Prevalence of somatic symptoms among Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) survivors in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Many Ebola virus disease (EVD) survivors have reported somatic and neuropsychological symptoms after discharge from the Ebola Treatment Unit (ETU). Since the 2014-2016 Ebola epidemic in West Africa, various studies have investigated and identified these symptoms. Evidence on somatic symptoms is widely available in the literature, however, there is no concise overview of the prevalence across different time intervals. METHODS: This meta-analysis was conducted following the (PRISMA) guidelines. A database search was conducted to identify original studies that reported the prevalence of symptoms. The primary outcome measure was the prevalence rate of several somatic symptoms. Results were pooled, and prevalence rates were assessed over time, to elucidate any particular trends. RESULTS: We included 23 studies (5,714 participants). The pooled prevalence was: arthralgia 50% (95% CI: 41%-59%); headache 44% (95% CI: 36%-52%); myalgia 32% (95% CI: 26%-38%); abdominal pain 27% (95% CI: 15%-39%); fatigue 25% (95% CI: 19%-31%); numbness of feet 16% (95% CI: 14%-18%); numbness of hands 12% (95% CI: 10%-14%) and hearing loss 9% (95% CI: 5%-12%). Prevalence across different time intervals revealed significant patterns. All the symptoms persisted for more than 2 years after discharge except for abdominal pain. CONCLUSION: The pooled prevalence rates of somatic symptoms are notably high. Arthralgia and headache are the most prevalent of the symptoms, with hearing loss and numbness in hands and feet being the least. We found that arthralgia, myalgia, and abdominal pain decreased over time. However, headache, fatigue, numbness of hands and feet, and hearing loss increased over time.

Reporting quality of meta-analyses in acupuncture: Investigating adherence to the PRISMA statement.

Although Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Acupuncture (PRISMA-A) checklists had been in use for several years, compliance rate was still not optimistic. We investigated the quality of reporting for meta-analyses of acupuncture published in PubMed. We compared the compliance rate for the quality of reporting following the publication of both the PRISMA and PRISMA-A recommendations. We searched PubMed for articles published between January 1st, 2020 and December 31st, 2022, after Endnote X9 document management software and manual screening, 180 meta-analyses of acupuncture were selected as samples. The PRISMA, and PRISMA-A checklists were used to evaluate the quality of the literature. Data were collected using a standard form. Pearson χ2 test and/or Fisher exact test were used to assess differences in reporting among groups. Logistic regression is used to calculate OR and its 95% CI. The total reported compliance rate of all items in the PRISMA list was 61.3%, and the reported compliance rate of the items with a compliance rate of <50% accounted for 35.71% of the total items. The total reported coincidence rate of all items in the PRISMA-A was 56.9%, and the reported coincidence rate of the items with a reported coincidence rate of <50% accounted for 31.25% of all the items. The compliance rate of the published research to PRISMA or PRISMA-A has no statistical difference between the Journal Citation Reports partition (Quarter1-Quarter2) and Journal Citation Reports partition (Quarter3-Qurater4) (P > .05). Regardless of the level of journals published, have obvious deficiencies in the details of the study, the reference basis for the design of the study, the analysis method, the degree of strictness, the scientific nature, and other aspects. We must strengthen education on the standardization of research reports.

A comprehensive review on immune checkpoint inhibitors induced cardiotoxicity characteristics and associated factors.

Newly approved cancer drugs called ICIs have shown remarkable success in improving patient survival rates, but they also have the potential for inflammatory and immune-related side effects, including those affecting the cardiovascular system. Research has been conducted to understand the development of these toxicities and identify risk factors. This review focuses on the characteristics of ICI-induced cardiotoxicity and discusses the reported risk factors. It is important for cardio-oncologists to understand the basic concepts of these drugs to better understand how cardiotoxicities occur. It might be hard to find reports, where all patients treated with ICIs had developed cardiac toxicity, because there could be other existing and variable factors that influence the likelihood or risk of developing cardiotoxicity during treatment. Various clinical parameters have been explored as potential risk factors, and further investigation is needed through large-scale studies.

Treatment of multiple myeloma based on autologous stem cell transplant: An overview of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Multiple myeloma (MM) is a malignant plasma cell disease. In recent years, several systematic reviews, and meta-analyses have been published on treatment protocols, including autologous stem cell transplantation for MM. METHODS: Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched to systematically summarize the quality of the methodology and evidence of meta-analyses regarding treatment of MM including autologous stem cell transplantation. RESULTS: Total 11 meta-analyses were included. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses evaluation revealed that the quality of included reviews was affected by possible unevaluated bias between studies and the lack of protocol and registration. The AMSTAR2 scale indicated that the quality of the methodology of included reviews ranged from very low to moderate. The grading, assessment, development, and evaluation of recommendations evaluation showed that among the included outcome indicators, most of them are of low quality. CONCLUSION: This overview suggested that the combination of drugs has improved patient survival rates, efficacy and safety compared with the standard regimen. However, the strength of the evidence is uneven and due to methodological errors, the results should be interpreted with caution in order to provide a reference for further improvement of the study design. The methodological quality of the relevant meta-analysis needs to be further improved.