Evidence Based Social Science in China Paper 2: The History and Development of Evidence Based Social Work in China.

OBJECTIVES: To present the history and potential for development of evidence-based (EB) social work in China. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The conception and methodology of EB social work is a potential strategy to support high quality development of social work in China. This article documents and analyzes the progress of EB social work in China. We focus on current research, reasons, challenges, and strategies. RESULTS: EB social work started late in China. The number of EB social work literature and systematic reviews has increased since 2004. The development of EB social work has been uneven nationally with few practitioners and decision makers involved. However, more and more social work researchers received training in evidence-based practice through national workshops and conferences. CONCLUSION: EB social work faced various challenges, but there are now more opportunities for EB social work development in China. Researchers, practitioners, managers and decision makers are encouraged to work together to establish a thorough methodological system and use existing evidence as much as possible when carrying out social work programs and services.

Evidence Based Social Science in China Paper 4 : The quality of social science systematic reviews and meta-analysis published from 2000-2019.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the characteristics, methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in social science journals in China. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The Chinese Social Sciences Citation Index (CSSCI) databases were searched for systematic reviews and meta-analysis published between January 2000 and December 2019. We randomly selected 200 articles from the 401 identified in our search. The Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklists were used to assess the methodological and reporting quality, respectively. RESULTS: The 200 articles we selected covered a wide range of research fields in 9 disciplines, most of which belonged to management, education and psychology. The mean AMSTAR score and PRISMA score was 8.99 ± 3.36 points and 14.74 ± 3.96 points, respectively. These findings indicated that the quality of the systematic reviews was below the average level. Meanwhile, year of publication was related to both methodological quality (P = 0.001) and reporting quality (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Although many systematic reviews and meta-analysis have been published in top Chinese journals, the methodological and reporting quality is troubling. Thus, the most urgent task is to increase the standard of systematic reviews and meta-analysis of every discipline rather than continuing to publish them in great quantity.

Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and reduction of depressive symptoms in older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to systematically review the efficacy of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid (n-3 PUFA) supplements in reducing depressive symptoms among older adults aged 60 and above. METHODS: Relevant electronic databases were searched from their inception to June 4, 2018, including Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Global Health, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and Chinese Biomedical Medicine Database. Two reviewers independently screened for eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias of the included studies. The effect size data were analyzed using robust variance estimation in meta-regression. RESULTS: Nine studies were included. The overall treatment effects of n-3 PUFA supplements in reducing depressive symptoms for older adults was not statistically significant (d = -0.202, 95% CI = -0.463, 0.060). Meta-regression found interventions with dosage of n-3 PUFA greater than 1.5 g/d had an average effect size of -0.428, with a 95% confidence interval of [-0.822, -0.035], which is statistically significant. Meta-regression did not find significant moderating effects of comorbidity, baseline depression, intervention duration, and EPA-DHA ratio, potentially due to limited statistical power. LIMITATIONS: The current review only included 9 studies based on literature search in major English and Chinese databases, which provided limited statistical power for moderator analysis and the results are suggestive only. CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis of 9 RCTs found mixed findings of the efficacy of n-3 PUFA in the treatment of depressive symptoms among older adults aged 60 and above. More high-quality, large-scale RCTs are needed to confirm the current conclusions.

Long-term clinical outcomes of everolimus-eluting stent versus paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Everolimus -eluting stent (EES) is common used in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Our purpose is to evaluate long-term clinical outcomes of everolimus -eluting stent (EES) versus paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronaryinterventions (PCI) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP and relevant websites ( https://scholar-google-com.ezproxy.lib.usf.edu/ ) for articles to compare outcomes between everolimus-eluting stent and paclitaxel-eluting stent without language or date restriction. RCTs that compared the use of everolimus -eluting stent and paclitaxel-eluting stent in PCI were included. Variables relating to patient, study characteristics, and clinical endpoints were extracted. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software. RESULTS: We identified 6 published studies (from three randomized trials) more on everolimus-eluting stent (n = 3352) than paclitaxel-eluting (n = 1639), with follow-up duration ranging from 3, 4 and 5 years. Three-year outcomes of everolimus-eluting stent compared to paclitaxel-eluting were as following: the everolimus-eluting stent significantly reduced all-cause death (relative risk [RR]:0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.46. to 0.82), MACE (RR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.41 to 0.77), MI (RR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.48 to 0.86), TLR (RR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.59 to 0.88), ID-TLR (RR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.59 to 0.92) and ST (RR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.32 to 0.90). There was no difference in TVR between the everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting (RR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.10); Four-year outcomes of everolimus-eluting compared to paclitaxel-eluting: the everolimus-eluting significantly reduced MACE (RR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.98) and ID-TLR (RR: 0.47; 95 % CI: 0.23 to 0.97). There was no difference in MI (RR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.16 to 1.46), TLR (RR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.20 to 1.04) and ST ((RR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.05 to 2.39). Five-year outcomes of everolimus-eluting stent compared to paclitaxel-eluting: There was no difference in ID-TLR (RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.45 to 1.02) and ST (RR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.28 to 1.80). CONCLUSIONS: In the present meta-analysis, everolimus-eluting appeared to be safe and clinically effective in patients undergoing PCI in comparison to PES in 3-year clinical outcomes; there was similar no difference in reduction of ST between EES and PES in long-term(≥ 4 years) clinical follow-ups. Everolimus-eluting is more safety than paclitaxel-eluting in long-term clinical follow-ups, whether these effects can be applied to different patient subgroups warrants further investigation.

Bicarbonate versus lactate solutions for acute peritoneal dialysis.

BACKGROUND: The high mortality rate among critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) remains an unsolved problem in intensive care medicine, despite the use of renal replacement therapy (RRT). Increasing evidence from clinical studies in adults and children suggests that the new peritoneal dialysis (PD) fluids may allow for better long-term preservation of peritoneal morphology and function. Formation of glucose degradation products (GDPs) can be reduced and even avoided with the use of newer "biocompatible" solutions. However, it is still unclear if there are any differences in using conventional (lactate) solutions compared with low GDP (bicarbonate) solutions for acute PD. OBJECTIVES: To look at the benefits and harms of bicarbonate versus lactate solutions in acute PD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (from 1966), EMBASE (from 1980), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database LILACS (from 1982), and reference lists of articles.Date of last search: 6 May 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing bicarbonate to lactate solution for acute PD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assess the methodological quality of studies. One author abstracted data onto a standard form, and a second author checked data extraction. We used the random-effects model and expressed the results as relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: We included one study (20 patients) in this review. In shock patients, bicarbonate did not differ from lactate with respect to mortality (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.06 to 3.91); however there were significant differences in blood lactate (MD -1.60 mmol/L, 95% CI -2.04 to -1.16), serum bicarbonate (MD 5.00 mmol/L, 95% CI 3.26 to 6.74) and blood pH (MD 0.12, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.18). In non-shock patients there was a significance difference in blood lactate (MD -0.60 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.85 to -0.35) but not in serum bicarbonate (MD 1.10 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.27 to 2.47) or blood pH (MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.02 to -0.06). Other outcomes could not be analysed because of the limited data available. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no strong evidence that any clinical advantage for patients requiring acute PD for AKI when comparing conventional (lactate) with low GDP dialysis solutions (bicarbonate).

Evidence-based practice in the health and social services in China: developments, strategies, and challenges.

For the past decade, healthcare professionals and decision makers in China have made efforts to promote the development of evidence-based practice (EBP) in medicine and health services. In recent years, attention has been given to the use of EBP among other nonmedical fields, such as social work and education. The purpose of this article is to explore the current and the future development of EBP in health and social services in China. We first presented a brief account of EBP development in the Chinese context. Then, based on a literature search, we explored empirical foundations that may support the development and advancement of EBP in China. We also elaborated on some barriers that inhibit the development of EBP, and proposed strategies that are in place to overcome these barriers. This article concludes with a discussion of perceived challenges to the development of EBP in health and social services in China.

Azithromycin versus penicillin G benzathine for early syphilis.

BACKGROUND: Syphilis is a complex systemic disease caused by a spirochete, Treponema pallidum. The World Health Organization estimates that at least 12 million people worldwide are currently infected with syphilis. In this review we compared two current standards of treatment for early syphilis, benzathine benzylpenicillin (penicillin G) and azithromycin. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of azithromycin versus benzathine penicillin (penicillin G) for early syphilis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases using the search terms detailed in Appendix 1: the Cochrane Sexually Transmitted Diseases Group Specialized Register (July 2011), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) published in The Cochrane Library (Issue 7 2011), MEDLINE (1948 to July 2011), EMBASE (1980 to July 2011), PsycINFO (1806 to July 2011) and the Chinese Biological Medicine Literature Database (CBM) (1978 to 2011). The search was not limited by language. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing azithromycin with benzathine penicillin G at any dose for the treatment of early syphilis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently applied the inclusion criteria to potential studies, with any disagreements resolved by discussion. The risk of bias of each study was assessed by the same two review authors. We pooled data using an odds ratio (OR). MAIN RESULTS: Three studies (generating four eligible study comparisons) were included. One study is ongoing. There was no statistically significant difference between azithromycin and benzathine penicillin treatment in the odds of cure (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.56); nor any difference at three months (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.50), six months (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.54) or nine months (OR 1.45, 95% CI 0.46 to 6.42). Subgroup analysis by primary and latent syphilis and by dose of azithromycin (2 g and 4 g) did not explain the variation between the study results. The reporting of computed mild to tolerated adverse events, from two included trials, indicated no statistically significant difference between azithromycin and benzathine penicillin (OR 1.43, 95% CI 0.42 to 4.95), although with a high level of heterogeneity (P = 0.05, I(2) = 74%). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Differences in the odds of cure did not reach statistical significance when azithromycin was compared with benzathine penicillin for the treatment of early syphilis. No definitive conclusion can be made regarding the relative safety of benzathine penicillin G and azithromycin for early syphilis. Further studies on the utility of benzathine penicillin G for early syphilis are warranted.

Bicarbonate versus lactate solutions for acute peritoneal dialysis.

BACKGROUND: The high mortality rate among critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) remains an unsolved problem in intensive care medicine, despite the use of renal replacement therapy (RRT). Increasing evidence from clinical studies in adults and children suggests that the new peritoneal dialysis (PD) fluids may allow for better long-term preservation of peritoneal morphology and function. Formation of glucose degradation products (GDPs) can be reduced and even avoided with the use of newer "biocompatible" solutions. However, it is still unclear if there are any differences in using conventional (lactate) solutions compared with low GDP (bicarbonate) solutions for acute PD. OBJECTIVES: To look at the benefits and harms of bicarbonate versus lactate solutions in acute PD. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (from 1966), EMBASE (from 1980), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database LILACS (from 1982), and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing bicarbonate to lactate solution for acute PD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assess the methodological quality of studies. One author abstracted data onto a standard form, and a second author checked data extraction. We used the random-effects model and expressed the results as relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: We included one study (20 patients) in this review. In shock patients, bicarbonate did not differ from lactate with respect to mortality (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.06 to 3.91); however there were significant differences in blood lactate (MD -1.60 mmol/L, 95% CI -2.04 to -1.16), serum bicarbonate (MD 5.00 mmol/L, 95% CI 3.26 to 6.74) and blood pH (MD 0.12, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.18). In non-shock patients there was a significance difference in blood lactate (MD -0.60 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.85 to -0.35) but not in serum bicarbonate (MD 1.10 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.27 to 2.47) or blood pH (MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.02 to -0.06). Other outcomes could not be analysed because of the limited data available. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no strong evidence that any clinical advantage for patients requiring acute PD for AKI when comparing conventional (lactate) with low GDP dialysis solutions (bicarbonate).

High dose rate versus low dose rate intracavity brachytherapy for locally advanced uterine cervix cancer.

BACKGROUND: Carcinoma of the uterine cervix is the second most common cancer and the third leading cause of cancer death among women. Radiotherapy has been used successfully to treat cervical cancer for nearly a century. The combination of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) has become a standard treatment modality for cervical cancer. Depending on the difference in dose rate on 'Point A' (located 2 cm above the cervical os and 2 cm lateral to the central axis of the uterus), the ICBT is divided into three modalities: low dose rate (LDR), high dose rate (HDR) and medium dose rate (MDR). Despite the practical advantages of HDR, it is necessary to investigate further the efficacy and safety of HDR brachytherapy compared to LDR brachytherapy. Questions arise as to whether HDR or LDR brachytherapy improves results for patients with cervical cancer in terms of local control rates, survival and complications related to treatment. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of HDR- versus LDR-ICBT for patients with uterine cervical cancer. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Specialised Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to November 2009), EMBASE (1974 to November 2009), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) (1978 to November 2009) for relevant original, published trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared HDR- with LDR-ICBT, combined with EBRT, for patients with locally advanced uterine cervical cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted the data using standardised forms. Primary outcome measures included overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS) and pelvic control rate, while secondary outcomes included rates of recurrence and complications. MAIN RESULTS: Four studies involving 1265 patients met the inclusion criteria. In our meta-analysis to compare HDR and LDR, the pooled RRs were 0.95 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.15), 0.93 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.04) and 0.79 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.20) for 3-, 5- and 10-year overall survival rates; and 0.95 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.07) and 1.02 (0.88 to 1.19) for 5- and 10-year disease-specific survival (DSS) rates. The RR for RFS was 1.04 (95% CI 0.71 to 1.52) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.14) at three and five years. For local control rates the RR was 0.95 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.05) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.05) at three and five years; with a RR of 1.09 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.43) for locoregional recurrence, 0.79 (95% CI 0.40 to 1.53) for local and distance recurrence, 2.23 (95% CI 0.78 to 6.34) for para-aortic lymph node metastasis and 0.99 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.35) for distance metastasis. For bladder, rectosigmoid and small bowel complications, the RR was 1.33 (95% CI 0.53 to 3.34), 1.00 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.91) and 3.37 (95% CI 1.06 to 10.72), respectively. These results indicate that there were no significant differences except for increased small bowel complications with HDR (P = 0.04). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review showed no significant differences between HDR- and LDR-ICBT when considering OS, DSS, RFS, local control rate, recurrence, metastasis and treatment related complications for women with cervical carcinoma. Due to some potential advantages of HDR-ICBT (rigid immobilization, outpatient treatment, patient convenience, accuracy of source and applicator positioning, individualized treatment) we recommend the use of HDR-ICBT for all clinical stages of cervix cancer.

Azithromycin vs. benzathine penicillin G for early syphilis: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

The World Health Organization estimates that at least 12 million people are infected with syphilis in the world. Southeast Asia accounts for 5.8 million; Africa accounts for 3.5 million. There has been controversy in using the two kinds of antibiotics for early syphilis. A systematic review comparing these antibiotics could affect treatment guidelines. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of azithromycin vs. penicillin G benzathine for early syphilis and a meta-analysis to compare these two kinds of antibiotics for early syphilis. Four randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria; 476 patients were evaluated for their cure rate. Cure rates were 95.0% (227/239) for azithromycin and 84.0% (199/237) for penicillin G benzathine. After pooling the data, the difference in efficacy was computed. Cure rate (OR=1.37), 95% CI (1.05, 1.77) and the risk difference for cure rate between the two drugs were statistically significant. Although the gastrointestinal adverse effect of azithromycin is five times more than the adverse effect of penicillin G benzathine, the differences are not significant. Azithromycin achieved a higher cure rate than penicillin G benzathine in a long follow-up.

[Meta analysis of clinical effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer].

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy has gained increasing attention as a treatment for gastric cancer since Wilke first reported its application to the treatment of gastric cancer in 1989. However, its value in treating gastric cancer remains controversial. This research was to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on gastric cancer through a Meta analysis of the randomized controlled trials published worldwide in both English and Chinese. METHODS: Cochrane systematic evaluation was used to search through Cochrane libraries of clinical comparative trials, PubMed, Embase, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), Chinese Scientific Journal Full-text Database (CSJD) and Chinese Journal Full-text Database (CJFD), aided with manual retrieval and other retrievals. The quality of the assessment was independently evaluated and cross-checked by two evaluators, and the results of homogeneous studies were analyzed with RevMan4.2.10 software. RESULTS: Five randomized controlled trials involved a total of 838 patients were studied. Of the 5 trials, 2 were performed in Japan, 1 in the Netherlands, 1 in the United Kingdom, 1 in China. Of the 838 patients, 373 were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 465 were treated with surgery alone. Among the above 5 studies, one used blind method and one described random allocation concealment method. No statistical differences were found in the resection rate, cure rate, 1-and 5-year survival rates between neoadjuvant chemotherapy group and surgery group [odds ratio (OR)=1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.67-1.77 for resection rate; OR=1.25, 95% CI=0.85-1.84 for cure rate; OR=1.61, 95% CI=0.90-2.90 for 1-year survival rate; OR=1.13, 95% CI=0.83-1.53 for 5-year survival rate]. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on gastric cancer is not better than that of surgery alone. Therefore, neoadjuvant chemotherapy should not be recommended as a regular treatment for gastric cancer before obtaining evidences of its certain efficacy on gastric cancer.

Safety of irinotecan/cisplatin versus etoposide/cisplatin for patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: a metaanalysis.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety of patients with extensive small-cell lung cancer treated with irinotecan/cisplatin (IP) versus etoposide/cisplatin (EP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a metaanalysis of a randomized controlled trial. The main outcome measures for safety were grade 3/4 leukopenia, grade 3 anemia, grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia, grade 3/4 neutropenia, grade 3 vomiting/nausea, grade 3/4 diarrhea, and infection. RESULTS: Three randomized controlled trials totaling 535 patients were included. Metaanalysis results are as follows: fewer patients receiving IP experienced grade 3/4 leukopenia (response rate [RR], 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-0.67), grade 3 anemia (RR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.43-0.99), and grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (RR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.12-0.42), compared with patients receiving EP. But more patients experienced grade 3 vomiting or nausea (RR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.37-3.37) and grade 3/4 diarrhea (RR, 21.66; 95% CI, 4.87-96.2). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups with regard to infection (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.54-1.04). CONCLUSION: Current clinical studies might confirm that fewer patients receiving IP experienced grade 3/4 leukopenia, grade 3 anemia, grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia, and grade 3/4 neutropenia, compared with patients receiving EP, but more experienced grade 3 vomiting/nausea and grade 3/4 diarrhea. There was no significant difference between the group receiving IP and the group receiving EP with regard to infection. Although there is convincing evidence to confirm the results mentioned herein, they still need to be confirmed by large-sample, multicenter, randomized, controlled trials.