Evidence-informed guidelines in oral health: insights from a systematic survey.

BACKGROUND: Oral diseases are a major global public health problem, impacting the quality of life of those affected. While consensus exists on the importance of high-quality, evidence-informed guidelines to inform practice and public health decisions in medicine, appropriate methodologies and standards are not commonly adhered to among producers of oral health guidelines. This study aimed to systematically identify organizations that develop evidence-informed guidelines in oral health globally and survey the methodological process followed to formulate recommendations. METHODS: We searched numerous electronic databases, guideline repositories, and websites of guideline developers, scientific societies, and international organizations (January 2012-October 2023) to identify organizations that develop guidelines addressing any oral health topic and that explicitly declare the inclusion of research evidence in their development. Pairs of reviewers independently evaluated potentially eligible organizations according to predefined selection criteria and extracted data about the organization's characteristics, key features of their guidelines, and the process followed when formulating formal recommendations. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze and summarize data. RESULTS: We included 46 organizations that developed evidence-informed guidelines in oral health. The organizations were mainly professional associations and scientific societies (67%), followed by governmental organizations (28%). In total, organizations produced 55 different guideline document types, most of them containing recommendations for clinical practice (77%). Panels were primarily composed of healthcare professionals (87%), followed by research methodologists (40%), policymakers (24%), and patient partners (18%). Most (60%) of the guidelines reported their funding source, but only one out of three (33%) included a conflict of interest (COI) policy management. The methodology used in the 55 guideline document types varied across the organizations, but only 19 (35%) contained formal recommendations. Half (51%) of the guideline documents referred to a methodology handbook, 46% suggested a structured approach or system for rating the certainty of the evidence and the strength of recommendations, and 37% mentioned using a framework to move from evidence to decisions, with the GRADE-EtD being the most widely used (27%). CONCLUSION: Our findings underscore the need for alignment and standardization of both terminology and methodologies used in oral health guidelines with current international standards to formulate trustworthy recommendations.

Is exposure to pollen a risk factor for moderate and severe asthma exacerbations?

Limited number of studies have focused on the impact of pollen exposure on asthma. As a part of the EAACI Guidelines on Environment Science, this first systematic review on the relationship of pollen exposure to asthma exacerbations aimed to bridge this knowledge gap in view of implementing recommendations of prevention. We searched electronic iPubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases using a set of MeSH terms and related synonyms and identified 73 eligible studies that were included for systemic review. When possible, meta-analyses were conducted. Overall meta-analysis suggests that outdoor pollen exposure may have an effect on asthma exacerbation, but caution is needed due to the low number of studies and their heterogeneity. The strongest associations were found between asthma attacks, asthma-related ED admissions or hospitalizations, and an increase in grass pollen concentration in the previous 2-day overall in children aged less than 18 years of age. Tree pollen may increase asthma-related ED visits or admissions lagged up to 7-day overall in individuals younger than 18 years. Rare data show that among subjects under 18 years of age, an exposure to grass pollen lagged up to 3 days may lower lung function. Further research considering effect modifiers of pollen sensitization, hay fever, asthma, air pollution, green spaces, and pre-existing medications is urgently warranted to better evaluate the impacts of pollen on asthma exacerbation. Preventive measures in relation to pollen exposure should be integrated in asthma control as pollen increase continues due to climate change.

Are Cannabis, Cannabis-Derived Products, and Synthetic Cannabinoids a Therapeutic Tool for Rheumatoid Arthritis? A Friendly Summary of the Body of Evidence.

BACKGROUND: Symptom management in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) remains a complex challenge. Widespread use of cannabis-based medicines for a myriad of symptoms has fostered rheumatology patients' interest. However, their safety and efficacy in RA remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to perform a structured summary of the body of evidence in order to determine whether cannabis, cannabis-derived products, and synthetic cannabinoids are an effective treatment for rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: An electronic search in Epistemonikos database was performed to identify systematic reviews and their primary studies that addressed our clinical question. The body of evidence was collected in a pivot table in Epistemonikos. Information and data from the primary studies were extracted from the identified reviews. Finally, extracted data were reanalyzed, and a summary of findings table was generated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: Twenty-six systematic reviews were identified which included in total only 1 randomized trial assessing our clinical question. CONCLUSIONS: Cannabis, cannabis-derived products and synthetic cannabinoids may slightly reduce disease activity in patients with RA. Its use may result in little to no difference in pain reduction and may slightly increase nervous system adverse events. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of cannabis, cannabis-derived products, and synthetic cannabinoids on serious adverse events risk.

COVID-19 transmission during swimming-related activities: a rapid systematic review.

BACKGROUND: There are uncertainties about mitigating strategies for swimming-related activities in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. There is an opportunity to learn from the experience of previous re-openings to better plan the future one. Our objectives are to systematically review the evidence on (1) the association between engaging in swimming-related activities and COVID-19 transmission; and (2) the effects of strategies for preventing COVID-19 transmission during swimming-related activities. METHODS: We conducted a rapid systematic review. We searched in the L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence) platform for COVID-19. The searches covered the period from the inception date of each database until April 19, 2021. We included non-randomized studies for the review on association of COVID-19 transmission and swimming-related activities. We included guidance documents reporting on the strategies for prevention of COVID-19 transmission during swimming-related activities. We also included studies on the efficacy and safety of the strategies. Teams of two reviewers independently assessed article eligibility. For the guidance documents, a single reviewer assessed the eligibility and a second reviewer verified the judgement. Teams of two reviewers extracted data independently. We summarized the findings of included studies narratively. We synthesized information from guidance documents according to the identified topics and subtopics, and presented them in tabular and narrative formats. RESULTS: We identified three studies providing very low certainty evidence for the association between engaging in swimming-related activities and COVID-19 transmission. The analysis of 50 eligible guidance documents identified 11 topics: ensuring social distancing, ensuring personal hygiene, using personal protective equipment, eating and drinking, maintaining the pool, managing frequently touched surfaces, ventilation of indoor spaces, screening and management of sickness, delivering first aid, raising awareness, and vaccination. One study assessing the efficacy of strategies to prevent COVID-19 transmission did not find an association between compliance with precautionary restrictions and COVID-19 transmission. CONCLUSIONS: There are major gaps in the research evidence of relevance to swimming-related activities in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the synthesis of the identified strategies from guidance documents can inform public health management strategies for swimming-related activities, particularly in future re-opening plans.

Epistemonikos: a comprehensive database of systematic reviews for health decision-making.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews allow health decisions to be informed by the best available research evidence. However, their number is proliferating quickly, and many skills are required to identify all the relevant reviews for a specific question. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We screen 10 bibliographic databases on a daily or weekly basis, to identify systematic reviews relevant for health decision-making. Using a machine-based approach developed for this project we select reviews, which are then validated by a network of more than 1000 collaborators. After screening over 1,400,000 records we have identified more than 300,000 systematic reviews, which are now stored in a single place and accessible through an easy-to-use search engine. This makes Epistemonikos the largest database of its kind. CONCLUSIONS: Using a systematic approach, recruiting a broad network of collaborators and implementing automated methods, we developed a one-stop shop for systematic reviews relevant for health decision making.

Barriers to and facilitators for creating, disseminating, implementing, monitoring and evaluating oral health policies in the WHO African region: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To advance oral health policies (OHPs) in the World Health Organization (WHO) African region, barriers to and facilitators for creating, disseminating, implementing, monitoring and evaluating OHPs in the region were examined. METHODS: Global Health, Embase, PubMed, Public Affairs Information Service Index, ABI/Inform, Web of Science, Academic Search Complete, Scopus, Dissertations Global, Google Scholar, WHO's Institutional Repository for Information Sharing (IRIS), the WHO Noncommunicable Diseases Document Repository and the Regional African Index Medicus and African Journals Online were searched. Technical officers at the WHO Regional Office for Africa were contacted. Research studies and policy documents reporting barriers to and facilitators for OHP in the 47 Member States in the WHO African region published between January 2002 and March 2024 in English, French or Portuguese were included. Frequencies were used to summarize quantitative data, and descriptive content analysis was used to code and classify barrier and facilitator statements. RESULTS: Eighty-eight reports, including 55 research articles and 33 policy documents, were included. The vast majority of the research articles and policy documents were country-specific, but they were lacking for most countries. Frequently mentioned barriers across policy at all stages included financial constraints, a limited and poorly organized workforce, deprioritization of oral health, the absence of health information systems, inadequate integration of oral health services within the overarching health system and limited oral health literacy. Facilitators included a renewed commitment to establishing national OHPs, recognition of a need to diversify the oral health workforce, and an increased understanding of the influence of social determinants of health among oral health care providers. CONCLUSIONS: Most countries lack a country-specific body of evidence to assist policymakers in anticipating barriers to and facilitators for OHPs. The barriers and facilitators relevant to disparate subnational, national, and regional conditions and circumstances must be considered to advance the creation, dissemination, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of OHPs in the WHO African region.

Policymakers' perceived barriers and facilitators in the use of research evidence in oral health policies and guidelines: a qualitative study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence-informed oral health policies are crucial to improving patient and population outcomes, but policymakers and organisational leaders infrequently systematically incorporate research evidence. Although there is indirect evidence regarding challenges in other healthcare sectors, the use of evidence-informed oral health policies remains unstudied in oral health. This study aims to assess policymakers' perceived needs, barriers and facilitators in using research evidence to inform policies in oral health. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a qualitative study situated within a phenomenological paradigm. We will conduct semistructured interviews with policymakers (5-10) affiliated with key organisations conducting guidance, policy statements, guidelines or any knowledge transfer deliverables in oral health. Organisations will be sampled purposively and with no geographical restrictions. All interviews will be recorded, and an audio transcript will be generated. Subsequently, a researcher will review and validate the transcripts. Data will be analysed using thematic analysis supported by ATLAS.ti software. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was not sought because the study protocol met the criteria for exemption from such review according to the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of the Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau and the Spanish legislation (Law 14/2007 of 3 July, on biomedical research). Informed consent will be obtained from all subjects involved in this study. The findings of this study will be shared with participating organisations for feedback, disseminated in conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal adopting open science practices. STUDY REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (DOI:10.17605/OSF.IO/W4KG7).

How oral health care organizations formulate actionable statements to inform practice and policy: A protocol for a systematic survey.

Background: Oral diseases are a major global public health problem that impacts the quality of life of those affected. While widespread consensus exists on the importance of high-quality, evidence-informed guidelines to inform practice and public health decisions in medicine, appropriate methodologies and standards are not commonly adhered to among producers of oral health guidelines. This systematic survey aims to identify organizations developing evidence-informed guidelines and policy documents in oral health globally, and describe the methods and processes used. Methods: We will conduct manual searches on the websites of guideline developers, Ministries of Health, and scientific societies. Additionally, we will systematically search electronic databases to identify published guidelines and collect the name of the responsible entity. We will include organizations that regularly develop guidelines on any oral health topic and that explicitly declare the inclusion of research evidence in its development process. Subsequently, we will use a standardized form to extract data about the characteristics of the organization, the characteristics of their guideline or policy documents, and their formal recommendation development processes. These data will be extracted from various sources, such as the organization's official website, the methods section of each guideline, or methodological handbooks. We will use descriptive statistics to analyze the extracted data. Discussion: This systematic survey will synthesize key characteristics and methodologies used by organizations developing evidence-informed guidelines. This study will provide the basis for future development of a sustainable and connected collaborative network for evidence-informed guidelines and policy documents in oral health globally. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, and targeted dissemination of findings with the identified organizations. Our systematic survey represents a necessary first step toward improving the field of oral health policies and guidelines.

Barriers to and facilitators for the creation, dissemination, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of oral health policies in the WHO Africa region: A scoping review protocol.

Background: Evidence-informed oral health policies (OHP) can be instrumental in ending the neglect of oral health globally. When appropriately developed and implemented, OHP can improve the efficiency of healthcare systems and the quality of health outcomes. However, more than half of the countries in the World Health Organization (WHO) African region do not have an oral health policy or even the existence of a policy in need of additional and more national-specific OHP as part of non-communicable diseases and universal health coverage agendas. The objective of this protocol's study is to determine the barriers to and facilitators for the creation, dissemination, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of OHP in the WHO Africa region. Methods: We will conduct a systematic search in Global Health, Embase, PubMed, PAIS, ABI/Inform, Web of Science, Academic Search Complete, Scopus, databases that index gray literature, and the WHO policy repositories. We will include qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research studies and OHP documents published since January 1, 2002, which address stakeholders' perceptions and experiences regarding barriers to and facilitators for the creation, dissemination, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of OHP in countries part of the WHO African region. We will produce descriptive statistics (frequencies and proportions) for quantitative data and conduct descriptive content analysis for qualitative data. Discussion: To effectively establish evidence-based OHP in the WHO African region, it is crucial to recognize existing challenges and opportunities for progress. The findings of this review will be relevant for Chief Dental Officers at ministries of health, administrators of dental schools, or academic institutions in the WHO African region and will inform a stakeholder dialogue meeting in Kenya in November of 2023. Registration: Open Science Framework: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/9KMWR.

Corticosteroids for managing acute pain subsequent to surgical extraction of mandibular third molars: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are used to manage pain after surgical tooth extractions. The authors assessed the effect of corticosteroids on acute postoperative pain in patients undergoing surgical tooth extractions of mandibular third molars. TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: The authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. The authors searched the Epistemonikos database, including MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the US clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) from inception until April 2023. Pairs of reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, then full texts of trials were identified as potentially eligible. After duplicate data abstraction, the authors conducted random-effects meta-analyses. Risk of bias was assessed using Version 2 of the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and certainty of the evidence was determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: Forty randomized controlled trials proved eligible. The evidence suggested that corticosteroids compared with a placebo provided a trivial reduction in pain intensity measured 6 hours (mean difference, 8.79 points lower; 95% CI, 14.8 to 2.77 points lower; low certainty) and 24 hours after surgical tooth extraction (mean difference, 8.89 points lower; 95% CI, 10.71 to 7.06 points lower; very low certainty). The authors found no important difference between corticosteroids and a placebo with regard to incidence of postoperative infection (risk difference, 0%; 95% CI, -1% to 1%; low certainty) and alveolar osteitis (risk difference, 0%; 95% CI, -3% to 4%; very low certainty). PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Low and very low certainty evidence suggests that there is a trivial difference regarding postoperative pain intensity and adverse effects of corticosteroids administered orally, submucosally, or intramuscularly compared with a placebo in patients undergoing third-molar extractions.

Chemo-mechanical removal versus conventional removal for deep caries lesion. / Remoción química – mecánica comparada con remoción total convencional para lesiones de caries dentinarias profundas.

INTRODUCTION: Dental caries have been traditionally managed with the non-selective removal of carious tissue (total removal). However, the adverse effects and fear that this technique produces in patients has promoted the use of more conservative caries removal techniques such as chemo-mechanical removal, but there is still controversy regarding its effectiveness and safety. METHODS: We searched in Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from the systematic reviews, reanalyzed data of primary studies, conducted a meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings tables using the GRADE approach. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We identified seven systematic reviews including 34 studies overall, of which 30 correspond to randomized trials. We concluded that chemo-mechanical caries removal probably reduces the need for anesthesia. Additionally, chemo-mechanical caries removal may decrease the pain experienced by the patient, decrease the risk of restoration failure and increase the time of the procedure for the removal of deep caries, but the certainty of the evidence is low. We are uncertain whether chemo-mechanical caries removal reduces the risk of pulp exposure as the certainty of the evidence has been assessed as very low.

INTRODUCCION: La caries dental tradicionalmente es manejada con la remoción no selectiva del tejido carioso (remoción total). Sin embargo, los efectos adversos y el temor que produce esta técnica en los pacientes ha promovido la utilización de técnicas de remoción de caries más conservadoras como la remoción químico-mecánica, pero aún existe controversia respecto a su efectividad y seguridad. MÉTODOS: Para responder esta pregunta utilizamos Epistemonikos, la mayor base de datos de revisiones sistemáticas en salud, la cual es mantenida mediante búsquedas en múltiples fuentes de información, incluyendo MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, entre otras. Extrajimos los datos desde las revisiones identificadas, analizamos los datos de los estudios primarios, realizamos un metaanálisis y preparamos tablas de resumen de los resultados utilizando el método GRADE. RESULTADOS Y CONCLUSIONES: Identificamos siete revisiones sistemáticas que en conjunto incluyeron 34 estudios primarios, de los cuales 30 corresponden a ensayos aleatorizados. Concluimos que la remoción químico-mecánica de caries probablemente disminuye la necesidad de anestesia. Además, podría disminuir el dolor que experimenta el paciente, disminuir el riesgo del fracaso de la restauración y aumentar el tiempo del procedimiento, pero la certeza de la evidencia es baja. No es posible establecer con claridad si la remoción químico- mecánica disminuye el riesgo de exposición pulpar debido a que la certeza de la evidencia existente ha sido evaluada como muy baja.

Stepwise removal compared to complete removal for deep carious lesions. / Remoción en dos pasos (stepwise) comparado con remoción total para caries dentinarias profundas.

INTRODUCTION: Carious lesions have traditionally been treated by non-selective (complete or total) removal of carious tissue. However, due to its risks and adverse effects, carious tissue removal techniques have been developed, based on the preservation of tooth tissue, including the stepwise removal. The objective of this summary is to clarify the uncertainty about the effectiveness and safety of the stepwise removal technique compared to complete removal. METHODS: To answer this question we used Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by searching multiple sources of information, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from identified reviews, reanalyzed data from primary studies, performed a meta-analysis, and prepared summary tables of results using the GRADE method. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We identified three systematic reviews that included five primary studies, four of them corresponding to randomized trials. We concluded that stepwise removal may reduce the risk of pulp exposure, the risk of signs and symptoms of pulp disease and the risk of restoration failure, but the certainty of the evidence is low.

INTRODUCCION: Las lesiones cariosas han sido tradicionalmente tratadas mediante la remoción total (completa o no selectiva) del tejido cariado. Sin embargo, debido a sus riesgos y efectos adversos, se han desarrollado nuevas técnicas de remoción del tejido cariado, basadas en la conservación del tejido dentario, entre ellas la remoción en dos pasos o stepwise. El objetivo de este resumen es aclarar la incertidumbre sobre la efectividad y la seguridad de la técnica de remoción en dos pasos (stepwise) comparado con la remoción total. MÉTODOS: Para responder esta pregunta utilizamos Epistemonikos, la mayor base de datos de revisiones sistemáticas en salud, la cual es mantenida mediante búsquedas en múltiples fuentes de información, incluyendo MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, entre otras. Extrajimos los datos desde las revisiones identificadas, reanalizamos los datos de los estudios primarios, realizamos un metaanálisis, preparamos tablas de resumen de los resultados utilizando el método GRADE. RESULTADOS Y CONCLUSIONES: Identificamos tres revisiones sistemáticas que en conjunto incluyeron cinco estudios primarios, de los cuales cuatro corresponden a ensayos aleatorizados. Concluimos que la remoción en dos pasos (stepwise) podría disminuir el riesgo de exposición pulpar, el riesgo de aparición de signos y síntomas pulpares y la falla en la restauración, pero la certeza de la evidencia es baja.

Platelet-Rich Fibrin in Third Molar Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocol.

Objective: The objective of this systematic review is to assess the effectiveness and safety of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) in third molar surgery. Data Sources: A comprehensive search strategy is meant to be used in an attempt to identify all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs), ongoing investigation reported in specialty congresses and trials regardless of language or publication status (published, unpublished, in press and in progress). Searches will be conducted in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PUBMED, Embase, Lilacs, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, US National Institutes of Health (NIH), grey literature and in specialized congresses and conferences. Eligibility Criteria: We will include randomized trials evaluating the effect of PRF on wound healing after third molar surgery. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, data extraction and risk of bias assessment using Cochrane "risk of bias" tool. We will pool the results using meta-analysis and will apply the GRADE system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Ethics and Dissemination: As researchers will not access information that could lead to the identification of an individual participant, obtaining ethical approval was waived.

Therapeutic exercise to improve motor function among children with Down Syndrome aged 0 to 3 years: a systematic literature review and meta­analysis.

The effects and the prescription parameters of therapeutic exercise are not clear. For this reason, is needed to determine the effect of therapeutic exercises on the motor function of children with Down Syndrome (DS) aged 0 to 3 years. The present study is systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness outcomes in this population: gait, balance, motor development, fine motor skills, and executive functions. The databases of PubMed, PEDro, EMBASE, SCIELO, Lilacs, Cochrane library were searched from January to December 2019. We recruited Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) which met the inclusion criteria in our study. Six studies and 151 participants were included. Two types of therapeutic exercises, aerobic and neuromuscular, were identified. Both types of exercise were effective in improving outcomes. There were no differences between the modes of application of the exercise. No differences were identified between the treadmill and the physiotherapy plan for the reduction of the time to reach independent walking, Mean Difference (MD) 46.79, 95% Confidence Interval (IC) (- 32.60, 126.19), nor for the increase in walking speed MD 0.10 IC (- 0.02, 0.21) m/s. This study suggests that aerobic exercise therapy has a potentially effective role to promote the gait and motor development of children with DS aged 0 to 3 years when it is applied using a treadmill with a frequency of 5 days, a duration of 6-8 min, and an intensity of between 0.2 and 0.5 m/s. Studies with less heterogeneity and larger sample sizes are required.

Effects of screening strategies to detect carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to summarize the evidence on the effects of screening strategies to detect carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria (Enterobacteriaceae, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa). METHODS: Eligible studies were randomized trials, non-randomized controlled trials, controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time series. We conducted searches in CENTRAL, PUBMED, Embase, Epistemonikos, and in multiple databases available in the Virtual Health Library (LILACS, Scielo, WHO IBECS, and PAHO IBECS). All the searches covered the period until 4 June 2021. No date or language restrictions were applied. Two reviewers independently evaluated potentially eligible studies according to predefined selection criteria, and extracted data on study characteristics, methods, outcomes, and risk of bias, using a predesigned standardized form. When possible, we intended to conduct meta-analyses using a random-effect model. We assessed the certainty of the evidence (CoE) and summarized the results using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Our search strategy yielded 57,451 references. No randomized trials were identified. Sixteen studies (one controlled before-after study and 15 interrupted time series) met our inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Most studies were conducted in tertiary care general hospitals from the United States, Europe, and Asia. Eleven studies included adult patients hospitalized in general wards and intensive care units, one was carried out in a neonatal intensive care unit, two in hematology or oncology units, and one in a solid organ transplantation department. Eleven studies were conducted in the setting of an outbreak. Regarding the detection strategy used, all studies included screening strategies for high-risk patients at the moment of admission and 7 studies reported a contact surveillance strategy. Most studies were conducted in settings where infection prevention and control measures were concomitantly installed or reinforced. Data were not suitable for meta-analysis, so the results were presented as a narrative synthesis. Most studies showed a decline in the prevalence of both infection and colonization rates after the implementation of a policy of active surveillance, but the CoE is low. Screening strategies may result in little to no difference in the risk of all-cause mortality and the length of hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: Existing evidence may favor the use of surveillance culture to carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria, but its quality is poor, so solid conclusions cannot be drawn. Well-conducted randomized trials or high-quality quasi-experimental studies are needed to improve the certainty of the existing evidence. These studies should assess the effect of the addition of screening strategies as a single intervention and measure clinically important outcomes such as infection, length of hospital stay, and mortality.

COVID-19 Living Overview of Evidence repository is highly comprehensive and can be used as a single source for COVID-19 studies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 Living OVerview of Evidence (COVID-19 L·OVE) is a public repository and classification platform for COVID-19 articles. The repository contains more than 430,000 articles as of September 20, 2021 and intends to provide a one-stop shop for COVID-19 evidence. Considering that systematic reviews conduct high-quality searches, this study assesses the comprehensiveness and currency of the repository against the total number of studies in a representative sample of COVID-19 systematic reviews. METHODS: Our sample was generated from all the studies included in the systematic reviews of COVID-19 published during April 2021. We estimated the comprehensiveness of COVID-19 L·OVE repository by determining how many of the individual studies in the sample were included in the COVID-19 L·OVE repository. We estimated the currency as the percentage of studies that was available in the COVID-19 L·OVE repository at the time the systematic reviews conducted their own search. RESULTS: We identified 83 eligible systematic reviews that included 2,132 studies. COVID-19 L·OVE had an overall comprehensiveness of 99.67% (2,125/2,132). The overall currency of the repository, that is, the proportion of articles that would have been obtained if the search of the reviews was conducted in COVID-19 L·OVE instead of searching the original sources, was 96.48% (2,057/2,132). Both the comprehensiveness and the currency were 100% for randomized trials (82/82). CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 L·OVE repository is highly comprehensive and current. Using this repository instead of traditional manual searches in multiple databases can save a great amount of work to people conducting systematic reviews and would improve the comprehensiveness and timeliness of evidence syntheses. This tool is particularly important for supporting living evidence synthesis processes.

Consistency of covid-19 trial preprints with published reports and impact for decision making: retrospective review.

Objective: To assess the trustworthiness (ie, complete and consistent reporting of key methods and results between preprint and published trial reports) and impact (ie, effects of preprints on meta-analytic estimates and the certainty of evidence) of preprint trial reports during the covid-19 pandemic. Design: Retrospective review. Data sources: World Health Organization covid-19 database and the Living Overview of the Evidence (L-OVE) covid-19 platform by the Epistemonikos Foundation (up to 3 August 2021). Main outcome measures: Comparison of characteristics of covid-19 trials with and without preprints, estimates of time to publication of covid-19 preprints, and description of differences in reporting of key methods and results between preprints and their later publications. For the effects of eight treatments on mortality and mechanical ventilation, the study comprised meta-analyses including preprints and excluding preprints at one, three, and six months after the first trial addressing the treatment became available either as a preprint or publication (120 meta-analyses in total, 60 of which included preprints and 60 of which excluded preprints) and assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE framework. Results: Of 356 trials included in the study, 101 were only available as preprints, 181 as journal publications, and 74 as preprints first and subsequently published in journals. The median time to publication of preprints was about six months. Key methods and results showed few important differences between trial preprints and their subsequent published reports. Apart from two (3.3%) of 60 comparisons, point estimates were consistent between meta-analyses including preprints versus those excluding preprints as to whether they indicated benefit, no appreciable effect, or harm. For nine (15%) of 60 comparisons, the rating of the certainty of evidence was different when preprints were included versus being excluded-the certainty of evidence including preprints was higher in four comparisons and lower in five comparisons. Conclusion: No compelling evidence indicates that preprints provide results that are inconsistent with published papers. Preprints remain the only source of findings of many trials for several months-an unsuitable length of time in a health emergency that is not conducive to treating patients with timely evidence. The inclusion of preprints could affect the results of meta-analyses and the certainty of evidence. Evidence users should be encouraged to consider data from preprints.

Pulmonary rehabilitation for COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol. / Rehabilitación pulmonar en COVID-19: protocolo de una revisión sistemática viva.

OBJECTIVE: This living systematic review aims to provide a timely, rigorous and continuously updated summary of the evidence available on the role of pulmonary rehabilitation in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. DESIGN: This is the protocol of a living systematic review. DATA SOURCES: We will conduct searches in the L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence) platform for COVID-19, a system that maps PICO questions to a repository maintained through regular searches in electronic databases, preprint servers, trial registries and other resources relevant to COVID-19. No date or language restrictions will be applied. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES AND METHODS: We adapted an already published common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question. We will include randomized trials evaluating the effect of pulmonary rehabilitation as monotherapy or in combination with other interventions-versus sham or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will pool the results using meta-analysis and will apply the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.

OBJETIVO: Proporcionar un resumen oportuno, riguroso y continuamente actualizado de la evidencia disponible sobre el papel de la rehabilitación pulmonar en el tratamiento de los pacientes con COVID-19. DISEÑO: Es el protocolo de una revisión sistemática viva. FUENTE DE DATOS: Realizaremos búsquedas en la plataforma L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence) para COVID-19, un sistema que mapea los componentes de las preguntas de investigación (PICO) en un repositorio mantenido a través de búsquedas regulares en bases de datos electrónicas, servidores de pre-impresión, registros de ensayos y otros recursos relevantes para COVID-19. No se aplicarán restricciones de fecha ni de idioma. CRITERIOS DE ELEGIBILIDAD PARA LA SELECCIÓN DE ESTUDIOS Y MÉTODOS: Se adaptó un protocolo común ya publicado para revisiones sistemáticas paralelas múltiples a las especificidades de la pregunta. Se incluirán ensayos aleatorios que evalúen el efecto de la rehabilitación pulmonar como monoterapia o en combinación con otras intervenciones frente a un tratamiento simulado o ningún tratamiento en pacientes con COVID-19. Dos revisores examinarán de forma independiente cada estudio para determinar su elegibilidad, extraerán los datos y evaluarán el riesgo de sesgo. Se agruparán los resultados mediante un metaanálisis y se aplicará el sistema Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) para evaluar la certeza de las pruebas para cada resultado. ÉTICA Y DIFUSIÓN: No se considera necesaria la aprobación ética. Los resultados de esta revisión se difundirán ampliamente a través de publicaciones revisadas por pares, redes sociales y medios de comunicación tradicionales.

Perceived Stress in Dentists and Dental Students of Latin America and the Caribbean during the Mandatory Social Isolation Measures for the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study.

This study aims to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically considering the mandatory social isolation measures implemented, on the perceived stress of a sample of dentists and dental students from Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as the associated sociodemographic and pandemic-related variables. A cross-sectional survey was conducted with a sample of 2036 dentists and dental students (1433 women). For the main outcome, the 14-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-14) was used. The survey also questioned sociodemographic aspects, questions on the COVID-19 pandemic, health variables, and habits. Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses (linear regression) were applied to observe the factors associated with perceived stress. The PSS-14 mean score was 24.76 (±11.76). Hierarchical regression models showed significant variables associated with the PSS-14 scores: income level during mandatory social isolation, having older adults under care during mandatory social isolation, self-perceived level of concern regarding COVID-19, self-perceived health, Coffee consumption during mandatory social isolation. In general terms, the pandemic has influenced the personal, social, labor, and everyday life of dental staff and affected the mental health of this population specifically when perceived stress is considered. Public policies, strategies, and mental health surveillance systems are required for this population.

Improving Social Justice in COVID-19 Health Research: Interim Guidelines for Reporting Health Equity in Observational Studies.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the global imperative to address health inequities. Observational studies are a valuable source of evidence for real-world effects and impacts of implementing COVID-19 policies on the redistribution of inequities. We assembled a diverse global multi-disciplinary team to develop interim guidance for improving transparency in reporting health equity in COVID-19 observational studies. We identified 14 areas in the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) checklist that need additional detail to encourage transparent reporting of health equity. We searched for examples of COVID-19 observational studies that analysed and reported health equity analysis across one or more social determinants of health. We engaged with Indigenous stakeholders and others groups experiencing health inequities to co-produce this guidance and to bring an intersectional lens. Taking health equity and social determinants of health into account contributes to the clinical and epidemiological understanding of the disease, identifying specific needs and supporting decision-making processes. Stakeholders are encouraged to consider using this guidance on observational research to help provide evidence to close the inequitable gaps in health outcomes.