How completely are randomized controlled trials of non-pharmacological interventions following concussion reported? A systematic review.

PURPOSE: To examine the reporting completeness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of non-pharmacological interventions following concussion. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Web of Science up to May 2022. Two reviewers independently screened studies and assessed reporting completeness using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR), Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT), and international Consensus on Therapeutic Exercise aNd Training (i-CONTENT) checklists. Additional information was sought my study authors where reporting was incomplete. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed with the Cochrane ROB-2 Tool. RCTs examining non-pharmacological interventions following concussion. RESULTS: We included 89 RCTs (n = 53 high ROB) examining 11 different interventions for concussion: sub-symptom threshold aerobic exercise, cervicovestibular therapy, physical/cognitive rest, vision therapy, education, psychotherapy, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, transcranial magnetic stimulation, blue light therapy, osteopathic manipulation, and head/neck cooling. Median scores were: TIDieR 9/12 (75%; interquartile range (IQR) = 5; range: 5-12), CERT 17/19 (89%; IQR = 2; range: 10-19), and i-CONTENT 6/7 (86%; IQR = 1; range: 5-7). Percentage of studies completely reporting all items was TIDieR 35% (31/89), CERT 24% (5/21), and i-CONTENT 10% (2/21). Studies were more completely reported after publication of TIDieR (t87 = 2.08; p = 0.04) and CERT (t19 = 2.72; p = 0.01). Reporting completeness was not strongly associated with journal impact factor (TIDieR: rs = 0.27; p = 0.01; CERT: rs = -0.44; p = 0.06; i-CONTENT: rs = -0.17; p = 0.48) or ROB (TIDieR: rs = 0.11; p = 0.31; CERT: rs = 0.04; p = 0.86; i-CONTENT: rs = 0.12; p = 0.60). CONCLUSION: RCTs of non-pharmacological interventions following concussion demonstrate moderate to good reporting completeness, but are often missing key components, particularly modifications, motivational strategies, and qualified supervisor. Reporting completeness improved after TIDieR and CERT publication, but publication in highly cited journals and low ROB do not guarantee reporting completeness.

The management of lower back pain using pilates method: assessment of content exercise reporting in RCTs.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the quality of the reporting of exercise interventions with Pilates method for the treatment of lower back pain (LBP) in adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two independent evaluators selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of moderate and high methodological quality included in a Cochrane Systematic Review (SR) and from an additional updated search in the following databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro and SPORTDiscus. Three assessment tools (Consensus on Therapeutic Exercise Training (CONTENT) scale, Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) checklist) were utilized by three pairs of two independent researchers trained. The scales' concordance was measured using the Kappa coefficient. RESULTS: Ten RCTs were included. The CONTENT scale score was 5.3 (± 1.33) out of 9 points; the TIDieR checklist was 8.5 (± 1.71) out of 12 points and the CERT checklist was 9.5 (± 3.62) out of 19 points. The CONTENT and CERT had moderate concordance, while there was fair concordance between the other tools. CONCLUSIONS: The overall reporting quality for the Pilates exercises in ten moderate-to-high quality RTCs for the management of LBP was low according to CONTENT scale and CERT checklist and high according to TIDieR checklist.Implications for RehabilitationReporting of Pilates exercise program in moderate-to-high quality RCTs for the management of lower back pain remains incomplete.Pilates exercise program should be personalized and contextualized to individual participants.There may be a need to consider adding to or combining the information available from various trials.

Identification of G-Quadruplex-Binding Inhibitors of Myc Expression through Affinity Selection-Mass Spectrometry.

The Myc oncogene is overexpressed in many cancers, yet targeting it for cancer therapy has remained elusive. One strategy for inhibition of Myc expression is through stabilization of the G-quadruplex (G4), a G-rich DNA secondary structure found within the Myc promoter; stabilization of G4s has been shown to halt transcription of downstream gene products. Here we used the Automated Ligand Identification System (ALIS), an affinity selection-mass spectrometry method, to identify compounds that bind to the Myc G4 out of a pool of compounds that had previously been shown to inhibit Myc expression in a reporter screen. Using an ALIS-based screen, we identified hits that bound to the Myc G4, a small subset of which bound preferentially relative to G4s from the promoters of five other genes. To determine functionality and specificity of the Myc G4-binding compounds in cell-based assays, we compared inhibition of Myc expression in cells with and without Myc G4 regulation. Several compounds inhibited Myc expression only in the Myc G4-containing line, and one compound was verified to function through Myc G4 binding. Our study demonstrates that ALIS can be used to identify selective nucleic acid-binding compounds from phenotypic screen hits, increasing the pool of drug targets beyond proteins.