the literature. Methods: The ScR was performed in accordance with the guidelines established in the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. We searched 7 databases for peer reviews and gray literature published between January 2011 and December 2021. The retrieved studies were screened using Rayyan in a single-blind manner by 2 independent authors, and data were extracted using ATLAS.ti software. The same software was used for thematic analysis. Results: The systematic search retrieved 3061 studies (n=2238, 73.1%, unique), of which 26 (0.8%) studies were included. From these, we identified 102 methodological frameworks designed for dHTA. These frameworks revealed great heterogeneity between them due to their different structures, approaches, and items to be considered in dHTA. In addition, we identified different wording used to refer to similar concepts. Through thematic analysis, we reduced this heterogeneity. In the first phase of the analysis, 176 provisional codes related to different assessment items emerged. In the second phase, these codes were clustered into 86 descriptive themes, which, in turn, were grouped in the third phase into 61 analytical themes and organized through a vertical hierarchy of 3 levels: level 1 formed by 13 domains, level 2 formed by 38 dimensions, and level 3 formed by 11 subdimensions. From these 61 analytical themes, we developed a proposal for a methodological framework for dHTA. Conclusions: There is a need to adapt the existing frameworks used for dHTA or create new ones to more comprehensively assess different kinds of dHTs. Through this ScR, we identified 26 studies including 102 methodological frameworks and tools for dHTA. The thematic analysis of those 26 studies led to the definition of 12 domains, 38 dimensions, and 11 subdimensions that should be considered in dHTA.