Efficacy of virtual reality for pain relief in medical procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Effective pain control is crucial to optimise the success of medical procedures. Immersive virtual reality (VR) technology could offer an effective non-invasive, non-pharmacological option to distract patients and reduce their experience of pain. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of Immersive virtual reality (VR) technology in reducing patient's pain perception during various medical procedures by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and SIGLE until December 2022 for all randomised clinical trials (RCT) evaluating any type of VR in patients undergoing any medical procedure. We conducted a random effect meta-analysis summarising standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We evaluated heterogeneity using I 2 and explored it using subgroup and meta-regression analyses. RESULTS: In total, we included 92 RCTs (n = 7133 participants). There was a significant reduction in pain scores with VR across all medical procedures (n = 83, SMD - 0.78, 95% CI - 1.00 to - 0.57, I 2 = 93%, p = < 0.01). Subgroup analysis showed varied reduction in pain scores across trial designs [crossover (n = 13, SMD - 0.86, 95% CI - 1.23 to - 0.49, I 2 = 72%, p = < 0.01) vs parallel RCTs (n = 70, SMD - 0.77, 95% CI - 1.01 to - 0.52, I 2 = 90%, p = < 0.01)]; participant age groups [paediatric (n = 43, SMD - 0.91, 95% CI - 1.26 to - 0.56, I 2 = 87%, p = < 0.01) vs adults (n = 40, SMD - 0.66, 95% CI - 0.94 to - 0.39, I 2 = 89%, p = < 0.01)] or procedures [venepuncture (n = 32, SMD - 0.99, 95% CI - 1.52 to - 0.46, I 2 = 90%, p = < 0.01) vs childbirth (n = 7, SMD - 0.99, 95% CI - 1.59 to - 0.38, I 2 = 88%, p = < 0.01) vs minimally invasive medical procedures (n = 25, SMD - 0.51, 95% CI - 0.79 to - 0.23, I 2 = 85%, p = < 0.01) vs dressing changes in burn patients (n = 19, SMD - 0.8, 95% CI - 1.16 to - 0.45, I 2 = 87%, p = < 0.01)]. We explored heterogeneity using meta-regression which showed no significant impact of different covariates including crossover trials (p = 0.53), minimally invasive procedures (p = 0.37), and among paediatric participants (p = 0.27). Cumulative meta-analysis showed no change in overall effect estimates with the additional RCTs since 2018. CONCLUSIONS: Immersive VR technology offers effective pain control across various medical procedures, albeit statistical heterogeneity. Further research is needed to inform the safe adoption of this technology across different medical disciplines.

Healthcare and research priorities for women with polycystic ovary syndrome in the UK National Health Service: A modified Delphi method.

OBJECTIVE: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a chronic lifelong condition affecting up to 20% of women worldwide. There is limited input from affected women to guide the provision of healthcare services and future research needs. Our objective was to scope the healthcare and research priorities of women with PCOS in the United Kingdom. DESIGN: A three-staged modified Delphi method, consisting of two questionnaires and a consensus meeting involving lay representatives and healthcare professionals. PATIENTS AND MEASUREMENTS: Lay patient representatives of women with PCOS. Participants were asked to identify and rank healthcare and research priorities for their importance. RESULTS: Six hundred and twenty-four lay participants took part in our Delphi method. Over 98% were diagnosed with PCOS (614/624, 98.4%). More than half experienced difficulties to receive a PCOS diagnosis (375/624, 60%), and the majority found it difficult to access specialised PCOS health services in the NHS (594/624, 95%). The top two healthcare priorities included better education for health professionals on the diagnosis and management of PCOS (238/273, 87.1%) and the need to set up specialist PCOS services (234/273, 85.7%). The top two research priorities focused on identifying better treatments for irregular periods (233/273, 85.3%) followed by better tests for early PCOS diagnosis (230/273, 84.2%). CONCLUSIONS: We identified 13 healthcare and 14 research priorities that reflect the current health needs of women with PCOS in the United Kingdom. Adopting these priorities in future healthcare and research planning will help to optimise the health of women with PCOS and increase patient satisfaction.

Multivariable prediction models for fetal macrosomia and large for gestational age: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The identification of large for gestational age (LGA) and macrosomic fetuses is essential for counselling and managing these pregnancies. OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the literature for multivariable prediction models for LGA and macrosomia, assessing the performance, quality and applicability of the included model in clinical practice. SEARCH STRATEGY: MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched until June 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included observational and experimental studies reporting the development and/or validation of any multivariable prediction model for fetal macrosomia and/or LGA. We excluded studies that used a single variable or did not evaluate model performance. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted using the Checklist for critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies checklist. The model performance measures discrimination, calibration and validation were extracted. The quality and completion of reporting within each study was assessed by its adherence to the TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis) checklist. The risk of bias and applicability were measured using PROBAST (Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool). MAIN RESULTS: A total of 8442 citations were identified, with 58 included in the analysis: 32/58 (55.2%) developed, 21/58 (36.2%) developed and internally validated and 2/58 (3.4%) developed and externally validated a model. Only three studies externally validated pre-existing models. Macrosomia and LGA were differentially defined by many studies. In total, 111 multivariable prediction models were developed using 112 different variables. Model discrimination was wide ranging area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC 0.56-0.96) and few studies reported calibration (11/58, 19.0%). Only 5/58 (8.6%) studies had a low risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: There are currently no multivariable prediction models for macrosomia/LGA that are ready for clinical implementation.

Comparing the treatment of endometriosis-related pain by excision of endometriosis or hysterectomy: A multicentre prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of endometriosis excision alone to excision plus hysterectomy, with and without bilateral oophorectomy, for endometriosis-related symptoms. DESIGN: Multicentre prospective cohort. SETTING: Eighty-six specialist endometriosis centres. POPULATION: Women undergoing rectovaginal endometriosis surgery between 2009 and 2021. METHODS: We performed multivariable regression with random effects for patient and centre, controlling for age, BMI, smoking, laparoscopic versus open approach and type of bowel surgery performed, with sensitivity analysis for loss to follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain scores, bowel symptoms and quality-of-life measures. RESULTS: Compared to endometriosis excision alone, women undergoing hysterectomy with conservation of ovaries had greater improvement in non-cyclical pain (MD: 1.41/10, 95% CI: 1.03-1.78, p < 0.001), dyspareunia (MD: 1.12/10, 95% CI: 0.71-1.53, p < 0.001), back pain (MD: 1.29/10, 95% CI: 0.92-1.67, p < 0.001) and quality-of-life scores (MD: 8.77/100, 95% CI: 5.79-11.75, p < 0.001) at 24 months post-operatively. Women undergoing hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy also had greater improvement in non-cyclical pelvic pain (MD: 2.22/10, 95% CI: 1.80-2.63, p < 0.001), dyspareunia (MD: 1.05/10, 95% CI: 0.59-1.52, p < 0.001), back pain (MD: 1.18/10, 95% CI: 0.77-1.59, p < 0.001) and quality of life (MD: 12.41/100, 95% CI: 9.07-15.74, p < 0.001) at 24 months compared to endometriosis excision alone. Compared to hysterectomy with ovarian conservation, hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy was associated with greater improvement in non-cyclical pelvic pain (MD: 0.81/10, 95% CI: 0.32-1.30, p = 0.001) at 24 months and quality of life (MD: 3.74/100, 95% CI: 0.56-6.92, p = 0.021) at 12 months, although this result was sensitive to loss to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who undergo endometriosis excision plus hysterectomy experience greater improvement in pain and quality of life compared to those who have endometriosis excision alone. There are additional benefits of bilateral oophorectomy with hysterectomy, although its value is less clear due to loss of follow-up.

Optimizing intrauterine insemination: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and safety of clinical treatment add-ons.

INTRODUCTION: Intrauterine insemination (IUI) is one of the most widespread fertility treatments. However, IUI protocols vary significantly amongst fertility clinics. Various add-on interventions have been proposed to boost success rates. These are mostly chosen arbitrarily or empirically. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the effectiveness and safety of add-on interventions to the standard IUI protocol and to provide evidence-based recommendations on techniques used to optimize the clinical outcomes of IUI treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analyses were performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A computerized literature search was performed from database inception to May 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included reporting on couples/single women undergoing IUI with any protocol for any indication using partner's or donor sperm. A meta-analysis based on random effects was performed for each outcome and add-on. Three authors independently assessed the trials for quality and risk of bias and overall certainty of evidence. Uncertainties were resolved through consensus. Primary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR) or live birth rate (LBR) per cycle/per woman randomized. Registration number PROSPERO: CRD42022300857. RESULTS: Sixty-six RCTs were included in the analysis (16 305 participants across 20 countries). Vaginal progesterone as luteal phase support in stimulated cycles was found to significantly increase LBR/OPR (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.09-1.72, I2 = 4.9%) (moderate/low certainty of the evidence). Endometrial scratch prior/during stimulated IUI cycles may increase LBR/OPR (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.03-2.01, I2 = 1.8%), but evidence is very uncertain. Results from two studies suggest that follicular phase ovarian stimulation increases LBR/OPR (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.00-1.94, I2 = 0%) (low certainty of evidence). No significant difference was seen for the primary outcome for the other studied interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that vaginal luteal phase progesterone support probably improves LBR/OPR in stimulated IUI treatments. In view of moderate/low certainty of the evidence more research is needed for solid conclusions. Further research is also recommended for the use of endometrial scratch and ovarian stimulation. Future studies should report on results according to subfertility background as it is possible that different add-ons could benefit specific patient groups.

The risk of miscarriage following COVID-19 vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the risk of miscarriage among pregnant women who received any of the COVID-19 vaccines? SUMMARY ANSWER: There is no evidence that COVID-19 vaccines are associated with an increased risk of miscarriage. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the mass roll-out of vaccines helped to boost herd immunity and reduced hospital admissions, morbidity, and mortality. Still, many were concerned about the safety of vaccines for pregnancy, which may have limited their uptake among pregnant women and those planning a pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception until June 2022 using a combination of keywords and MeSH terms. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We included observational and interventional studies that enrolled pregnant women and evaluated any of the available COVID-19 vaccines compared to placebo or no vaccination. We primarily reported on miscarriage in addition to ongoing pregnancy and/or live birth. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: We included data from 21 studies (5 randomized trials and 16 observational studies) reporting on 149 685 women. The pooled rate of miscarriage among women who received a COVID-19 vaccine was 9% (n = 14 749/123 185, 95% CI 0.05-0.14). Compared to those who received a placebo or no vaccination, women who received a COVID-19 vaccine did not have a higher risk of miscarriage (risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% CI 0.89-1.28, I2 35.8%) and had comparable rates for ongoing pregnancy or live birth (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97-1.03, I2 10.72%). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Our analysis was limited to observational evidence with varied reporting, high heterogeneity and risk of bias across included studies, which may limit the generalizability and confidence in our findings. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: COVID-19 vaccines are not associated with an increase in the risk of miscarriage or reduced rates of ongoing pregnancy or live birth among women of reproductive age. The current evidence remains limited and larger population studies are needed to further evaluate the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No direct funding was provided to support this work. M.P.R. was funded by the Medical Research Council Centre for Reproductive Health Grant No: MR/N022556/1. B.H.A.W. hold a personal development award from the National Institute of Health Research in the UK. All authors declare no conflict of interest. REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289098.

In praise of ovulation induction for the management of anovulatory subfertility.

Rapid advances in assisted reproductive technology have revolutionized fertility treatments for couples worldwide seeking a pregnancy. Although this is promising, concerns are emerging over the overuse of unnecessary assisted conception treatments, particularly among couples with anovulatory subfertility. Some experts are calling for the cessation of ovulation induction as the primary treatment of anovulatory subfertility in favour of more sophisticated assisted conception treatments. In the absence of other causes of subfertility, ovulation induction in patients with type 1 and type 2 anovulation disorders can achieve an up to 80% ovulation rate with a 40% cumulative pregnancy rate and few adverse effects. Considering the various risks and high costs associated with assisted reproductive technology treatments, it is hard to argue for their cost-effectiveness when simpler, safer and cheaper pharmacological ovulation induction could achieve comparable pregnancy rates. We argue here for the safe, effective and ethical use of ovulation induction in this population, supplemented by a judicious use of assisted conception treatments. We emphasize the essential role of ovulation induction as a first-line intervention for couples with anovulatory subfertility delivered within a patient-centred multidisciplinary care model and with a clear escalation pathway to use assisted reproductive technology treatments based on the person's response, characteristics and treatment preference.

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.

Effectiveness of intrapartum fetal surveillance to improve maternal and neonatal outcomes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cesarean delivery is the most common surgical procedure worldwide. Intrapartum fetal surveillance is routinely offered to improve neonatal outcomes, but the effects of different methods on the risk of emergency cesarean deliveries remains uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of different types of fetal surveillance. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL until June 1, 2020, for randomized trials evaluating any intrapartum fetal surveillance method. We performed a network meta-analysis within a frequentist framework. We assessed the quality and network inconsistency of trials. We reported primarily on intrapartum emergency cesarean deliveries and other secondary maternal and neonatal outcomes using risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We included 33 trials (118 863 patients) evaluating intermittent auscultation with Pinard stethoscope/handheld Doppler (IA), cardiotocography (CTG), computerized cardiotocography (cCTG), CTG with fetal scalp lactate (CTG-lactate), CTG with fetal scalp pH analysis (CTG-FBS), CTG with fetal pulse oximetry (FPO-CTG), CTG with fetal heart electrocardiogram (CTG-STAN) and their combinations. Intermittent auscultation reduced the risk of emergency cesarean deliveries compared with other types of surveillance (IA v. CTG: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72-0.97; IA v. CTG-FBS: RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.63-0.80; IA v.CTG-lactate: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.64-0.92; IA v. FPO-CTG: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65-0.87; IA v.FPO-CTG-FBS: RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67-0.99; cCTG-FBS v. IA: RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.04-1.42), except STAN-CTG-FBS (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.98-1.40). There was a similar reduction observed for emergency cesarean deliveries for fetal distress. None of the evaluated methods was associated with a reduced risk of neonatal acidemia, neonatal unit admissions, Apgar scores or perinatal death. INTERPRETATION: Compared with other types of fetal surveillance, intermittent auscultation seems to reduce emergency cesarean deliveries in labour without increasing adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes.

Quantifying CD138+ cells in the endometrium to assess chronic endometritis in women at risk of recurrent pregnancy loss: A prospective cohort study and rapid review.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the value of uterine CD138+ cells, as a marker of chronic endometritis, in predicting subsequent reproductive outcome in women with history of recurrent pregnancy loss. DESIGN: A prospective longitudinal study. SETTING: Tertiary specialized clinic. PATIENTS: Women with history of recurrent pregnancy loss or implantation failure over a 12-months follow-up period. INTERVENTION: We quantified the CD138+ cells/high powered field (hpf) using immunohistochemistry and image analysis of endometrial biopsies obtained during the secretory stage post ovulation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Live birth and subsequent pregnancy loss. We calculated the receiver operator curve for predicting subsequent pregnancy loss and reported using relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: We enrolled 344 women of whom 88 became pregnant (88/344, 25.5%). Half of them had a subsequent live birth (47/88, 53%) and the rest lost their pregnancy (41/88, 46%). The median CD138+ score was significantly lower in the live birth group (P < 0.005) and women with a CD138+ score ≥ 16/hpf had a higher risk of subsequent miscarriage (RR 10.0, 95% CI 2.78-36.02). CD138+ cells count showed a good prediction for subsequent pregnancy loss in high-risk women with an area under the curve of 0.75 (95% CI 0.59-0.82, P = 0.01). A cut-off value of 4-6 cells/hpf offered the best predictive accuracy with higher scores predicting worse reproductive outcome. Our findings are limited by the small event rate and the sample size of our cohort. CONCLUSION: Quantifying CD138+ cells by immunohistochemistry in women with a history of recurrent pregnancy loss is helpful to diagnose chronic endometritis and predict subsequent reproductive outcome.

Intralipid infusion at time of embryo transfer in women with history of recurrent implantation failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) affects 10% of couples undergoing assisted conception, often due to poor endometrial receptivity. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of Intra-venous intralipid (IVI) in improving pregnancy rates in women with history of RIF using. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for any randomized trials evaluating the use of IVI at the time of embryo transfer in women undergoing assisted conception until September 2020. We extracted data in duplicate and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tools. We meta-analyzed data using a random effect model. RESULTS: We included five randomized trials reporting on 843 women with an overall moderate risk of bias. All trials used 20% IVI solution at the time of embryo transfer compared to normal saline infusion or no intervention (routine care). The IVI group had a higher chance of clinical pregnancy (172 vs 119, risk ratio [RR] 1.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-2.07, I2 44.2%) and live birth (132 vs 73, RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.42-2.35, I2 0%) post treatment compared to no intervention. Our findings are limited by the small sample size and the variations in treatment protocols and population characteristics. CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence to support the use of IVI at the time of embryo transfer in women with the history of RIF. More research is needed before adopting it in clinical practice.

Harmonising research outcomes for polycystic ovary syndrome: an international multi-stakeholder core outcome set.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the key core outcomes to be reported in studies on polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS)? SUMMARY ANSWER: We identified 3 generic and 30 specific core outcomes in 6 specialist domains: metabolic (8), reproductive (7), pregnancy (10), oncological (1), psychological (1) and long-term outcomes (1). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Research reporting PCOS is heterogeneous with high variation in outcome selection, definition and quality. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Evidence synthesis and a modified Delphi method with e-surveys were used as well as a consultation meeting. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Overall, 71 health professionals and 123 lay consumers (women with lived experience of PCOS and members of advocacy and peer support groups) from 17 high-, middle- and low-income countries were involved in this analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The final core outcome set included 3 generic outcomes (BMI, quality of life, treatment satisfaction) that are applicable to all studies on women with PCOS and 30 specific outcomes that were categorised into six specialist domains: 8 metabolic outcomes (waist circumference, type 2 diabetes, insulin resistance, impaired glucose tolerance, hypertension, coronary heart disease, lipid profile, venous thromboembolic disease); 7 reproductive outcomes [viable pregnancy (confirmed by ultrasound including singleton, twins and higher multiples), clinical and biochemical hyperandrogenism, menstrual regularity, reproductive hormonal profile, chronic anovulation, ovulation stimulation success including the number of stimulated follicles ≥ 12 mm, incidence and severity of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome]; 10 pregnancy outcomes (live birth, miscarriage, stillbirth, neonatal mortality, gestational weight gain, gestational diabetes, preterm birth, hypertensive disease in pregnancy, baby birth weight, major congenital abnormalities); 3 psychological outcomes (depression, anxiety, eating disorders); 1 oncological (abnormal endometrial proliferation including atypical endometrial hyperplasia and endometrial cancer); and 1 outcome in the long-term domain (long-term offspring metabolic and developmental outcomes). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We involved lay consumers in all stages of study through e-surveys but not through focus groups, thereby limiting our understanding of their choices. We did not address the variations in the definitions and measurement tools for some of the core outcomes. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Implementing this core outcome set in future studies on women with PCOS will improve the quality of reporting and aid evidence synthesis. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Evidence synthesis was funded through the Australian government, National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Centre for Research Excellence in PCOS, and H.T. is funded through an NHMRC fellowship. B.H.A. is funded through an NIHR lectureship. All authors have no competing interest to declare.

Variations in long-term outcome reporting among offspring followed up after lifestyle interventions in pregnancy: a systematic review.

Background Mothers and their offspring may benefit from lifestyle interventions during pregnancy. We systematically reviewed the literature to map and evaluate the quality of long-term offspring outcomes in follow-up cohorts of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Cochrane Central (until March 2019) for all RCTs evaluating any lifestyle (diet or exercise) intervention during pregnancy and their follow-up cohorts. Two reviews evaluated the extracted outcomes using two standardised assessment tools, one for quality of reporting (score range 0-6) and another for the variation in outcome selection. We extracted data in duplicate and reported using natural frequencies, medians, ranges, means and standard deviation (SD). Results We captured 30 long-term offspring outcomes reported in six articles (four studies). Offspring anthropometric measurements were the most commonly reported outcomes. There was a large variation in the measurement tools used. The mean overall quality score for outcome reporting was 3.33 (SD 1.24), with poor reporting of secondary outcomes and limited justification for the choice of the reported outcomes. Most studies showed selective reporting for both their primary and secondary outcomes. Conclusion The quality of reporting for long-term offspring outcomes following lifestyle interventions in pregnancy is varied with evidence of selective outcome reporting. Developing a core outcome set will help to reduce the variations in outcome reporting to optimise future research.

Informing treatment decisions through meta-analysis: to network or not?

Evidence from randomised trials and their meta-analyses is typically formed of head-to-head comparisons of a couple of treatments; multiarm trials are infrequent. However, in real-life healthcare, there are many more than two treatment options for a particular condition. To be relevant for the shop-floor of practice, evidence-based medicine requires the use a comprehensive approach to compile, compare and contrast evidence on all options in one synthesis. Network meta-analysis (NMA) offers exactly such a solution. It generates a rank order of the available treatments for practitioners and policymakers that has the merit of objectivity. However, reviewers should make transparent the limitations of NMA as it uses direct and indirect comparisons, inevitably collating data with a certain degree of heterogeneity. This approach is increasingly being deployed to underpin evidence syntheses for incorporating research into practice.

Use of dietary assessment tools in randomized trials evaluating diet-based interventions in pregnancy: a systematic review of literature.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Accurate assessment of dietary intake in interventional trials is the key to evaluate changes in dietary behaviour and compliance. We evaluated the use of dietary assessment tools in randomized trials on diet-based interventions in pregnancy by a systematic review. RECENT FINDINGS: We updated our previous search (until January 2012) on trials of diet and lifestyle interventions in pregnancy using Medline and EMBASE up to December 2015. Two independent reviewers undertook study selection and data extraction. We assessed the characteristics of dietary assessment tools, the timing and frequency of use and any validation undertaken.Two-thirds (39/58, 67%) of the included studies used some form of tools to assess dietary intake. Multiple days' food diaries were the most commonly used (23/39, 59%). Three studies (3/39, 8%) validated the used tools in a pregnant population. Three studies (3/39, 8%) prespecified the criteria for adherence to the intervention. The use of dietary assessment tools was not associated with study quality, year of publication, journal impact factor, type of journal and the study sample size. SUMMARY: Although self-reporting dietary assessment tools are widely used in interventional dietary trials in pregnancy, the quality and applicability of existing tools are low.

Rotational vaginal delivery with Kielland's forceps: a systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness and safety outcomes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The use of Kielland's forceps has declined significantly in the last three decades. There is a lack of quality evidence on potential benefits and harms associated with using these forceps. We have performed a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of using Kielland's forceps. RECENT FINDINGS: We have searched electronic databases for all clinical studies reporting primary data on using Kielland's forceps and assessed their risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We have pooled the event rate of adverse outcomes reported following the use of Kielland's forceps including a direct comparison to rotational ventouse. In total we included 23 studies. Direct comparison meta-analysis revealed higher failure rate with rotational ventouse compared with Kielland's. There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of adverse maternal outcomes between the two groups. There was higher risk of neonatal trauma in the ventouse group, but no significant difference in other neonatal outcomes. SUMMARY: Kielland's forceps have a high success rate with relatively low adverse outcomes despite their use being controversial. In comparison to rotational ventouse, Kielland's forceps have higher efficacy with less risk of neonatal trauma.