Evidence map of traditional Chinese exercises.

Objective: This study aimed to assess and visually depict the clinical evidence landscape of traditional Chinese exercises and identify any research gaps and future research needs. Methods: We comprehensively searched seven Chinese and English databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews (SRs) evaluating the effects of traditional Chinese exercises from their inception until May 2023. The quality of evidence was assessed via the GRADE approach, and the research topics, intervention effects, and strength of evidence were graphically displayed. Results: This evidence map includes 2,017 studies, comprising 1,822 RCTs and 195 SRs. These studies were conducted globally in various countries. Among the traditional Chinese exercises, Tai Chi and Baduanjin have received the most research attention, with a growing number of publications. When traditional Chinese exercises were compared with the control groups, 88.2% of the included SRs reported significantly positive effects, 4.1% reported unclear effects, and 7.7% reported no significant differences. The findings suggested that traditional Chinese exercises could benefit patients with osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, hypertension, coronary heart disease, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, stroke, Parkinson's disease, anxiety, and depression. However, the overall quality of the evidence was suboptimal, with 11.3% rated as moderate, 45.6% as low, and 43.1% as critically low. Conclusion: This evidence map visually represents valuable information on traditional Chinese exercises. While most studies have reported significant benefits, the overall quality of evidence is low.

Differences in the reporting of conflicts of interest and sponsorships in systematic reviews with meta-analyses in dentistry: an examination of factors associated with their reporting.

BACKGROUND: Reporting conflicts of interest (COI) and sources of sponsorship are of paramount importance in adequately interpreting the results of systematic reviews. Some evidence suggests that there is an influence of COI and sponsorship on the study results. The objectives of this meta-research study were twofold: (a) to assess the reporting of COI and sponsorship statements in systematic reviews published in dentistry in three sources (abstract, journal's website and article's full text) and (b) to assess the associations between the characteristics of the systematic reviews and reporting of COI. METHODS: We searched the PubMed database for dental systematic reviews published from database inception to June 2023. We assessed how COI and sponsorship statements were reported in the three sources. We performed a logistic regression analysis to assess the associations between the characteristics of the systematic reviews and the reporting of COI. RESULTS: We assessed 924 abstracts published in PubMed and on the corresponding journals´ websites. Similarly, full texts associated with the 924 abstracts were also assessed. A total of 639 (69%) and 795 (88%) studies had no statement of COI in the abstracts on PubMed and the journal's website, respectively. In contrast, a COI statement was reported in 801 (87%) full texts. Sponsorship statements were not reported in 911 (99%) and 847 (93%) abstracts published in PubMed and a journal´s website, respectively. Nearly two-thirds of the full-text articles (N = 607) included sponsorship statements. Journal access was significantly associated with COI statement reporting in all three sources. Open-access journals have significantly higher odds to report COI in PubMed and full-texts, while have significantly lower odds to report COI in the websites, compared with subscription or hybrid journals. Abstract type was significantly associated with COI statement reporting on the journal's website and in the full text. Review registration based on the full text and the number of authors were significantly associated with COI statement reporting in PubMed and in the full texts. Several other variables were found to be significantly associated with COI statement reporting in one of the three sources. CONCLUSIONS: COI and sponsorship statements seem to be underreported in the abstracts and homepage of the journals, compared to the full-texts. These results were particularly more pronounced in abstracts published in both the PubMed database and the journals' websites. Several characteristics of systematic reviews were associated with COI statement reporting.

Epidemiology and clinical outcomes of vasomotor symptoms among perimenopausal women and women aged 65 years or older in the US: a systematic review.

Vasomotor symptoms (VMS) are the hallmark of menopause and negatively affect a large proportion of women over many years. However, studies evaluating the overall impact of VMS are limited. This systematic review (SR) aimed to examine epidemiological, clinical, humanistic, and economic outcomes of VMS among perimenopausal women and among women aged ≥65 years in the US. A systematic search of the MEDLINE and Embase databases was conducted to identify observational studies (2010-2022) reporting on these populations. Data reporting outcomes of interest were extracted and analyzed descriptively. Of 7,613 studies identified, 34 met inclusion criteria, of which 30 reported on perimenopausal women and 4 reported on VMS in women aged ≥ 65 years. VMS and severe/moderate-to-severe VMS were reported by 48.4-70.6 percent and 13.0-63.1 percent, respectively, of perimenopausal women. Mean VMS duration was 2.6 years, and median duration ranged from 7.4 to 10.1 years among women with onset in early perimenopause and from 3.8 to 6.1 years among those with onset in late perimenopause. Among women aged ≥65 years, 20.9-45.1 percent reported VMS; 2.0 percent reported severe symptoms, and 17.6 percent reported moderate symptoms. No studies reported VMS frequency and duration or the economic or humanistic burden among women aged ≥65 years. In conclusion, high VMS frequency and severity were observed among perimenopausal women and women aged ≥65 years in the US in this SR, highlighting the need for (1) better management of VMS to reduce frequency and severity and (2) further research to clarify the impact of VMS on disease burden, quality of life, and economic impact.

Exploring transparent reporting and data availability in systematic reviews to identify subgroup evidence: imaging for suspected hepatocellular carcinoma in the non-cirrhotic liver.

We aim to illustrate the role of complete and transparent reporting coupled with access to data sourced from published systematic reviews, especially assisting in the identification of evidence for subgroups within the context of a rare disease. To accomplish this principle, we provide a real-world example encountered during the revision of the Dutch clinical practice guideline for hepatocellular carcinoma. Specifically, we retrieved insights from two Cochrane reviews to identify direct evidence concerning the diagnostic test accuracy of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for detecting hepatocellular carcinomas in suspected patients without liver cirrhosis. Through reusing the Cochrane review authors' efforts already undertaken in their exhaustive literature search and selection, we successfully identified relevant direct evidence for this subgroup of suspected patients without cirrhosis and performed an evidence synthesis within the constraints of limited resources for the guideline revision. This approach holds the potential for replication in other subgroups in the context of rare diseases, contingent on the transparent and complete reporting of systematic reviews, as well as the availability and accessibility of their extracted data. Consequently, we underscore the importance of adhering to established reporting guidelines for systematic reviews, while simultaneously advocating for increased availability and accessibility to data. Such practices would not only increase the transparency and reproducibility of systematic reviews but could also increase reusability of their data. In turn, the increased reusability could result in reduced resource utilization in other sectors such as the guideline developing community as we show in our example.

Searching for studies: A guide to information retrieval for Campbell systematic reviews.

This guide outlines general issues in searching for studies; describes the main sources of potential studies; and discusses how to plan the search process, design, and carry out search strategies, manage references found during the search process and document and report the search process.

Methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews on aesthetics and reconstructive breast surgery: A meta-research.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews (SR) of randomized controlled trials on esthetics and reconstructive breast surgery. METHODS: Meta-research study with a broad search strategy was developed to retrieve all relevant systematic reviews. We evaluated the methodological and reporting guidance adopted by these reviews and assessed their adequacy to items from AMSTAR-2 (methodological quality) and PRISMA 2020 (reporting quality). The protocol of this study was prospectively published in: https://osf.io/preprints/osf/ucpgd. RESULTS: After the selection process, 15 SR were included; eight (60%) referred the use of a methodological guide and five (33.3%) invertedly referred PRISMA as the methodological guide. Reporting guidelines were referred by none of the included systematic review. The median adequacy to PRISMA-2020 items was 42.9% (Q1 - 38.1%/Q3 - 95.2%) and to AMSTAR-2 items was 33.3% (Q1 - 23.3%/Q3 - 93.3%) which reflects overall low reporting and methodological quality of included SR. The overall confidence in the results using AMSTAR-2 framework was critically low in 73.3% of included SR. Although a small number of SR were included, a high correlation between the methodological and reporting quality was observed (Spearmean rho = 0.96, 95% bias-corrected confidence interval = 0.84 to 0.99). CONCLUSION: Methodological and reposting quality of SR of randomized clinical trials on esthetic or reconstructive breast surgery is poor. Half of the authors referred to the use of valid guidance to plan and conduct their reviews and none of them referred the use of a guidance for reporting their results.

A living critical interpretive synthesis to yield a framework on the production and dissemination of living evidence syntheses for decision-making.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact in the global research production and has also increased research waste. Living evidence syntheses (LESs) seek to regularly update a body of evidence addressing a specific question. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the production and dissemination of LESs emerged as a cornerstone of the evidence infrastructure. This critical interpretive synthesis answers the questions: What constitutes an LES to support decision-making?; when should one be produced, updated, and discontinued?; and how should one be disseminated? METHODS: Searches included the Cochrane Library, EMBASE (Ovid), Health Systems Evidence, MEDLINE (Ovid), PubMed, and Web of Science up to 23 April 2024 and included articles that provide any insights on addressing the compass questions on LESs. Articles were selected and appraised, and their insights extracted. An interpretive and iterative coding process was used to identify relevant thematic categories and create a conceptual framework. RESULTS: Among the 16,630 non-duplicate records identified, 208 publications proved eligible. Most were non-empirical articles, followed by actual LESs. Approximately one in three articles were published in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The conceptual framework addresses six thematic categories: (1) what is an LES; (2) what methodological approaches facilitate LESs production; (3) when to produce an LES; (4) when to update an LES; (5) how to make available the findings of an LES; and (6) when to discontinue LES updates. CONCLUSION: LESs can play a critical role in reducing research waste and ensuring alignment with advisory and decision-making processes. This critical interpretive synthesis provides relevant insights on how to better organize the global evidence architecture to support their production. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration: CRD42021241875.

A survey of experts to identify methods to detect problematic studies: stage 1 of the INveStigating ProblEmatic Clinical Trials in Systematic Reviews project.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) inform health-care decisions. Unfortunately, some published RCTs contain false data, and some appear to have been entirely fabricated. Systematic reviews are performed to identify and synthesize all RCTs which have been conducted on a given topic. This means that any of these 'problematic studies' are likely to be included, but there are no agreed methods for identifying them. The INveStigating ProblEmatic Clinical Trials in Systematic Reviews (INSPECT-SR) project is developing a tool to identify problematic RCTs in systematic reviews of health care-related interventions. The tool will guide the user through a series of 'checks' to determine a study's authenticity. The first objective in the development process is to assemble a comprehensive list of checks to consider for inclusion. METHODS: We assembled an initial list of checks for assessing the authenticity of research studies, with no restriction to RCTs, and categorized these into five domains: Inspecting results in the paper; Inspecting the research team; Inspecting conduct, governance, and transparency; Inspecting text and publication details; Inspecting the individual participant data. We implemented this list as an online survey, and invited people with expertise and experience of assessing potentially problematic studies to participate through professional networks and online forums. Participants were invited to provide feedback on the checks on the list, and were asked to describe any additional checks they knew of, which were not featured in the list. RESULTS: Extensive feedback on an initial list of 102 checks was provided by 71 participants based in 16 countries across five continents. Fourteen new checks were proposed across the five domains, and suggestions were made to reword checks on the initial list. An updated list of checks was constructed, comprising 116 checks. Many participants expressed a lack of familiarity with statistical checks, and emphasized the importance of feasibility of the tool. CONCLUSION: A comprehensive list of trustworthiness checks has been produced. The checks will be evaluated to determine which should be included in the INSPECT-SR tool. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Systematic reviews draw upon evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to find out whether treatments are safe and effective. The conclusions from systematic reviews are often very influential, and inform both health-care policy and individual treatment decisions. However, it is now clear that the results of many published RCTs are not genuine. In some cases, the entire study may have been fabricated. It is not usual for the veracity of RCTs to be questioned during the process of compiling a systematic review. As a consequence, these "problematic studies" go unnoticed, and are allowed to contribute to the conclusions of influential systematic reviews, thereby influencing patient care. This prompts the question of how these problematic studies could be identified. In this study, we created an extensive list of checks that could be performed to try to identify these studies. We started by assembling a list of checks identified in previous research, and conducting a survey of experts to ask whether they were aware of any additional methods, and to give feedback on the list. As a result, a list of 116 potential "trustworthiness checks" was created. In subsequent research, we will evaluate these checks to see which should be included in a tool, INveStigating ProblEmatic Clinical Trials in Systematic Reviews, which can be used to detect problematic studies.

Young People Transitioning From Child and Adolescent to Adult Mental Health Services: A Qualitative Systematic Review.

To critically synthesise the literature on the lived experience of young adults about their transition to adult mental health services including the perspectives of key people in their world: parents, carers and clinicians. Young people within child and adolescent mental health services are usually required to transition to adult mental health services at the age of 18, despite evidence showing cognitive and emotional development impacted by childhood trauma, illness and adverse life events. This qualitative systematic review searched relevant electronic databases, policy documents, grey literature and theses examining original qualitative peer-reviewed studies published from 2009 to 2022 in English. The process utilised the PRISMA guidelines and the quality of papers assessed by the JBI critical appraisal tool. Nine papers met the criteria for inclusion in the review. The results indicate that qualitative research listening to the voices of young people transitioning to adult mental health services is a rarity. Even fewer papers examine the perspectives of key people in their lives: this review has critically synthesised the literature on the lived experience of young adults about their transition to adult mental health services including the perspectives of key people in their world: parents, carers and clinicians. The main themes identified include: age 18 is not a helpful trigger to transition; young people want more individualised planning; parents want more involvement and clinicians open up about a challenging nexus with adult mental health services.

Benchmarking Human-AI Collaboration for Common Evidence Appraisal Tools.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether large language models (LLMs) may facilitate time- and resource-intensive text-related processes in evidence appraisal. OBJECTIVES: To quantify the agreement of LLMs with human consensus in appraisal of scientific reporting (PRISMA) and methodological rigor (AMSTAR) of systematic reviews and design of clinical trials (PRECIS-2). To identify areas, where human-AI collaboration would outperform the traditional consensus process of human raters in efficiency. DESIGN: Five LLMs (Claude-3-Opus, Claude-2, GPT-4, GPT-3.5, Mixtral-8x22B) assessed 112 systematic reviews applying the PRISMA and AMSTAR criteria, and 56 randomized controlled trials applying PRECIS-2. We quantified agreement between human consensus and (1) individual human raters; (2) individual LLMs; (3) combined LLMs approach; (4) human-AI collaboration. Ratings were marked as deferred (undecided) in case of inconsistency between combined LLMs or between the human rater and the LLM. RESULTS: Individual human rater accuracy was 89% for PRISMA and AMSTAR, and 75% for PRECIS-2. Individual LLM accuracy was ranging from 63% (GPT-3.5) to 70% (Claude-3-Opus) for PRISMA, 53% (GPT-3.5) to 74% (Claude-3-Opus) for AMSTAR, and 38% (GPT-4) to 55% (GPT-3.5) for PRECIS-2. Combined LLM ratings led to accuracies of 75-88% for PRISMA (4-74% deferred), 74-89% for AMSTAR (6-84% deferred), and 64-79% for PRECIS-2 (29-88% deferred). Human-AI collaboration resulted in the best accuracies from 89-96% for PRISMA (25/35% deferred), 91-95% for AMSTAR (27/30% deferred), and 80-86% for PRECIS-2 (76/71% deferred). CONCLUSIONS: Current LLMs alone appraised evidence worse than humans. Human-AI collaboration may reduce workload for the second human rater for the assessment of reporting (PRISMA) and methodological rigor (AMSTAR) but not for complex tasks such as PRECIS-2.

Barriers and facilitators to faecal immunochemical testing in symptomatic populations: A rapid systematic scoping review and gap analysis.

AIM: Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is used to triage people with signs or symptoms of a colorectal cancer (CRC). Recent guidelines have recommended further research to improve access, uptake and return of FIT. This systematic scoping review aims to understand the barriers and facilitators to FIT testing in symptomatic patients. METHOD: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies published after September 2013 were included. MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO databases were searched to identify publications examining barriers and facilitators to FIT. Initially, the data underwent thematic analysis, and subsequently, factors were aligned to components of the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behaviour model. All outcomes are presented in adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. RESULTS: One thousand two hundred thirty-two papers were identified; 11 met the inclusion criteria. Barriers and facilitators were identified at the patient (e.g., knowledge), provider (e.g., general practitioner awareness) and service level (e.g., method of providing FIT kits). Factors were categorised into the subcomponents of the model: psychological capability (e.g., lack of FIT knowledge), reflective motivation (e.g., beliefs regarding FIT sampling and faeces being unhygienic) and automatic motivation (e.g., embarrassment, scary, anxiety provoking). Gaps in knowledge emerged in three domains: (1) patient experience, (2) FIT pathway and (3) healthcare professionals experience of FIT. CONCLUSION: This systematic scoping review provides a summary of the literature on FIT uptake, and identified factors across multiple levels and components. To increase adherence to FIT completion within primary care, a multifaceted theory and evidence-based approach is needed to underpin future behavioural science interventions.

Literature search sandbox: a large language model that generates search queries for systematic reviews.

Objectives: Development of search queries for systematic reviews (SRs) is time-consuming. In this work, we capitalize on recent advances in large language models (LLMs) and a relatively large dataset of natural language descriptions of reviews and corresponding Boolean searches to generate Boolean search queries from SR titles and key questions. Materials and Methods: We curated a training dataset of 10 346 SR search queries registered in PROSPERO. We used this dataset to fine-tune a set of models to generate search queries based on Mistral-Instruct-7b. We evaluated the models quantitatively using an evaluation dataset of 57 SRs and qualitatively through semi-structured interviews with 8 experienced medical librarians. Results: The model-generated search queries had median sensitivity of 85% (interquartile range [IQR] 40%-100%) and number needed to read of 1206 citations (IQR 205-5810). The interviews suggested that the models lack both the necessary sensitivity and precision to be used without scrutiny but could be useful for topic scoping or as initial queries to be refined. Discussion: Future research should focus on improving the dataset with more high-quality search queries, assessing whether fine-tuning the model on other fields, such as the population and intervention, improves performance, and exploring the addition of interactivity to the interface. Conclusions: The datasets developed for this project can be used to train and evaluate LLMs that map review descriptions to Boolean search queries. The models cannot replace thoughtful search query design but may be useful in providing suggestions for key words and the framework for the query.

Neurological manifestations in adult patients with the m.3243A>G variant in mitochondrial DNA.

Background: The m.3243A>G variant in mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is the most common cause of the MELAS (Mitochondrial encephalopathy, lactic acidosis and stroke-like episodes) syndrome usually commencing in childhood or adolescence. In adults, the variant presents with versatile and mostly neurological phenotypes, but MELAS may not be common. Objective: To examine the frequency of phenotypes in adults with m.3243A>G in a population-based cohort and in a meta-analysis of reported case series. Methods: We clinically examined 51 adult patients with m.3243A>G to determine the frequency of phenotypes and to analyse the contribution of variant heteroplasmy, age, sex and mtDNA haplogroup to the phenotypes. The frequencies of neurological features were also assessed in a meta-analysis on 25 published case series reporting 1314 patients. Results: Sensorineural hearing impairment (HI), cognitive impairment and myopathy were the most common manifestations, whereas stroke-like episodes were infrequent. Variant heteroplasmy and age were only modest predictors of the phenotypes, although heteroplasmy correlated significantly with disability and Kaplan-Meier analysis showed progression of phenotypes with age. Male sex predicted more severe disability, whereas haplogroup UK was associated with no significant disability. Meta-analysis revealed substantial heterogeneity of phenotype frequencies and preferential inclusion of the MELAS phenotype. Discussion: In adult patients with m.3243A>G sensorineural HI, cognitive impairment and myopathy are common manifestations with lifetime prevalences approaching unity. Stroke-like episodes are rare. Variant heteroplasmy, age, sex and mtDNA haplogroup contribute to the severity of the disease. Meta-analysis provided a solid estimate of the various neurological symptoms in adults with m.3243A>G.

Safety implications of mask use: a systematic review and evidence map.

BACKGROUND: Widespread use of respiratory protection masks has become a critical component of public health response. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review synthesises the evidence on the acute physiological, cognitive and psychological impacts associated with different types of masks and provides an evidence map of research gaps. METHODS: A comprehensive search from 2000 to 2023 was conducted across multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane databases, Scopus and PubMed). An umbrella systematic overview was conducted for physiological outcomes using existing systematic reviews. We conducted de novo systematic reviews for cognitive and psychological outcomes. Pairs of independent reviewers determined eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Certainty at an outcome level was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: The search resulted in 13 370 potential citations, leading to the inclusion of nine systematic reviews for physiological outcomes (87 primary studies) and 10 primary studies for cognitive and psychological outcomes (3815 participants), with the majority of participants being healthy adults. Studies evaluating physiological outcomes demonstrated that various types of masks have little to no significant difference in heart rate (surgical mask (mean difference (MD): 0.96 (-1.01 to 2.93)), N95 mask (MD: 1.63 (-2.79 to 6.05)) and cloth mask (MD: -0.94 (-6.39 to 4.52))) or respiratory rate during rest or exercise (surgical mask (MD: -1.35 (-3.00 to 0.29)), N95 mask (MD: 0.10 (-3.10 to 3.29)) and cloth mask (MD: -2.57 (-6.44 to 1.29)) (low certainty for most outcomes)). Mask use may be associated with very small changes in minute ventilation (surgical mask (MD: -13.9 (-20.30 to -7.53)) and N95 mask (MD: -16.3 (-28.7 to -3.9))), tidal volume (surgical mask (MD: -0.14 (-0.23 to -0.05)) and N95 mask (MD: -0.10 (-0.33 to 0.13))), oxygen saturation (surgical mask (MD: -0.59% (-0.87 to -0.30)), N95 mask (MD: -0.35% (-0.75 to 0.05)) and cloth mask (MD: -0.50% (-1.23; 0.24))), carbon dioxide partial pressure (surgical mask (standardised MD (SMD): 1.17 (0.70 to 1.64)) and N95 mask (SMD: 0.43 (0.08 to 0.79))) and exercise performance (surgical mask (SMD: -0.12 (-0.39 to 0.15)), N95 mask (SMD: -0.42 (-0.76 to -0.08)) and cloth mask (SMD: -0.26 (-0.54 to 0.02)) (low certainty for most outcomes)). Studies evaluating cognitive outcomes showed mixed results. Some studies reported reduced mental workload, and others showed no significant effect or decreased performance. The impact on attention, errors and reaction time was variable. These studies were small and at moderate to high risk of bias. Evidence was insufficient to estimate the effect of mask use on psychological outcomes (claustrophobia, depression and anxiety) as these studies were small, non-longitudinal and at high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: This evidence map provides a comprehensive insight into the multifaceted impact of respiratory protection mask use, and highlights the limited certainty in the available body of evidence. This evidence map supports the development of future research agenda.

Antioxidant Effect in Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy in Rat Model: A Systematic Review.

Oxidative stress is a contributing factor that leads to the vascular complications of diabetes mellitus. Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is one of the microvascular complications with rising concern as the disease progresses despite strict glucose control and monitoring. Thus, there is an ongoing need for an early intervention that is effective in halting or slowing the progression of DPN where antioxidants have been proposed as potential therapeutic agents. This systematic review aims to evaluate the existing evidence on the antioxidant effect in DPN and provide insight on the role of antioxidants in the progression of DPN in a rat model. A comprehensive literature search was conducted on Web of Science, EBSCOhost, and Scopus to identify the effects and role of antioxidants in DPN. Data extraction was performed and SYRCLE's risk of bias (RoB) tool was used for risk assessment. This systematic review was written following the PRISMA 2020 statements. From the literature search, 1268 articles were screened, and a total of 101 full-text articles were further screened before 33 were analyzed. These findings collectively suggest that antioxidants can play a crucial role in managing and potentially reversing the effects of diabetic neuropathy by targeting oxidative stress and improving nerve function.

Digital Mental Health Interventions for Alleviating Depression and Anxiety During Psychotherapy Waiting Lists: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Depression and anxiety have become increasingly prevalent across the globe. The rising need for treatment and the lack of clinicians has resulted in prolonged waiting times for patients to receive their first session. Responding to this gap, digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) have been found effective in treating depression and anxiety and are potentially promising pretreatments for patients who are awaiting face-to-face psychotherapy. Nevertheless, whether digital interventions effectively alleviate symptoms for patients on waiting lists for face-to-face psychotherapy remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to synthesize the effectiveness of DMHIs for relieving depression and anxiety symptoms of patients on waiting lists for face-to-face therapy. This review also investigated the features, perceived credibility, and usability of DMHIs during waiting times. METHODS: In this systematic review, we searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and Web of Science for research studies investigating the effectiveness of DMHIs in reducing either depression or anxiety symptoms among individuals waiting for face-to-face psychotherapy. The search was conducted in June 2024, and we have included the studies that met the inclusion criteria and were published before June 6, 2024. RESULTS: Of the 9267 unique records identified, 8 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the systematic review. Five studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 3 studies were not. Among the RCTs, we found that digital interventions reduced depression and anxiety symptoms, but the majority of interventions were not more effective compared to the control groups where participants simply waited or received a self-help book. For the non-RCTs, the interventions also reduced symptoms, but without control groups, the interpretation of the findings is limited. Finally, participants in the included studies perceived the digital interventions to be credible and useful, but high dropout rates raised concerns about treatment adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the lack of effective interventions among the reviewed studies, especially among the RCTs, our results suggest that waiting list DMHIs are not more effective compared to simply waiting or using a self-help book. However, more high-quality RCTs with larger sample sizes are warranted in order to draw a more robust conclusion. Additionally, as this review revealed concerns regarding the high dropout rate in digital interventions, future studies could perhaps adopt more personalized and human-centered functions in interventions to increase user engagement, with the potential to increase treatment adherence and effectiveness.

Enhancing systematic reviews: An in-depth analysis on the impact of active learning parameter combinations for biomedical abstract screening.

Systematic Review (SR) are foundational to influencing policies and decision-making in healthcare and beyond. SRs thoroughly synthesise primary research on a specific topic while maintaining reproducibility and transparency. However, the rigorous nature of SRs introduces two main challenges: significant time involved and the continuously growing literature, resulting in potential data omission, making most SRs become outmoded even before they are published. As a solution, AI techniques have been leveraged to simplify the SR process, especially the abstract screening phase. Active learning (AL) has emerged as a preferred method among these AI techniques, allowing interactive learning through human input. Several AL software have been proposed for abstract screening. Despite its prowess, how the various parameters involved in AL influence the software's efficacy is still unclear. This research seeks to demystify this by exploring how different AL strategies, such as initial training set, query strategies etc. impact SR automation. Experimental evaluations were conducted on five complex medical SR datasets, and the GLM model was used to interpret the findings statistically. Some AL variables, such as the feature extractor, initial training size, and classifiers, showed notable observations and practical conclusions were drawn within the context of SR and beyond where AL is deployed.

A review of health equity considerations in Cochrane reviews of lifestyle interventions for cardiovascular health in adults.

OBJECTIVE: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of global disease burden and rising healthcare costs. Systematic reviews (SRs) rigorously evaluate evidence on health interventions' effects and guide personal, clinical, and policy decision-making. Health equity is the absence of avoidable and unfair differences in health between groups within a population. Assessing equity in lifestyle interventions for cardiovascular health is important due to persisting health inequities in CVD burden and access to interventions. We aim to explore how health equity considerations are addressed in Cochrane SRs of lifestyle interventions for cardiovascular health. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This is a methodological review of Cochrane SRs of lifestyle interventions for cardiovascular health using the PROGRESS-Plus framework. PROGRESS-Plus stands for Place of residence, Race/ethnicity/culture/language, Occupation, Gender/sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status, and Social capital, while "Plus" stands for additional factors associated with discrimination and exclusion such as age, disability, and comorbidity. Using predefined selection criteria, two authors independently screened all Cochrane reviews published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews between August 2017 and December 2022. PROGRESS-Plus factors in the SRs were sought in the Summary of Findings (SoF) table, Methods/Inclusion criteria, Methods/Subgroup analyses, Results/Included studies, Results/Subgroup analyses, and Discussion/Overall completeness and applicability of evidence. RESULTS: We included 36 SRs published by 10 Cochrane groups, addressing 11 health conditions with mostly dietary and exercise interventions. The most common PROGRESS-Plus factors assessed were gender/sex, age, and comorbidity. PROGRESS-Plus factors were most addressed in the inclusion criteria (64%), the discussion (75%), and the included studies (92%) sections of the SRs. Only 33% of SoF tables referenced PROGRESS-Plus. Sixty-nine percent of the included SRs planned for subgroup analyses across one or more PROGRESS-Plus factors, but only 43% of SRs conducted subgroup analyses, suggesting limited reporting of PROGRESS-Plus factors in primary studies. CONCLUSIONS: Equity factors are not sufficiently addressed in Cochrane reviews of lifestyle interventions for cardiovascular health. Low reporting of PROGRESS-Plus factors in implications for practice and research sections of Cochrane SRs limit equity focused guidance for current clinical practice, public health interventions and future research.

Mirabegron Versus Placebo and Other Therapeutic Modalities in the Treatment of Patients with Overactive Bladder Syndrome-A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The prevalence of overactive bladder (OAB) increases with age. Mirabegron and other drugs are used for the management of patients with OAB. To evaluate mirabegron versus other treatments for overactive bladder syndrome (OAB). METHODS: This randomised controlled trial (RCT)-based systematic review (CRD42020200394) was conducted following the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement, with standards reported in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: We included 28 RCTs (n = 27 481 adults), comparing the following: mirabegron 25 mg versus placebo (n = 8798; six RCTs): significant changes in urgency urinary incontinence (mean difference [MD] -0.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.56 to -0.26), total incontinence (MD -0.47, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.30), and nocturia (MD -0.10, 95% CI -0.17 to -0.02), and mirabegron 50 mg versus placebo (n = 14 933; 12 RCTs): significant changes in urgency urinary incontinence (MD -0.41, 95% CI -0.52 to -0.31), urgency (MD -0.49, 95% CI -0.64 to -0.33), total incontinence (MD -0.44, 95% CI -0.55 to -0.33), favouring mirabegron 25/50 mg; mirabegron 50 mg versus tolterodine 4 mg (n = 8008; five RCTs): significant changes in micturition (MD -0.16, 95% CI -0.31 to -0.02) and overall adverse events (AEs; odds ratio [OR] 0.71, 95% CI 0.59-0.86), favouring mirabegron 50 mg; mirabegron 50 mg versus solifenacin 5 mg (n = 8911; four RCTs): significant changes in voided volume/micturition in millilitres (MD -7.77, 95% CI -12.93 to -2.61), favouring mirabegron 50 mg; and mirabegron 50 mg versus oxybutynin 73.5 mg (n = 302; one RCT): significant changes in overall AEs (OR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00-0.16), favouring mirabegron 50 mg. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Mirabegron is effective, safe, and well tolerated. Coadministration with anticholinergics provides an advantageous additive effect without a higher occurrence of side effects. PATIENT SUMMARY: Mirabegron is effective, safe, and well tolerated for treating overactive bladder. When used in conjunction with anticholinergic medications, it provides extra benefits without causing more side effects.