Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Transl Pediatr ; 6(1): 18-26, 2017 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28164026

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Completing large systematic reviews and maintaining them up to date poses significant challenges. This is mainly due to the toll required of a small group of experts to screen and extract potentially eligible citations. Automated approaches have failed so far in providing an accessible and adaptable tool to the research community. Over the past decade, crowdsourcing has become attractive in the scientific field, and implementing it in citation screening could save the investigative team significant work and decrease the time to publication. METHODS: Citations from the 2015 update of a pediatrics vitamin D systematic review were uploaded to an online platform designed for crowdsourcing the screening process (http://www.CHEORI.org/en/CrowdScreenOverview). Three sets of exclusion criteria were used for screening, with a review of abstracts at level one, and full-text eligibility determined through two screening stages. Two trained reviewers, who participated in the initial systematic review, established citation eligibility. In parallel, each citation received four independent assessments from an untrained crowd with a medical background. Citations were retained or excluded if they received three congruent assessments. Otherwise, they were reviewed by the principal investigator. Measured outcomes included sensitivity of the crowd to retain eligible studies, and potential work saved defined as citations sorted by the crowd (excluded or retained) without involvement of the principal investigator. RESULTS: A total of 148 citations for screening were identified, of which 20 met eligibility criteria (true positives). The four reviewers from the crowd agreed completely on 63% (95% CI: 57-69%) of assessments, and achieved a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 88-100%) and a specificity of 99% (95% CI: 96-100%). Potential work saved to the research team was 84% (95% CI: 77-89%) at the abstract screening stage, and 73% (95% CI: 67-79%) through all three levels. In addition, different thresholds for citation retention and exclusion were assessed. With an algorithm favoring sensitivity (citation excluded only if all four reviewers agree), sensitivity was maintained at 100%, with a decrease of potential work saved to 66% (95% CI: 59-71%). In contrast, increasing the threshold required for retention (exclude all citations not obtaining 3/4 retain assessments) decreased sensitivity to 85% (95% CI: 65-96%), while improving potential workload saved to 92% (95% CI: 88-95%). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the accuracy of crowdsourcing for systematic review citations screening, with retention of all eligible articles and a significant reduction in the work required from the investigative team. Together, these two findings suggest that crowdsourcing could represent a significant advancement in the area of systematic review. Future directions include further study to assess validity across medical fields and determination of the capacity of a non-medical crowd.

2.
PeerJ ; 4: e1701, 2016.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26966655

RESUMEN

Background. Due to inadequate UV exposure, intake of small quantities of vitamin D is recommended to prevent musculoskeletal disease. Both basic science and observational literature strongly suggest that higher doses may benefit specific populations and have non-musculoskeletal roles. Evaluating the evidence surrounding high dose supplementation can be challenging given a relatively large and growing body of clinical trial evidence spanning time, geography, populations and dosing regimens. Study objectives were to identify and summarize the clinical trial literature, recognize areas with high quality evidence, and develop a resource database that makes the literature more immediately accessible to end users. Methods. Medline (1946 to January 2015), Embase (1974 to January 2015), and Cochrane databases (January 2015), were searched for trials. All pediatric (0-18 years) trials administering doses higher than 400 IU (<1 year) or 600 IU (≥1 year) were included. Data was extracted independently by two of the authors. An online searchable database of trials was developed containing relevant extracted information (http://www.cheori.org/en/pedvitaminddatabaseOverview). Sensitivity and utility were assessed by comparing the trials in the database with those from systematic reviews of vitamin D supplementation including children. Results. A total of 2,579 candidate papers were identified, yielding 169 trials having one or more arms meeting eligibility criteria. The publication rate has increased significantly from 1 per year (1970-1979) to 14 per year (2010-2015). Although 84% of the total trials focused on healthy children or known high risk populations (e.g., renal, prematurity), this proportion has declined in recent years due to the rise in trials evaluating populations and outcomes not directly related to the musculoskeletal actions of vitamin D (27% in 2010s). Beyond healthy children, the only pediatric populations with more than 50 participants from low risk of bias trials evaluating a clinically relevant outcome were prematurity and respiratory illness. Finally, we created and validated the online searchable database using 13 recent systematic reviews. Of the 38 high dose trials identified by the systematic review, 36 (94.7%) could be found within the database. When compared with the search strategy reported in each systematic review, use of the database reduced the number of full papers to assess for eligibility by 85.2% (±13.4%). Conclusion. The pediatric vitamin D field is highly active, with a significant increase in trials evaluating non-classical diseases and outcomes. Despite the large overall number there are few high quality trials of sufficient size to provide answers on clinical efficacy of high-dose vitamin D. An open access online searchable data should assist end users in the rapid and comprehensive identification and evaluation of trials relevant to their population or question of interest.

3.
J Asthma ; 52(4): 382-90, 2015 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25365192

RESUMEN

CONTEXT: Observational studies have suggested a relationship between vitamin D status and asthma-related respiratory outcomes. The benefit of vitamin D supplementation for pulmonary function, symptoms and exacerbations is not well established. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review paediatric clinical trials investigating the role of vitamin D on asthma-related respiratory outcomes. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were searched until January 2014. No date or language restrictions. STUDY SELECTION: Clinical trials reporting asthma-related respiratory outcomes following vitamin D administration at a dose equal or greater than 500 IU per day were included and reviewed independently by two authors for full systematic review eligibility. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted and verified pre-defined data fields. RESULTS: We identified five studies that met study eligibility and assessed final data synthesis. The median trial size was 48 participants (range 17-430) and the average daily dose of cholecalciferol ranged from 500 to 2000 IU/day. Overall study methodological quality was high, but some heterogeneity in population and vitamin D dosing regimen was evident. Meta-analysis suggested a statistically significant reduction (RR 0.41, CI 0.27-0.63) in asthma exacerbation with vitamin D therapy. LIMITATIONS: Due to variability in outcome selection and missing data, it was not possible to perform meta-analysis for pulmonary function testing and asthma symptom scores. Vitamin D-related adverse events were not considered in four of five papers. CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence from this systematic review suggests that high dose vitamin D may prevent asthma exacerbation. This should be confirmed through larger well-designed randomised controlled trials.


Asunto(s)
Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Suplementos Dietéticos , Vitamina D/uso terapéutico , Adolescente , Niño , Preescolar , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Pruebas de Función Respiratoria , Vitamina D/administración & dosificación
4.
Pediatrics ; 135(1): e152-66, 2015 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25511115

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Vitamin D deficiency may represent a modifiable risk factor to improve outcome in severe illness. The efficacy of high-dose regimens in rapid normalization of vitamin D levels is uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of pediatric clinical trials administering high-dose vitamin D to evaluate 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) response and characteristics associated with final 25(OH)D levels by using Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, including reference lists of systematic reviews and eligible publications. Uncontrolled and controlled trials reporting 25(OH)D levels after high-dose (≥1000 IU) ergocalciferol or cholecalciferol were selected. Two reviewers independently extracted and verified predefined data fields. RESULTS: We identified 88 eligible full-text articles. Two of 6 studies that administered daily doses approximating the Institute of Medicine's Tolerable Upper Intake Level (1000-4000 IU) to vitamin D-deficient populations achieved group 25(OH)D levels >75 nmol/L within 1 month. Nine of 10 studies evaluating loading therapy (>50 000 IU) achieved group 25(OH)D levels >75 nmol/L. In meta-regression, baseline 25(OH)D, regimen type, dose, age, and time factors were associated with final 25(OH)D levels. Adverse event analysis identified increased hypercalcemia risk with doses >400 000 IU, but no increased hypercalcemia or hypercalciuria with loading doses <400 000 IU (or 10 000 IU/kg). Few studies in adolescents evaluated loading dose regimens >300 000 IU. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid normalization of vitamin D levels is best achieved by using loading therapy that considers disease status, baseline 25(OH)D, and age (or weight). Loading doses >300 000 IU should be avoided until trials are conducted to better evaluate risk and benefit.


Asunto(s)
Deficiencia de Vitamina D/tratamiento farmacológico , Vitamina D/uso terapéutico , Vitaminas/uso terapéutico , Adolescente , Niño , Preescolar , Humanos , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Valores de Referencia , Inducción de Remisión , Factores de Tiempo , Vitamina D/análogos & derivados , Vitamina D/sangre , Deficiencia de Vitamina D/sangre
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA