Meningioma systematic reviews and meta-analyses: an assessment of reporting and methodological quality

The Role of Parent-Child Attachment, Hostile Attribution Bias in Aggression: A Meta-Analytic Review

Parent-Child Attachment (PCA) and Hostile Attribution Bias (HAB) are closely related to aggression, but findings regarding their relationships are inconsistent. There is a lack of understanding of the underlying mechanism between PCA and aggression. This review employed meta-analysis approaches to investigate the associations between PCA and aggression, as well as between HAB and aggression, and the mechanism for the PCA-aggression association. An article search was conducted in CNKI, PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, ProQuest, and Google Scholar. Totally, 118 studies involving general populations and those at high risk for aggression were included. Results revealed negative associations between Parent-Child Attachment Security (PCAS) and aggression (ρ = -.267, p < .001) and positive associations between Parent-Child Attachment Insecurity (PCAI) and aggression (ρ = .240, p < .05). HAB and aggression were found to be positively associated (ρ = .303, p < .001). As for the PCAS-aggression association, a larger effect size was found in females than in males. The HAB-reactive aggression association was stronger than the HAB-proactive aggression association. In Eastern culture, the association between HAB and aggression was stronger than in Western culture. HAB mediated the association between PCAS and aggression. Our findings contribute to the understanding of the occurrence and development of aggression by establishing an association between attachment theory and the social information processing model. The practical implications include interventions targeting cultivating PCAS and alleviating HAB, which might serve as effective ways to reduce aggression, yet aggression type, gender, and cultural background should be taken into consideration.

Work pressure, coping styles and occupational burnout among Chinese police officers: a meta-analytic review

The present study conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis to systematically review the relationship between occupational burnout and work pressure among Chinese police officers. Additionally, the study explored the mediating role of coping styles using a meta-analytic structural equation model. The investigation involved a thorough search of CNKI, PubMed, PsychInfo, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases, resulting in the identification of a total of 39 studies with 124 effect sizes and 14,089 police officers. The findings revealed a positive correlation between work pressure and occupational burnout among Chinese police officers (r = 0.410, 95% CI = [0.347, 0.469]). Furthermore, negative coping styles mediate the relationship between work pressure and occupational burnout. Importantly, these conclusions held true across various work regions for police officers. These results provide insights into the relationship magnitude between work pressure and occupational burnout in Chinese police work and shed light on the underlying mechanisms. Based on these findings, it is recommended that interventions focusing on reducing work pressure and fostering positive coping styles be implemented to mitigate occupational burnout among police officers.

Author instructions in biomedical journals infrequently address systematic review reporting and methodology: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to analyze how instructions for authors in journals indexed in MEDLINE address systematic review (SR) reporting and methodology.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We analyzed instructions for authors in 20% of MEDLINE-indexed journals listed in the online catalog of the National Library of Medicine on July 27, 2021. We extracted data only from the instructions published in English. We extracted data on the existence of instructions for reporting and methodology of SRs.

RESULTS

Instructions from 1,237 journals mentioned SRs in 45% (n = 560) of the cases. Systematic review (SR) registration was mentioned in 104/1,237 (8%) of instructions. Guidelines for reporting SR protocols were found in 155/1,237 (13%) of instructions. Guidelines for reporting SRs were explicitly mentioned in 461/1,237 (37%), whereas the EQUATOR (Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research) network was referred to in 474/1,237 (38%) of instructions. Less than 2% (n = 20) of instructions mentioned risk of bias and meta-analyses; less than 1% mentioned certainty of evidence assessment, methodological expectations, updating of SRs, overviews of SRs, or scoping reviews.

CONCLUSION

Journals indexed in MEDLINE rarely provide instructions for authors regarding SR reporting and methodology. Such instructions could potentially raise authors' awareness and improve how SRs are prepared and reported.