Arwel W Jones

Dr. Arwel W Jones

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

13Years (2014-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 November 2017 in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JEJulian H. Elliott
Julian H. Elliott
ASAnneliese Synnot
Anneliese Synnot
TTTari Turner
Tari Turner
MSMark Simmonds
Mark Simmonds
EAElie Akl
Elie Akl
LPLeslea Pearson
Leslea Pearson

1 November 2017 in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JTJames Thomas
James Thomas
ANAnna Noel-Storr
Anna Noel-Storr
IMIain Marshall
Iain Marshall
BWByron Wallace
Byron Wallace
SMSteven McDonald
Steven McDonald
LPLeslea Pearson
Leslea Pearson
New approaches to evidence synthesis, which use human effort and machine automation in mutually reinforcing ways, can enhance the feasibility and sustainability of living systematic reviews. Human effort is a scarce and valuable resource, required when automation is impossible or undesirable, and includes contributions from online communities ("crowds") as well as more conventional contributions from review authors and information specialists. Automation can assist with some systematic review tasks, including searching, eligibility assessment, identification and retrieval of full-text reports, extraction of data, and risk of bias assessment. Workflows can be developed in which human effort and machine automation can each enable the other to operate in more effective and efficient ways, offering substantial enhancement to the productivity of systematic reviews. This paper describes and discusses the potential-and limitations-of new ways of undertaking specific tasks in living systematic reviews, identifying areas where these human/machine "technologies" are already in use, and where further research and development is needed. While the context is living systematic reviews, many of these enabling technologies apply equally to standard approaches to systematic reviewing.

1 November 2017 in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
EAElie Akl
Elie Akl
JMJoerg J. Meerpohl
Joerg J. Meerpohl
JEJulian Elliott
Julian Elliott
LKLara A. Kahale
Lara A. Kahale
HSHolger J. Schünemann
Holger J. Schünemann
LPLeslea Pearson
Leslea Pearson

1 November 2017 in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MSMark Simmonds
Mark Simmonds
GSGeorgia Salanti
Georgia Salanti
JMJoanne McKenzie
Joanne McKenzie
JEJulian Elliott
Julian Elliott
TAThomas Agoritsas
Thomas Agoritsas
LPLeslea Pearson
Leslea Pearson

4 June 2018 in npj Primary Care Respiratory Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HRHayley Robinson
Hayley Robinson
VWVeronika Williams
Veronika Williams
FCFfion Curtis
Ffion Curtis
CBChristopher Bridle
Christopher Bridle
AJArwel W Jones
Arwel W Jones
Pulmonary rehabilitation has short-term benefits on dyspnea, exercise capacity and quality of life in COPD, but evidence suggests these do not always translate to increased daily physical activity on a patient level. This is attributed to a limited understanding of the determinants of physical activity maintenance following pulmonary rehabilitation. This systematic review of qualitative research was conducted to understand COPD patients’ perceived facilitators and barriers to physical activity following pulmonary rehabilitation. Electronic databases of published data, non-published data, and trial registers were searched to identify qualitative studies (interviews, focus groups) reporting the facilitators and barriers to physical activity following pulmonary rehabilitation for people with COPD. Thematic synthesis of qualitative data was adopted involving line-by-line coding of the findings of the included studies, development of descriptive themes, and generation of analytical themes. Fourteen studies including 167 COPD patients met the inclusion criteria. Seven sub-themes were identified as influential to physical activity following pulmonary rehabilitation. These included: intentions, self-efficacy, feedback of capabilities and improvements, relationship with health care professionals, peer interaction, opportunities following pulmonary rehabilitation and routine. These encapsulated the facilitators and barriers to physical activity following pulmonary rehabilitation and were identified as sub-themes within the three analytical themes, which were beliefs, social support, and the environment. The findings highlight the challenge of promoting physical activity following pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD and provide complementary evidence to aid evaluations of interventions already attempted in this area, but also adds insight into future development of interventions targeting physical activity maintenance in COPD.

28 March 2018 in Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
HYHannah Young
Hannah Young
DMDaniel S March
Daniel S March
MGMatthew P M Graham-Brown
Matthew P M Graham-Brown
AJArwel W Jones
Arwel W Jones
FCFfion Curtis
Ffion Curtis
JBJames O Burton
James O Burton
Intradialytic cycling (IDC), delivered during haemodialysis (HD), has the potential to improve many health issues. This systematic review and meta-analysis examine the evidence on the effects of IDC on exercise capacity, quality of life (QoL), physical function and cardiovascular health. Twenty-four databases were searched alongside Internet and hand searching, and consultation with experts. Eligibility criteria were cluster randomized, randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of IDC versus usual care in prevalent adult HD patients. Primary outcome measures were exercise capacity (VO2 peak and field tests) and QoL. Secondary measures were cardiac and physical function. Thirteen RCTs were eligible. Eight provided data for use in meta-analyses, which indicated no significant change in VO2 peak (mean difference, MD 1.19 mL/kg/min, 95% confidence interval −1.15 to 3.52, P = 0.3), physical (mean change, MC 1.97, −8.27 to 12.22, P = 0.7) or mental component (MC 3.37, −7.94 to 14.68, P = 0.6) summary scores of the Medical Outcomes Short Form 36, pulse wave velocity (MD −0.57 m/s, −1.55 to 0.41, P = 0.4), systolic (MD −2.28 mmHg, −14.46 to 9.90, P = 0.7) or diastolic blood pressure (MD 2.25 mmHg, −3.01 to 7.50, P = 0.4) following IDC. IDC, however, leads to an improvement in performance on the 6-min walk test (MD 87.84 m, 39.60–136.09, P = 0.0004). All included studies were considered to have high risk of bias. There is insufficient evidence demonstrating whether cycling exercise during HD improves patient outcomes. High-quality, adequately powered RCTs of IDC are required.