Persistent organic pollutant exposure as a risk factor of gestational diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Findings related to the association between persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are inconclusive. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the strength of the association between POP exposure and GDM in a systematic review with meta-analysis. SEARCH STRATEGY: MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science were searched until July 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: Cohort and case-control studies analysing the association between POPs and GDM. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We assessed the risk of bias using the Quality in Prognosis Studies scale (QUIPS). Standardised mean differences were pooled using random-effect models. MAIN RESULTS: Sixteen articles including 12 216 participants were selected. The risk of bias was high in four articles (25%), moderate in 11 (68.75%) and low in one (6.25%). Small mean difference between GDM cases and controls was observed for PFHpA (0.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.1-0.35, I2 = 0.0%), PCB180 (0.37, 95% CI 0.19-0.56; I2 = 25.3%), BDE47 (0.23, 95% CI 0.0-0.45, I2 = 0%), BDE99 (0.36, 95% CI 0.14-0.59; I2 = 0%), BDE100 (0.42, 95% CI 0.19-0.64; I2 = 0%) and HCB (0.22, 95% CI 0.01-0.42, I2 = 39.6%). No considerable difference was observed for the rest of POPs. CONCLUSION: Small mean differences between GDM cases and controls were observed for some POPs. However, evidence shows mostly moderate quality and results were heterogeneous. Improved research methodology is needed to assess POPs and GDM risk.

A comprehensive systematic review of colorectal cancer screening clinical practices guidelines and consensus statements.

High-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs) are essential for evidence-based medicine. The purpose of this systematic review was to appraise the quality and reporting of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening CPGs and CSs. After prospective registration (Prospero no: CRD42021286156), a systematic review searched CRC guidances in duplicate without language restrictions in ten databases, 20 society websites, and grey literature from 2018 to 2021. We appraised quality with AGREE II (% of maximum score) and reporting with RIGHT (% of total 35 items) tools. Twenty-four CPGs and 5 CSs were analysed. The median overall quality and reporting were 54.0% (IQR 45.7-75.0) and 42.0% (IQR 31.4-68.6). The applicability had low quality (AGREE II score <50%) in 83% of guidances (24/29). Recommendations and conflict of interest were low-reported (RIGHT score <50%) in 62% guidances (18/29) and 69% (20/29). CPGs that deployed systematic reviews had better quality and reporting than CSs (AGREE: 68.5% vs. 35.5%; p = 0.001; RIGHT: 74.6% vs. 41.4%; p = 0.001). In summary, CRC screening CPGs and CSs achieved low quality and reporting. It is necessary a revision and an improvement of the current guidances. Their development should apply a robust methodology using proper guideline development tools to obtain high-quality evidence-based documents.

Decision Aids for Decision Making about Locally Advance Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) is a subset of breast cancer with locoregional progression without distant metastasis. The multimodality treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, hormonal and targeted therapy if required) could significantly improve results in this specific group of patients. The complex and multiple options of treatment with similar mortality rates but different outcomes depending on the patient's desires, preferences and social environment require aid to facilitate the individual patient's decisions (e.g. Decision Aids (DAs) targeting patients considering primary or adjuvant treatment in LABC). In this context, DAs have been proven fundamental to help patients and clinicians share and agree on the best value option. The current systematic review aimed to evaluate the existing DAs related to these patients with LABC and identify current status and possible improvement areas (possible scarcity and heterogeneity of instruments, the status of their development, explanation of their purpose,…). No previous systematic reviews have been published on this topic. Following Prospero registration no: CRD42021286173, studies about LABC DAs were identified, without data or language restrictions, through a systematic search of bibliographic databases in December 2021. Quality was assessed using Qualsyst criteria (range 0.0-1.0). The quality of the 17 selected studies ranged from 0.46 to 0.95. Of them, 14/17 (82%) were DAs about treatment, only one (6%) about diagnosis, and 2/17 (12%) about the employment of DAs. No screening or follow-up DAs were retrieved. Twelve (70.6%) DAs were online tools. They varied broadly regarding their characteristics and purposes. Most of the studies focused on developing and testing different DAs (5/17; 29.4%) and their impact (7/17; 41.2%). Only 4/17 (23.5%) analysed their implementation and cost. These instruments have proven to improve patient's knowledge and decision-making, decrease patient anxiety, and patients tend to undergo treatment. However, nowadays, there is still a need for further research and consensus on methodology to develop practical DAs.

International multi-stakeholder consensus statement on clinical trial integrity.

OBJECTIVE: To prepare a set of statements for randomised clinical trials (RCT) integrity through an international multi-stakeholder consensus. METHODS: The consensus was developed via: multi-country multidisciplinary stakeholder group composition and engagement; evidence synthesis of 55 systematic reviews concerning RCT integrity; anonymised two-round modified Delphi survey with consensus threshold based on the average percentage of majority opinions; and, a final consensus development meeting. Prospective registrations: (https://osf.io/bhncy, https://osf.io/3ursn). RESULTS: There were 30 stakeholders representing 15 countries from five continents including triallists, ethicists, methodologists, statisticians, consumer representatives, industry representatives, systematic reviewers, funding body panel members, regulatory experts, authors, journal editors, peer-reviewers and advisors for resolving integrity concerns. Delphi survey response rate was 86.7% (26/30 stakeholders). There were 111 statements (73 stakeholder-provided, 46 systematic review-generated, 8 supported by both) in the initial long list, with eight additional statements provided during the consensus rounds. Through consensus the final set consolidated 81 statements (49 stakeholder-provided, 41 systematic review-generated, 9 supported by both). The entire RCT life cycle was covered by the set of statements including general aspects (n = 6), design and approval (n = 11), conduct and monitoring (n = 19), reporting of protocols and findings (n = 20), post-publication concerns (n = 12), and future research and development (n = 13). CONCLUSION: Implementation of this multi-stakeholder consensus statement is expected to enhance RCT integrity.

The definition of unexplained infertility: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on tests required to either diagnose unexplained infertility or use for research inclusion criteria. This leads to heterogeneity and bias affecting meta-analysis and best practice advice. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review analyses the variability of inclusion criteria applied to couples with unexplained infertility. We propose standardised criteria for use both in future research studies and clinical diagnosis. SEARCH STRATEGY: CINAHL and MEDLINE online databases were searched up to November 2022 for all published studies recruiting couples with unexplained infertility, available in full text in the English language. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were collected in an Excel spreadsheet. Results were analysed per category and methodology or reference range. MAIN RESULTS: Of 375 relevant studies, only 258 defined their inclusion criteria. The most commonly applied inclusion criteria were semen analysis, tubal patency and assessment of ovulation in 220 (85%), 232 (90%), 205 (79.5%) respectively. Only 87/220 (39.5%) studies reporting semen analysis used the World Health Organization (WHO) limits. Tubal patency was accepted if bilateral in 145/232 (62.5%) and if unilateral in 24/232 (10.3%). Ovulation was assessed using mid-luteal serum progesterone in 115/205 (56.1%) and by a history of regular cycles in 87/205 (42.4%). Other criteria, including uterine cavity assessment and hormone profile, were applied in less than 50% of included studies. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the heterogeneity among studied populations with unexplained infertility. Development and application of internationally accepted criteria will improve the quality of research and future clinical care.

Ferritin screening and Iron treatment for maternal anemia and fetal growth restriction prevention - A multicenter randomized controlled trial (FAIR Study).

Background: Non-anemic iron deficiency precedes iron deficiency anaemia and has an estimated prevalence of 1-2 billion worldwide. Few studies have comprehensively researched the idea of treating non-anemic iron deficiency (NAID) with iron to improve the outcome of the mother and the offspring. Methods and Analysis: FAIR will be a multicenter randomized controlled trial that will be conducted in multiple clinical academic obstetrics units in Lahore (including Services Institute of Medical Sciences, Lahore, Allama Iqbal Medical College, Lahore and Fatima Jinnah Medical University). Pregnant women at gestational age <20 weeks with hemoglobin 11-13 g/L and ferritin below the threshold (<30 ng/ml) will be invited to take part in the study. Randomization will be done by computer based generated random numbers. One group (usual care or oral group) will be offered routine care prophylactic dose of oral iron (30-45 mg/day) and the other group (intervention arm or IV group) will be offered therapeutic dose of IV iron (dose calculated by Ganzoni formula) in addition to usual care. All patients will be followed up till delivery. Primary maternal outcome will be hemoglobin at 36 weeks' gestation. Secondary outcomes are fetal birthweight or small for gestational age, preterm birth, preeclampsia, multidimensional fatigue inventory, breast feeding initiation, blood transfusion, and fetal cord ferritin and hemoglobin. Discussion: The study will generate evidence as to whether screening serum ferritin in non-anemic pregnant women and replenishing their iron stores will likely reduce the rate of predelivery anemia in pregnant women, improve birthweight and preventing perinatal complications. Roles and responsibilities: Tayyiba Wasim is principal Investigator and other members of data management team are Natasha Bushra, Shamsa Humayoun, Khalid Saeed Khan, Fatima Shehbaz, Saba Rasool, Anam Riaz and Sonia Irshad. Principal investigator will assume the full responsibility of Fair trial including training of research assistants, administration of informed consent and protecting participants confidentiality. Data management team will help in the management, development and execution of trial. Khadija Irfan Khawaja is the operational lead for fair trial´s technology team comprising of Aziz Fatima and Zubia Zafar, responsible for gathering requirements from study teams and supporting the operational implementation of technology to drive the collection of high-quality study data. Protocol contributors are Gynae unit I of Services Institute of Medical Sciences/ Services hospital, Lahore, Gynae Unit II of Allama Iqbal Medical College/ Jinnah hospital, Lahore and Gynae unit 1 of Fatima Jinnah Medical College/ Sir Ganga Ram hospital, Lahore. These coordinating centres will recruit patients (sample size=600) and will discuss their progress in trial management meetings quarterly. Steering committee: has an independent chair Prof Samia Malik, one expert member Prof Faiza Bashir and Ms Neelam to represent patients, public and consumers. Trial steering committee with independent chair and member with a patient representative will oversee the study. Chair of steering committee has the authority to stop the trial whenever needed in case of positive or negative results. Steering committee meetings will be held on annual basis. Independent Data monitoring committee: comprises of Dr. Shehnoor Azhar as chair and Prof Ejaz Hussain and Dr. Shehla Javed Akram as members. Data monitoring committee will assess the progress, data safety and if needed critical efficacy points of the clinical study and will show their results quarterly in data interim meetings. The committee will focus on integrity of the whole process and compliance of all sites with all aspects of the protocol. It will perform confidential interim analyses quarterly, which may be used to determine if an effect is observed and if the study should continue to its planned sample size. Data monitoring committee will report to the Chair of the steering committee.

Listeriosis in pregnancy: An umbrella review of maternal exposure, treatment and neonatal complications.

BACKGROUND: Listeria monocytogenes is a commonly found organism in processed and prepared food and the disease of listeriosis is associated with a high morbidity and mortality. Compared with the general population, the risk of being diagnosed with listeriosis increases during pregnancy. Listeriosis can lead to miscarriage, spontaneous preterm labour and preterm birth, stillbirth and congenital neonatal infections. OBJECTIVES: We conducted a universal review of listeriosis in pregnancy and in the newborn. SEARCH STRATEGY: The EMBASE, PubMed, Cinahl and Web of Science databases were searched for systematic reviews indexed before 1 December 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: Any systematic reviews evaluating the prevalence, treatment, diagnosis and effects of listeriosis during pregnancy and up to 4 weeks postnatally were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Eligibility assessment, data extraction and quality assessment by the Methodological Quality Assessment of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) were performed in duplicate. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 397 citations of which nine systematic reviews comprising 330 studies and 487 patients' reviews were included. Most systematic reviews (seven of nine) were of moderate to high quality. Prevention in pregnant women was based on adherence to strict dietary recommendations, such as reheating leftovers until steamed and avoiding unpasteurised dairy products. Listeriosis infections were likely to occur in the third trimester (66%) rather than in the first trimester (3%) of pregnancy. Symptoms are mostly fever and other flu-like symptoms, such as fatigue. Diagnosis was primarily made by culture of the pathogen. Intravenous amoxicillin or ampicillin were first-line treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Listeriosis, a rare but serious infectious disease in pregnancy, can cause devastating consequences for the fetus and newborn. Appropriate preventative treatment should be initiated during early pregnancy to avoid complications. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Listeria is commonly found in processed and prepared food. Prevention is the best way to avoid listeriosis during pregnancy.

Guidance documents for colorectal and anal cancer treatment: A systematic quality and reporting assessment.

AIM: Evidence-based medicine is essential for clinical practice. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs) ought to follow a consistent methodology to underpin high-quality healthcare. We systematically analysed the quality and reporting of colorectal (CRC) and anal cancer CPGs and CSs. METHODS: Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and online sources (59 professional society websites and eight guideline databases) were systematically searched following prospective registration (PROSPERO no. CRD42021286146) by two reviewers independently, without language restrictions. CPGs and CSs about CRC and anal cancer treatment were included from January 2018 to November 2021 and were assessed using the AGREE II tool (per cent of maximum score) and the RIGHT tool (per cent of total 35 items) for quality and reporting respectively. RESULTS: The median overall quality and reporting of the 59 guidelines analysed were 55.0% (interquartile range 47.0-62.0) and 58% (interquartile range 50.0-67.9), respectively, with a proportion scoring less than half (<50%) for quality (20/59, 33.9%) and reporting (15/59, 25.4%). Guidance reported that following AGREE II methodology scored better on average than that without (AGREE II 77.7% vs. 47.6%, P = 0.001; RIGHT 50.0% vs. 33.9%, P = 0.001). Guidelines based on systematic reviews had better quality and reporting on average than those based on consensus (AGREE II 56.5% vs. 46.6%, P = 0.001; RIGHT 36.9% vs. 35.4%, P = 0.019). CONCLUSION: The quality and reporting of colorectal and anal cancer treatment CPGs and CSs were poor. Despite AGREE II and RIGHT inherent methodological limitations, few high-quality guidelines were found. Despite wide variability in scoring different domains, they merit urgent improvement in all areas. It has also been demonstrated that CPGs and CSs should be underpinned by systematic reviews collecting the best available clinical research findings.

Research integrity in clinical trials: innocent errors and spin versus scientific misconduct.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: High-quality research underpins the best healthcare practice. This article focuses on analyzing the current literature to promote research integrity across clinical trials. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent admissions of questionable practices by researchers have undermined practitioner and public confidence. There is limited evidence specifically for ethical and professional standards in clinical trials to guide researchers and institutions to embed integrity into research practice. SUMMARY: Unintentional errors and spin in research are not uncommon as training in design and conduct of clinical trials is not part of health education for medical and allied health professions. There is unfamiliarity with procedures, such as prospective registration, a priori documentation of statistical analysis plans, openness in data sharing, and so forth. This, combined with the academic culture of secrecy, has led to an environment where scientific suspicion, instead of trust, is the norm. Existing science integrity documents are devoid of specific recommendations about how to translate any guidance into clinical trial practice. There is a need for constructive, supportive and multidisciplinary approaches based on open dialogue and continuous training, targeting the research environment. Research integrity now needs to take centre stage to re-instill confidence in randomized trial evidence to inform clinical practice.

The impact of SjÓ§gren's syndrome on the quality of sexual life of female patients in the UK: a controlled analysis.

Mucosal dryness and dyspareunia are symptoms that may significantly affect women with primary SjÓ§gren syndrome (pSS). We investigated whether vaginal dryness is correlated with sexual function, and the impact may have on the quality of life (QoL) and mental health well-being in pSS patients. Ethically approved comparative cross-sectional study was designed to assess sexual function using the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) in 65 pSS female patients vs 62 sex-matched controls. The effect of vaginal dryness and fatigue on sexual function was investigated. Vaginal dryness was correlated with oral dryness estimated by salivary flow rate and the Clinical Oral Dryness Score to investigate whether genital dryness is indicative of general mucosal dryness in pSS. Validated questionnaires were used to investigate the effect of sexual function on QoL and mental health well-being. The number of sexually active pSS participants was significantly less than in the control group (28/65 vs 42/62, p < 0.05). The sexual function was significantly impaired in the pSS group (mean FSFI = 19 vs 28.3, p < 0.05). There was no significant association between self-reported vaginal dryness and oral dryness or sexual function. The open-ended questions showed that the most troublesome symptom reported by pSS patients was oral dryness (43%, n = 28/65) followed by fatigue (31%, n = 20/65). Sexual dysfunction had a negative impact on QoL and the mental health well-being of pSS patients in all aspects, especially on the quality of social life (ß = 0.7, p = 0.02). Addressing sexual dysfunction can potentially improve the QoL of pSS patients significantly, especially their social well-being.

Clinical practice guidelines and consensus for the screening of breast cancer: A systematic appraisal of their quality and reporting.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs) are being promoted to provide high-quality healthcare guidance. This systematic review has assessed the breast cancer (BC) screening CPGs and CSs quality and reporting. METHODS: A search of bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and CDSR), 12 guideline databases and 51 professional society websites was performed without language restrictions from January 2017 to June 2020, following prospective registration (Prospero no.: CRD42020203807). AGREE II (% of maximum score) and RIGHT (% of total 35 items) appraised quality and reporting individually, extracting data in duplicate; reviewer agreement was 98% and 93%, respectively. RESULTS: Forty guidances with median overall quality and reporting 51% (interquartile range [IQR] 39-63) and 48% (IQR 35-65), respectively. Twenty-two (55%) and 20 (50%) did not reach the minimum standards (scores <50%). The guidances that deployed systematic reviews had better quality (74.2% vs. 46.9%; p = 0.001) and reporting (80.5% vs. 42.6%; p = 0.001). Guidances reporting a tool referral scored better (AGREE II: 72.8% vs. 43.1%, p = 0.002; RIGHT: 75.0% vs. 46.9%, p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: BC screening CPGs and CSs suffered poor quality and reporting. More than half did not reach the minimum standards. They would improve if systematic reviews were used to underpin the recommendations made.

Systematic review of shared decision-making in guidelines about colorectal cancer screening.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to systematically evaluate quality of shared decision-making (SDM) in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs). METHODS: Search for CRC screening guidances was from 2010 to November 2021 in EMBASE, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Scopus and CDSR, and the World Wide Web. Three independent reviewers and an arbitrator rated the quality of each guidance using a SDM quality assessment tool (maximum score: 31). Reviewer agreement was 0.88. RESULTS: SDM appeared in 41/83 (49.4%) CPGs and 9/19 (47.4%) CSs. None met all the quality criteria, and 51.0% (52/102) failed to meet any quality items. Overall compliance was low (mean 1.63, IQR 0-2). Quality was better in guidances published after 2015 (mean 1, IQR 0-3 vs. mean 0.5, IQR 0-1.5; p = 0.048) and when the term SDM was specifically reported (mean 4.5, IQR 2.5-4.5 vs. mean 0.5, IQR 0-1.5; p < 0.001). CPGs underpinned by systematic reviews showed better SDM quality than consensus (mean 1, IQR 0-3 vs. mean 0, IQR 0-2, p = 0.040). CONCLUSION: SDM quality was suboptimal and mentioned in less than half of the guidances, and recommendations were scarce. Guideline developers should incorporate evidence-based SDM recommendations in guidances to underpin the translation of evidence into practice.

Protocol of Pakistan randomized and observational trial to evaluate coronavirus treatment among newly diagnosed patients with COVID-19: Azithromycin, Oseltamivir, and Hydroxychloquine.

Background & Objective: This study aimed to assess the clinical effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine Sulfate (200 mg orally 8 hourlies thrice a day for 5 days), oseltamivir (75 mg orally twice a day for 5 days), and Azithromycin (500 mg orally daily on day 1, followed by 250 mg orally twice a day on days 2-5) alone and in combination (in seven groups). Methods & Analysis: An adaptive design is deployed, set within a comprehensive cohort study, to permit flexibility in fast-changing clinical and public health scenario. Primary outcomes include turning the test negative for coronavirus nucliec acid and in bringing about clinical improvement on day 7 of follow-up on a seven-point ordinal scale. The randomized study will recruit participants of either gender above 18 years of age who will test positive for SARS-CoV-2 on Quantitative Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). Pregnant or lactating females, and those with severe respiratory distress, or with serious comorbidities will be excluded. Randomization will be done maintaining concealment of allocation sequence using a computer-generated random number list. The sample size will be subjected to periodic reviews by National Data Safety and Monitoring Board. Ethics and Dissemination: The trial is approved by the National Bioethics Committee (No.4-87/NBC-471-COVID-19-05/20/) and institutional Ethical Review Committee. This clinical trial conducted under Good Clinical Practice is expected to inform patients clinical guidelines for the use of these drugs in newly diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2. Trial Registration: The trial was prospectively registered on April 08, 2020 at clinicaltrials.gov with ID: NCT04338698.

Patient safety attitudes of frontline healthcare workers in Lahore: A multicenter study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate patient safety attitudes of the frontline health workers in hospitals of Lahore, Pakistan. METHODS: A self-administered Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) survey was deployed in five hospitals across Lahore, Pakistan (July 2019 to June 2020). A total of 1250 consecutive consenting nurses and postgraduate trainee physicians of under five years working experience were recruited. Assessment for each of the six subdomains (teamwork climate, safety climate, job satisfaction, stress recognition, perception of management, working conditions) was done on a 0-100 scale. Multivariate analyses examined their relationship with job cadre (nurses and physicians), duration of respondents' work experience (< 2 years, 3 - 4 years, > 4 years), and hospital sector (private and public). RESULTS: The response rate was 97% (1212 individuals; 765 nurses, 447 physicians). Nurses scored less than physicians in teamwork climate (-2.4, 95% CI -4.5 - -0.2, p=0.02) and stress recognition (-10.6, 95% CI -13.5 - -7.7, p<0.001), but more in perception of management (4.2, 95% CI 1.5 - 6.8, p=0.002) and working conditions (3.4, 95% CI 0.66 - 6.2, p=0.01). Increasing work experience was related to greater scores in all subdomains. Private hospitals scored generally higher than public ones. CONCLUSION: Duration of job experience was positively correlated with patient safety attitudes of hospital staff. These finding could serve as the baseline to shape staff perceptions by cadre in both public and private sector hospitals.

Harmonizing research outcomes for polycystic ovary syndrome (HARP), a marathon not a sprint: current challenges and future research need.

Investing in clinical research and evidence-based medicine has helped to improve the care for women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). However, several important questions remain unanswered on the optimal prevention and management strategies for PCOS. Addressing this uncertainty is often hindered by suboptimal research conduct leading to inefficient evidence synthesis and research wastage. PCOS research is often practised by varied specialized teams in silo leading to disharmonious and fragmented efforts neglecting the lifelong impact of PCOS on women's wellbeing. Poor engagement among key stakeholders and lay consumers continues to limit the impact and benefits of research to society. Selective reporting on surrogate outcomes with a 'significant' P-value is a common malpractice in PCOS outputs. Effective adoption of the harmonizing research outcomes for PCOS (HARP) core outcome set is needed to minimize heterogeneity in reporting and promote research excellence. Small single-centre studies offer limited value to assess the varied PCOS phenotypes. Efficient large scale data-sharing is needed to address complex research questions and glean the benefits of big data research. We propose a roadmap to address these challenges and remedy future research need by promoting patient and public involvement in PCOS research to guide research efforts and address real patients' needs; engaging all key stakeholder groups to promote a multi-disciplinary lifelong approach to new research; continuously refining research needs and priorities to revise the knowledge gap and allocate resources judiciously; standardizing outcomes definitions and measurement tools to harmonize reporting and promote excellence in research; and by investing in large data-sharing infrastructure to facilitate big data research and govern ethical data sharing.

Medical management of induced and incomplete first-trimester abortion by non-physicians in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Unsafe abortion is the cause of a substantial number of maternal mortalities and morbidities globally, but specifically in low- and middle-income countries. Medical abortion methods provided by non-physicians may be a way to reduce the burden of unsafe abortions. Currently, only one systematic review comparing non-physicians with physicians for medical abortion exists. However, the review does not have any setting restrictions and newer evidence has since been published. Therefore, this review aims to evaluate the effectiveness, acceptability, and safety of first-trimester abortion managed by non-physicians compared with physicians in low- and middle-income countries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The databases PubMed, Cochrane Library, Global Health Library, and EMBASE were searched using a structured search strategy. Further, the trial registries clinicaltrials.gov and The International Clinical Trial Registry Platform were searched for published and unpublished trials. Randomized controlled trials comparing provision of medical abortion by non-physicians with that by physicians in low- or middle-income countries were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Trials that reported effect estimates on the effectiveness of medical methods on complete abortion were included in the meta-analysis. The protocol was prospectively registered in the PROSPERO database, ID: CRD42020176811. RESULTS: Six papers from four different randomized controlled trials with a total of 4021 participants were included. Two of the four included trials were assessed to have overall low risk of bias. Four papers had outcome data on complete abortion and were included in the meta-analyses. Medical management of first-trimester abortion and medical treatment of incomplete abortion were found to be equally effective when provided by a non-physician as when provided by a physician (risk ratio 1.00; 95% CI 0.99-1.01). Further, the treatment was equally safe, and women were equally satisfied when a non-physician provided the treatment compared with a physician. CONCLUSIONS: Provision of medical abortion or medical treatment for incomplete abortion in the first trimester is equally effective, safe, and acceptable when provided by non-physicians compared with physicians in low- and middle-income countries. We recommend that the task of providing medical abortion and medical treatment for incomplete abortion in low- and middle-income countries should be shared with non-physicians.

Shared decision making in breast cancer screening guidelines: a systematic review of their quality and reporting.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) is a key component of evidence-based and patient-centred care. The aim of this study is to systematically review the quality of SDM proposals in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs) concerning breast cancer (BC) screening. METHODS: Guidances were identified, without language restrictions, using a prospectively planned systematic search (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus and guideline websites) from January 2010 to August 2020. Duplicate data extraction used a 31-item SDM quality assessment tool; reviewer agreement was 98%. RESULTS: SDM appeared only in 38 (49.4%) (33/68 CPGs, 4/9 CSs) documents (overall compliance with the quality tool: mean 5.74, IQR 3-8). CPGs and CSs specifically mentioning the term SDM (n = 12) had higher quality (mean 6.8, IQR 4-9 vs. mean 2.1, IQR 0-3; P = 0.001). No differences were found in mean quality comparing CPGs with CSs (3 vs. 1.6; P = 0.634), use of systematic review (4.2 vs. 2.9; P = 0.929) and publication in a journal (4 vs. 1.9; P = 0.094). Guidances with SDM were more recently reported than those without it (mean 41 vs. 57 months; P = 0.042). CONCLUSION: More than half of all the guidelines did not meet SDM quality criteria. Those that explored it were more recently reported. There is an urgent need for promoting SDM in guidances concerning BC screening issued by institutions, professional associations and medical journals.

Generating translatable evidence to improve patient care: the contribution of human factors.

Generating translatable evidence to improve patient care has proved challenging in reproductive medicine, with many 'add-on' treatments in routine assisted conception clinical practice that have not been reliably tested. This has consequences for patient care; specifically, IVF pregnancy rates have not improved. A change of culture is required in our profession, from indiscriminately applying the latest 'add-on' to large-scale participation in generating reliable translatable evidence.

Shared decision making in breast cancer treatment guidelines: Development of a quality assessment tool and a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: It is not clear whether clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs) are adequately promoting shared decision making (SDM). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the recommendations about SDM in CPGs and CSs concerning breast cancer (BC) treatment. SEARCH STRATEGY: Following protocol registration (Prospero no.: CRD42018106643), CPGs and CSs on BC treatment were identified, without language restrictions, through systematic search of bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, CDSR) and online sources (12 guideline databases and 51 professional society websites) from January 2010 to December 2019. INCLUSION CRITERIA: CPGs and CSs on BC treatment were selected whether published in a journal or in an online document. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: A 31-item SDM quality assessment tool was developed and used to extract data in duplicate. MAIN RESULTS: There were 167 relevant CPGs (139) and CSs (28); SDM was reported in only 40% of the studies. SDM was reported more often in recent publications after 2015 (42/101 (41.6 %) vs 46/66 (69.7 %), P = .0003) but less often in medical journal publications (44/101 (43.5 %) vs 17/66 (25.7 %), P = .009). In CPGs and CSs with SDM, only 8/66 (12%) met one-fifth (6 of 31) of the quality items; only 14/66 (8%) provided clear and precise SDM recommendations. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: SDM descriptions and recommendations in CPGs and CSs concerning BC treatment need improvement. SDM was more frequently reported in CPGs and CSs in recent years, but surprisingly it was less often covered in medical journals, a feature that needs attention.

To image or not in noncyclic breast pain? A systematic review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Investigation of noncyclic mastalgia in women without signs or risk factors for cancer is controversial. An initial imaging strategy can diagnose breast cancer early, potentially leading to better treatment and survival. However, cancer diagnosis is very uncommon in these cases, and this approach can be harmful, as false positives or suspicion results will lead to unneeded interventions and follow-up. The purpose of this review is to analyse the trade-offs between desirable and undesirable consequences of initial imaging tests against clinical follow-up. RECENT FINDINGS: We found seven relevant studies, all observational, with some methodological limitations and very low-quality evidence. They showed low breast cancer prevalence (around 1-2%, increasing with age), high sensitivity to rule out disease but moderate specificity to rule it in using mammography and echography, and lacked evidence on follow-up and final outcomes. SUMMARY: There is a low prevalence of breast cancer in patients with painful breast with negative physical examination, and very little research to inform about the effect of performing or avoiding initial imaging test on outcomes of interest. With such limited evidence, only a weak recommendation to reinforce shared decision making about what should be done in the primary care setting can be made, with the backup of a specialized breast unit.