The attached pre-print (accepted manuscript ) paper describes an application of available epidemiological evidence in guiding the adjustment of mental health resources to areas. Described with an illustrative application in Victoria, Australia. We have also provided our research data as a supplementary spreadsheet to showcase our analytic approach (the spreadsheet cam also easily be adapted to calculate mental health resource adjustments in other states and territories, or nationally).

Citation mining, citation searching or snowball searches have been recommended as a supplementary search method in the conduct of systematic searches for evidence retrieval as part of systematic review production. However, manual methods are extremely costly and time-consuming, with limited empirical evidence for their utility, and limited guidance on how best to incorporate the method during systematic review production. Encouragingly, the advent of programmatic access to bibliographic databases has enabled exploration of automated citation mining for a potentially scalable and replicable approach. Thus, the study aims to simulate and evaluate the use of exclusively automated citation searching methods for evidence retrieval compared to reference standard boolean logic-based methods, and to explore the factors that influence performance. Methods: A total of 30 systematic reviews will be retrieved from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Campbell Systematic Reviews and the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence (CEE). Baseline characteristics will be extracted, including the performance of the reference standard boolean search strategy in terms of recall, precision and F(1-3)-score for each sample review. Seed articles from the background and methods section of each sample review and their baseline characteristics will then be extracted, and automated citation searching will be conducted for different seed article and database combinations (Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex). Each seed article candidate will be ranked according to recall, and the top 10 seed articles will be combined in all possible combinations and evaluated. The end performance of automated citation searching will then be compared against the reference standard Boolean strategy for each sample review. The association of factors related to i) automated citation search parameters, ii) characteristics related to review question, and iii) characteristics related to the initial starting set of seed articles will be evaluated. Empirical guidance surrounding the use of automated citation searching will then be generated.

Background: There has been a trend toward birth at earlier gestational age and increased use of both induction of labour (IOL) and caesarean section (CS) for women with term pregnancies in many countries, particularly high-income countries. Unnecessary use of obstetric interventions during pregnancy and birth is associated with an increased risk of adverse health outcomes for women and babies, as well as adding financial costs to the health care systems. Existing evidence regarding the association between IOL at term and CS is mixed and conflicting, and little evidence has been known about the differential effect at each gestation between 37 +0 – 41 +6 weeks, separately among nulliparous and parous women. Objective: The aim of this study was to explore the association between IOL and primary CS for women with singleton term pregnancies, compared with expectant management (EM) of pregnancy. Methods: We performed an analysis of population-based retrospective cohort data on women who gave birth in one Australian state (Queensland), between 01/07/2012 and 30/06/2018. All no-labour births (i.e., prelabour CS), multiple births (e.g., twins or triplets), and women with a prior CS were excluded. Five sub-datasets were created based on the time of birth following IOL (37 +0 - 37 +6; 38 +0 - 38 +6; 39 +0 - 39 +6; 40 +0 - 40 +6; and 41 +0 - 41 +6). Unadjusted relative risk (RR) and adjusted relative risk (aRR) were calculated in each sub-dataset to explore the risk of primary CS following IOL, compared to EM. Analysis was stratified by parity (nulliparas versus paras). Sensitivity analyses were conducted by limiting to women with low-risk pregnancies. Results: The risk of primary CS following IOL was significantly higher for women with singleton pregnancies, compared with EM, before or after adjustment, at 38 +0 - 38 +6 (nulliparas: aRR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.10 - 1.18; paras: aRR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.25 - 1.46), at 39 +0 - 39 +6 (nulliparas: aRR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.14 - 1.22; paras: aRR = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.24 - 1.49), at 40 +0 - 40 +6 (nulliparas: aRR = 1.25, 95% CI: 1.21 - 1.29; paras: aRR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.26 - 1.56) and at 41 +0 - 41 +6 (nulliparas: aRR=1.42, 95% CI: 1.36 - 1.48; paras: aRR=1.61, 95% CI: 1.40 - 1.84). After adjusting for potential confounders, there was no significant difference in the risk of primary CS at 37 +0 - 37 +6 for nulliparas who had IOL and EM (aRR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.95 - 1.12). Results remain stable in the sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Our results demonstrated that the risk of primary CS following IOL was higher at each weeks’ gestation between 38 +0 - 38 +6 – 41 +0 - 41 +6 for both nulliparas and paras with singleton pregnancies, compared with EM, and the risk increased with gestational age. This has important implications to support shared decision making between women and health professionals regarding best clinical management and optimal timing of birth.