BAB 3

METODE PENELITIAN

3.1 Strategi Pencarian Literatur

3.1.1 Database Pencarian

Pencarian literature dikerjakan pada bulan September 2020 dengan

menggunakan database Google Scholar. Dan menggunakan builder And dan
OR.

3.1.2 Kata Kunci

Senam Otak Status Kognitif Demensia

OR OR OR
Brain Gym Cognitive Status Dementia
OR OR
Intelektual
OR
Intellectual
Keyword dalam penelitian ini adalah : ((Brain Gym AND Cognitive
StatusOR Intellectual AND Dementia))

3.1.3 Kriteria Inklusi dan Eksklusi

Strategi yang digunakan untuk mencari artikel menggunakan PICO ,

yang terdiri dari:

1. Patient/Population/Problem yaitu populasi atau masalah yang akan

dianalisis sesuai dengan tema yang sudah ditentukan dalam

literature review.
 2. Intervention yaitu suatu tindakan penatalaksanan terhadap kasus

perorangan atau masyarakat atau paparan tentang penatalaksanaan

studi sesuai dengan tema yang sudah ditentukan dalam literature

review.

3. Comparison yaitu perbandingan atau intervensi yang ingin

dibandingkan dengan intervensi atau paparan pada karya ilmiah

yang akan ditulis (jika ada atau dibutuhkan).

4. Outcome yaitu luaran atau hasil yang ingin diperolah pada studi

terdahulu sesuai dengan tema yang sudah ditentukan dalam

literature review.

P (Population) Lansia

I (Intervention) Terapi Senam Otak

C (Comparison) Tidak ada pembanding atau intervensi lainnya

O (Outcome) Status Kognitif Meningkat

Tabel 3.1.3 Kriteria Inklusi dan Eksklusi

Kriteria Inklusi Ekslusi

Population Lansia yang mengalami Lansia yang tidak
demensia mengalami demensia
Intervention Diberikan terapi senam otak Tidak diberikan terapi
senam otak
 Comparison Tidak ada pembanding
Outcome Keberhasilan terapi senam
otak terhadap peningkatan
status kognitif pada lansia
dengan demensia
Tidak dijelaskannya
keberhasilan terapi senam
otak terhadap peningkatan
status kognitif pada lansia
dengan demensia

3.2 Seleksi Studi dan Penilaian Kualitas

3.2.1 Seleksi Studi

Berdasarkan hasil pencarian literatur di satu database dan

menggunakan kata kunci yang disesuaikan dengan MeSH, peneliti
mendapatkan 78 artikel yang sesuai dengan kata kunci. Hasil pencarian
yang sudah didapatkan kemudian diperiksa duplikasi, tidak ditemukan
artikel yang sama. Peneliti kemudian melakukan skrining terhadap artikel
yang hanya memuat judul dan abstrak saja, ditemukan 11 artikel dan tersisa
67 artikel fulltext. Dari 67 artikel fulltext kemudian peneliti juga memeriksa
fulltext yang tidak lengkap dan tidak sesuai dengan PICO serta tidak sesuai
kriteria inklusi, ditemukan 47 yang kemudian dikeluarkan. Tersisa 20 artikel
(n=20) included study dan 5 artikel yang akan dilakukan analisis. Hasil
seleksi studi dapat digambarkan pada PRISMA flowchart berikut ini

PRISMA 2009 Flow Diagram

Records identified through

database (n=78)
Identification
Google Scholar (n = 78 )
 Records after duplicates removed Duplicates exclude
(n =0 ) (n = 0)

Screening

Records screened by tittle

Records excluded by tittle
and abstract and abstract
(n = 67 ) (n = 11 )

Full-text articles assessed Full-text articles excluded,

for eligibility with reasons
Eligibility
(n = 20) (n = 47)

Studies included in
qualitative synthesis (SR)
Included (n = 5)

Gambar 3.2 Diagram Flow Literature Review Berdasarkan Prisma 2009

3.2.3 Penilaian Kualitas

Analisis kualitas metodologi dalam setiap studi (n=5) dengan

checklist critical appraisal (terlampir) daftar penilaian dengan beberapa
pertanyaan untuk menilai kualitas dari studi. Penilaian kriteria diberi
checklist “YA” atau “TIDAK” atau “TIDAK JELAS” atau “TIDAK
TERSEDIA”. Hasil skrining akhir didapatkan 5 artikel yang mencapai
 skor 50% yang siap dilakukan analisis data untuk kemudian dilakukan
review.

Lampiran 1 JBI Tools

JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross Sectional Studies

Reviewer : Yusi Afidah Oktavia Date Tueday, 20-09-2020
Author : Dwi Anugrahni Astuti, Theresia Ivana, Theresia Jamini
Year 2018 Record Number 1
Yes No Unclear Not
 applicable
1. Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly  □ □ □
defined?
2. Were the study subjects and the setting described in  □ □ □
detail?
3. Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way?  □ □ □

4. Were objective, standard criteria used for measurement  □ □ □

of the condition?
 □ □ □
5. Were confounding factors identified?
6. Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated?  □ □ □

7. Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable  □ □ □

way?
 □ □ □
8. Was appropriate statistical analysis used?

Overall appraisal: Include  Exclude □ Seek further info □

Comments (Including reason for exclusion)

Lampiran 2 JBI Tools

JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross Sectional Studies
Reviewer : Yusi Afidah Oktavia Date Tueday, 20-09-2020
Author : Zulriski, Faisal Sangadji, Isti Antasari Year 2018 Record
Number 2
Yes No Unclear Not
applicable
1. Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly  □ □ □
 defined?
2. Were the study subjects and the setting described in  □ □ □
detail?
3. Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way?  □ □ □

4. Were objective, standard criteria used for measurement  □ □ □

of the condition?
 □ □ □
5. Were confounding factors identified?
6. Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated?  □ □ □

7. Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable  □ □ □

way?
 □ □ □
8. Was appropriate statistical analysis used?

Overall appraisal: Include  Exclude □ Seek further info □

Comments (Including reason for exclusion)

Lampiran 3 JBI Tools

JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross Sectional Studies
Reviewer : Yusi Afidah Oktavia Date Tueday, 20-09-2020
Author : Raden Surahmat, Novitalia Year 2017 Record
Number 3
Yes No Unclear Not
applicable
1. Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly  □ □ □
defined?
 2. Were the study subjects and the setting described in  □ □ □
detail?
3. Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way?  □ □ □

4. Were objective, standard criteria used for measurement  □ □ □

of the condition?
 □ □ □
5. Were confounding factors identified?
6. Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated?  □ □ □

7. Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable  □ □ □

way?
 □ □ □
8. Was appropriate statistical analysis used?

Overall appraisal: Include  Exclude □ Seek further info □

Comments (Including reason for exclusion)

Lampiran 4 JBI Tools

JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross Sectional Studies
Reviewer : Yusi Afidah Oktavia Date Tueday, 20-09-2020
Author : Ammy Retno Suryatika, Wijarnako Heru Pramono
Year 2019 Record Number 4
Yes No Unclear Not
applicable
1. Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly  □ □ □
defined?
2. Were the study subjects and the setting described in  □ □ □
 detail?
3. Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way?  □ □ □

4. Were objective, standard criteria used for measurement  □ □ □

of the condition?
 □ □ □
5. Were confounding factors identified?
6. Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated?  □ □ □

7. Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable  □ □ □

way?
 □ □ □
8. Was appropriate statistical analysis used?

Overall appraisal: Include  Exclude □ Seek further info □

Comments (Including reason for exclusion)

Lampiran 5 JBI Tools

JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross Sectional Studies
Reviewer : Yusi Afidah Oktavia Date :20-09-2020
Author : Abdul Wakhid, Elis Hartati, Mamat Supriyono
Year 2016 Record Number 5
Yes No Unclear Not
Applicable
1. Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly  □ □ □
defined?
2. Were the study subjects and the setting described in  □ □ □
detail?
 3. Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way?  □ □ □

4. Were objective, standard criteria used for measurement  □ □ □

of the condition?
 □ □ □
5. Were confounding factors identified?
6. Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated?  □ □ □

7. Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable  □ □ □

way?
 □ □ □
8. Was appropriate statistical analysis used?

Overall appraisal: Include  Exclude □ Seek further info □

Comments (Including reason for exclusion)