Side effects of COVID-19 vaccines in paediatric patients: a review systematic and meta-analysis protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The paediatric population represents a quarter of the world's population, and like adult patients, they have also suffered immeasurably from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Immunisation is an effective strategy for reducing the number of COVID-19 cases. With the advancements in vaccination for younger age groups, parents or guardians have raised doubts and questions about adverse effects and the number of doses required. Therefore, systematic reviews focusing on this population are needed to consolidate evidence that can help in decision-making and clinical practice. This protocol aims to assess the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in paediatric patients and evaluate the correlation between the number of vaccine doses and side effects. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search the PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Scopus and Cochrane databases for randomised and quasi-randomised clinical trials that list the adverse effects of the COVID-19 vaccine and assess its correlation with the number of doses, without any language restrictions. Two reviewers will select the studies according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extract data and asses for risk of bias using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The Review Software Manager (RevMan V.5.4.1) will be used to synthesise the data. We will use the Working Group's Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations to grade the strength of the evidence of the results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethical approval is not required as no primary data are collected. This systematic review will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023390077.

Pharmacological treatment for obstructive sleep apnea: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Summarize the evidence on drug therapies for obstructive sleep apnea. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, SciELO, LILACS, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched on February 17th, 2023. A search strategy retrieved randomized clinical trials comparing the Apnea-Hypopnea Index (AHI) in pharmacotherapies. Studies were selected and data was extracted by two authors independently. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. RevMan 5.4. was used for data synthesis. RESULTS: 4930 articles were obtained, 68 met inclusion criteria, and 29 studies (involving 11 drugs) were combined in a meta-analysis. Atomoxetine plus oxybutynin vs placebo in AHI mean difference of -7.71 (-10.59, -4.83) [Fixed, 95 % CI, I2 = 50 %, overall effect: Z = 5.25, p < 0.001]. Donepezil vs placebo in AHI mean difference of -8.56 (-15.78, -1.33) [Fixed, 95 % CI, I2 = 21 %, overall effect: Z = 2.32, p = 0.02]. Sodium oxybate vs placebo in AHI mean difference of -5.50 (-9.28, -1.73) [Fixed, 95 % CI, I2 = 32 %, overall effect: Z = 2.86, p = 0.004]. Trazodone vs placebo in AHI mean difference of -12.75 (-21.30, -4.19) [Fixed, 95 % CI, I2 = 0 %, overall effect: Z = 2.92, p = 0.003]. CONCLUSION: The combination of noradrenergic and antimuscarinic drugs shows promising results. Identifying endotypes may be the key to future drug therapies for obstructive sleep apnea. Moreover, studies with longer follow-up assessing the safety and sustained effects of these treatments are needed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022362639.

Drug therapies for obstructive sleep apnoea: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is a common disorder that can affect the quality of life and increase the risk for psychiatric, neurological and cardiometabolic diseases. Despite the significant burden, it poses on health and well-being, there is a lack of evidence regarding the use of drug therapies in these patients. This work aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatment alternatives for patients with OSA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, SciELO, LILACS, Scopus, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov, will be used for the search. A search strategy was developed to retrieve clinical trials that have evaluated polysomnographic primary outcome (Apnoea-Hypopnoea index) and secondary outcomes (eg, daytime sleepiness, adverse events) of any drug therapy used for OSA. No date or language restrictions will be applied. Two authors will independently select the studies meeting the inclusion criteria by screening the title, abstract and full text. Data will be extracted, and the risk of bias will be evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Review Manager V.5.4.1 will be used for data synthesis. The Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation will be used to assess the strength of the evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As a review of published data, it is not necessary to obtain ethical approval. The findings of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022362639.

Pharmacological treatment for obstructive sleep apnea: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Objective Summarize the evidence on drug therapies for obstructive sleep apnea. Methods The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, SciELO, LILACS, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched on February 17th, 2023. A search strategy retrieved randomized clinical trials comparing the Apnea-Hypopnea Index (AHI) in pharmacotherapies. Studies were selected and data was extracted by two authors independently. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. RevMan 5.4. was used for data synthesis. Results 4930 articles were obtained, 68 met inclusion criteria, and 29 studies (involving 11 drugs) were combined in a meta-analysis. Atomoxetine plus oxybutynin vs placebo in AHI mean difference of -7.71 (-10.59, -4.83) [Fixed, 95 % CI, I2 = 50 %, overall effect: Z = 5.25, p < 0.001]. Donepezil vs placebo in AHI mean difference of -8.56 (-15.78, -1.33) [Fixed, 95 % CI, I2 = 21 %, overall effect: Z = 2.32, p = 0.02]. Sodium oxybate vs placebo in AHI mean difference of -5.50 (-9.28, -1.73) [Fixed, 95 % CI, I2 = 32 %, overall effect: Z = 2.86, p = 0.004]. Trazodone vs placebo in AHI mean difference of -12.75 (-21.30, -4.19) [Fixed, 95 % CI, I2 = 0 %, overall effect: Z = 2.92, p = 0.003]. Conclusion The combination of noradrenergic and antimuscarinic drugs shows promising results. Identifying endotypes may be the key to future drug therapies for obstructive sleep apnea. Moreover, studies with longer follow-up assessing the safety and sustained effects of these treatments are needed. PROSPERO registration number CRD42022362639.

Laser and radiofrequency for treating genitourinary syndrome of menopause in breast cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer survivors (BCSs) experience more severe symptoms of genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) than healthy postmenopausal women. As hormonal therapy with oestrogen should be avoided in BCSs, finding an effective and safe therapy to address vaginal symptoms and sexual dysfunction is urgently needed. Physical methods may be promising alternatives for the specificities of this group of women. This review aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of physical methods (laser and radiofrequency) for treating GSM in BCSs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, SciELO, LILACS, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov databases will be searched. A search strategy was developed to retrieve clinical trials that evaluate the efficacy and safety of any physical method (laser or radiofrequency) used for GSM in BCSs. No date or language restrictions will be imposed. Two authors will independently select studies by title, abstract and full text to meet the inclusion criteria. Data will be extracted, and the risk of bias will be evaluated using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2). Review Manager 5.4.1 will be used for data synthesis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation will be used to assess the strength of the evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study reviews the published data; thus, obtaining ethical approval is unnecessary. The findings of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023387680.

Diretrizes curriculares do curso médico: o "GPS" precisa ser reprogramado? / National curriculum guidelines for the medical course: does the "GPS" need rerouting?

Resumo: Introdução: As Diretrizes Curriculares Nacionais (DCN) constituem as direções para formação do currículo de um curso. As DCN do curso médico atual foram instituídas há quase uma década. Nesse período, o mundo passou por mudanças sem precedentes, e a educação médica não pode ficar para trás. Desenvolvimento: O ensino médico no Brasil teve nos últimos 100 anos três principais modelos de ensino: desde o flexneriano, passando pela Problem-Based Learning (PBL), até o atual ensino baseado em competências. O entendimento de que o aluno é o centro do processo ensino aprendizagem já está enfatizado nas DCN de 2014, mas será que esse conceito está sendo implementado na prática das instituições de ensino superior? Como as DCN podem ajudar a guiar de forma mais clara e efetiva uma formação médica que vá além do conhecimento técnico e lapidar um profissional humanizado, ético e com olhar para o indivíduo e para a comunidade? Será que precisaremos "reprogramar" o Global Positioning System (GPS), a rota, das DCN depois de enfrentarmos tantas mudanças decorrentes da pandemia da Covid-19? Conclusão: Apesar dos desafios, há crescente envolvimento do corpo docente das instituições de ensino superior nas melhorias necessárias para a formação médica atual.

Abstract: Introduction: The National Curriculum Guidelines (NCG) provide the directions which an undergraduate course must follow. The current NCGs for the medical course were established almost a decade ago. In this period, the world has undergone unprecedented changes and medical education cannot be left behind. Development: Medical education in Brazil has been based on three main models in the last one hundred years: the Flexnerian, Problem-Based Learning (PBL), and the current competency-based learning. The concept that the student is the center of the teaching-learning process was already emphasized in the 2014 NCG, but is this actually implemented in practice by the universities? How can the NCG help guide a more clear and effective medical education that goes beyond technical knowledge and shapes a humanized ethical professional who views the needs of both the individual and the community? Is it necessary to reroute the GPS of the NCG after so many changes caused by the Covid-19 pandemic? Conclusion: Despite the challenges faced, university faculties are increasing their involvement in implementing the changes required for today's medical education.

Image guidance for endoscopic sinus surgery in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) is a current procedure for treating patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Image-guided surgery (IGS) for ESS may help reduce complications and improve precision. However, it is uncertain in which cases IGS is beneficial. This work aims to compare ESS with and without IGS in patients with CRS. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Scielo, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, LILACS and Clinicaltrials.gov will be searched for reported clinical trials comparing the quality of life and perioperative outcomes of ESS with and without navigation. The search is planned for 20 April 2022. Three independent authors will select eligible articles and extract their data. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation method will evaluate the strength of the evidence. Data synthesis will be performed using the Review Manager software V.5.4.1. To assess heterogeneity, I2 statistics will be computed. Additionally, meta-analysis will be performed if the included studies are sufficiently homogenous. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study reviews published data, and thus it is not necessary to obtain ethical approval. The findings of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020214791.