Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 29
Filtrar
1.
J Clin Epidemiol ; 173: 111427, 2024 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38880438

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Retraction is intended to be a mechanism to correct the published body of knowledge when necessary due to fraudulent, fatally flawed, or ethically unacceptable publications. However, the success of this mechanism requires that retracted publications be consistently identified as such and that retraction notices contain sufficient information to understand what is being retracted and why. Our study investigated how clearly and consistently retracted publications in public health are being presented to researchers. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This is a cross-sectional study, using 441 retracted research publications in the field of public health. Records were retrieved for each of these publications from 11 resources, while retraction notices were retrieved from publisher websites and full-text aggregators. The identification of the retracted status of the publication was assessed using criteria from the Committee on Publication Ethics and the National Library of Medicine. The completeness of the associated retraction notices was assessed using criteria from Committee on Publication Ethics and Retraction Watch. RESULTS: Two thousand eight hundred forty-one records for retracted publications were retrieved, of which less than half indicated that the article had been retracted. Less than 5% of publications were identified as retracted through all resources through which they were available. Within single resources, if and how retracted publications were identified varied. Retraction notices were frequently incomplete, with no notices meeting all the criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The observed inconsistencies and incomplete notices pose a threat to the integrity of scientific publishing and highlight the need to better align with existing best practices to ensure more effective and transparent dissemination of information on retractions.


Asunto(s)
Salud Pública , Retractación de Publicación como Asunto , Mala Conducta Científica , Estudios Transversales , Humanos , Mala Conducta Científica/estadística & datos numéricos , Mala Conducta Científica/ética , Edición/normas , Edición/ética
2.
JMIR Nurs ; 6: e46058, 2023 Oct 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37847533

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Although mobile health (mHealth) apps for both health consumers and health care providers are increasingly common, their implementation is frequently unsuccessful when there is a misalignment between the needs of the user and the app's functionality. Nurses are well positioned to help address this challenge. However, nurses' engagement in mHealth app development remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to determine the extent of the evidence of the role of nurses in app development, delineate developmental phases in which nurses are involved, and to characterize the type of mHealth apps nurses are involved in developing. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review following the 6-stage methodology. We searched 14 databases to identify publications on the role of nurses in mHealth app development and hand searched the reference lists of relevant publications. Two independent researchers performed all screening and data extraction, and a third reviewer resolved any discrepancies. Data were synthesized and grouped by the Software Development Life Cycle phase, and the app functionality was described using the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics functionality scoring system. RESULTS: The screening process resulted in 157 publications being included in our analysis. Nurses were involved in mHealth app development across all stages of the Software Development Life Cycle but most frequently participated in design and prototyping, requirements gathering, and testing. Nurses most often played the role of evaluators, followed by subject matter experts. Nurses infrequently participated in software development or planning, and participation as patient advocates, research experts, or nurse informaticists was rare. CONCLUSIONS: Although nurses were represented throughout the preimplementation development process, nurses' involvement was concentrated in specific phases and roles.

3.
Syst Rev ; 12(1): 168, 2023 09 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37730590

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Evidence syntheses cite retracted publications. However, citation is not necessarily endorsement, as authors may be criticizing or refuting its findings. We investigated the sentiment of these citations-whether they were critical or supportive-and associations with the methodological quality of the evidence synthesis, reason for the retraction, and time between publication and retraction. METHODS: Using a sample of 286 evidence syntheses containing 324 citations to retracted publications in the field of pharmacy, we used AMSTAR-2 to assess methodological quality. We used scite.ai and a human screener to determine citation sentiment. We conducted a Pearson's chi-square test to assess associations between citation sentiment, methodological quality, and reason for retraction, and one-way ANOVAs to investigate association between time, methodological quality, and citation sentiment. RESULTS: Almost 70% of the evidence syntheses in our sample were of critically low quality. We found that these critically low-quality evidence syntheses were more associated with positive statements while high-quality evidence syntheses were more associated with negative citation of retracted publications. In our sample of 324 citations, 20.4% of citations to retracted publications noted that the publication had been retracted. CONCLUSION: The association between high-quality evidence syntheses and recognition of a publication's retracted status may indicate that best practices are sufficient. However, the volume of critically low-quality evidence syntheses ultimately perpetuates the citation of retracted publications with no indication of their retracted status. Strengthening journal requirements around the quality of evidence syntheses may lessen the inappropriate citation of retracted publications.


Asunto(s)
Servicios Farmacéuticos , Farmacias , Humanos
4.
Syst Rev ; 12(1): 170, 2023 09 22.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37736736

RESUMEN

This paper presents a generalized registration form for systematic reviews that can be used when currently available forms are not adequate. The form is designed to be applicable across disciplines (i.e., psychology, economics, law, physics, or any other field) and across review types (i.e., scoping review, review of qualitative studies, meta-analysis, or any other type of review). That means that the reviewed records may include research reports as well as archive documents, case law, books, poems, etc. Items were selected and formulated to optimize broad applicability instead of specificity, forgoing some benefits afforded by a tighter focus. This PRISMA 2020 compliant form is a fallback for more specialized forms and can be used if no specialized form or registration platform is available. When accessing this form on the Open Science Framework website, users will therefore first be guided to specialized forms when they exist. In addition to this use case, the form can also serve as a starting point for creating registration forms that cater to specific fields or review types.


Asunto(s)
Formularios como Asunto , Revisiones Sistemáticas como Asunto
5.
J Clin Med ; 12(11)2023 May 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37297932

RESUMEN

Evidence regarding the adverse burden of severe neonatal jaundice (SNJ) in hospitalized neonates in resource-constrained settings is sparse. We attempted to determine the prevalence of SNJ, described using clinical outcome markers, in all World Health Organization (WHO) regions in the world. Data were sourced from Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Cochrane Library, African Journals Online, and Global Index Medicus. Hospital-based studies, including the total number of neonatal admissions with at least one clinical outcome marker of SNJ, defined as acute bilirubin encephalopathy (ABE), exchange blood transfusions (EBT), jaundice-related death, or abnormal brainstem audio-evoked response (aBAER), were independently reviewed for inclusion in this meta-analysis. Of 84 articles, 64 (76.19%) were from low- and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs), and 14.26% of the represented neonates with jaundice in these studies had SNJ. The prevelance of SNJ among all admitted neonates varied across WHO regions, ranging from 0.73 to 3.34%. Among all neonatal admissions, SNJ clinical outcome markers for EBT ranged from 0.74 to 3.81%, with the highest percentage observed in the African and South-East Asian regions; ABE ranged from 0.16 to 2.75%, with the highest percentages observed in the African and Eastern Mediterranean regions; and jaundice-related deaths ranged from 0 to 1.49%, with the highest percentage observed in the African and Eastern Mediterranean regions. Among the cohort of neonates with jaundice, the prevalence of SNJ ranged from 8.31 to 31.49%, with the highest percentage observed in the African region; EBT ranged from 9.76 to 28.97%, with the highest percentages reported for the African region; ABE was highest in the Eastern Mediterranean (22.73%) and African regions (14.51%). Jaundice-related deaths were 13.02%, 7.52%, 2.01% and 0.07%, respectively, in the Eastern Mediterranean, African, South-East Asian and European regions, with none reported in the Americas. aBAER numbers were too small, and the Western Pacific region was represented by only one study, limiting the ability to make regional comparisons. The global burden of SNJ in hospitalized neonates remains high, causing substantial, preventable morbidity and mortality especially in LMICs.

6.
Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil ; 14: 21514593231155828, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36817328

RESUMEN

Background: Fragility hip fracture patients are often malnourished. Nutrition supplementation may help, but it is unclear if supplementation is impactful when considering outcomes. A systematic review of literature examining perioperative nutrition status for older adults experiencing a hip fracture was performed. Methods: We searched Medline, CAB Abstracts and Embase (Ovid); Cochrane Library (Wiley); PubMed; Scopus; Global Index Medicus; Web of Science Core Collection; SPORTDiscus (EBSCO); and clinical trial registries ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP from inception to April 2021, incorporating terminology related to nutritional interventions, fragility fractures, and postoperative outcomes. Two investigators reviewed citations for inclusion, extracted nutrition intervention criteria, and categorized hip fragility outcomes. Results: Of 1792 citations, 90 articles underwent full-text screening, and 14 articles were included in the final sample. We identified nutritional interventions and 4 outcomes of interest. 8 studies (n = 649) demonstrated a mean difference of .78 days (CI .34-1.21) in length of stay (LOS) between the nutritional intervention and control groups. Rehabilitation ward stays were discussed in 2 studies demonstrating a non-statistically significant difference. 7 studies (n = 341) reported mortality rates; when pooled there was no statistically significant difference. 5 studies showed data for postoperative infections and 4 studies reported on postoperative urinary tract infections. Pooling of data found a statistically significant result (Relative Risk: .49 [.32, .75], P = .001) with low heterogeneity (I2 = 27%). 4 studies reported urinary tract infections (n = 140) in the intervention group and (n = 121) in the control group with a non-statistically significant result. Grip strength was only reported in two studies but pooling of the data was non-statistically significant. Conclusions: This systematic review highlighted the lack of consensus regarding the type of nutrition interventions available and impact on outcomes of interest including mortality, length of stay, infections, and grip strength for fragility hip fractures in older adults.

7.
J Adv Nurs ; 78(12): 3869-3896, 2022 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35986584

RESUMEN

AIMS: Diagnostic Reasoning (DR) is an essential competency requiring mastery for safe, independent Nurse Practitioner (NP) practice, but little is known about DR content included in NP education programs. The aims of this study were to identify whether and how the concept of DR is addressed in NP education. DESIGN: We conducted a scoping review on DR-related content and teaching innovations in U.S. primary care NP education programs, with implications for NP education programs worldwide. Concepts and principles with global applicability include: conducting focused and hypothesis-directed histories and exams, generating the problem statement, formulating the differential diagnosis, appropriate and relevant diagnostic testing, determining the working diagnosis and developing evidence-based, patient-centred management plans. DATA SOURCES: N = 1115 articles retrieved from Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL for the period 2005-2021. Forty-one scholarly articles met inclusion/exclusion criteria. REVIEW METHODS: Data were extracted, synthesized and grouped by theoretical frameworks, content included, educational interventions and assessment measures. RESULTS: Most articles provided descriptions of approaches for teaching NP clinical or diagnostic reasoning. Ten papers directly referenced the current science and theory of DR. CONCLUSION: The US NP education literature addressing DR is limited and demonstrates a lack of shared conceptualizations of DR. Whilst numerous components of DR are identifiable in the literature, a robust teaching/learning scholarship for DR has not yet been established in the US NP education literature. IMPACT: Whilst primary care NP education programs are beginning to incorporate DR education into their curricula, little research has been conducted to demonstrate the effectiveness of educational outcomes. Increased integration of DR content into NP education is needed, including increased educational research on teaching DR competencies. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution was included in this review, as the public is generally not familiar with DR or its teaching approaches.


Asunto(s)
Razonamiento Clínico , Enfermeras Practicantes , Humanos , Enfermeras Practicantes/educación , Curriculum , Solución de Problemas , Atención Primaria de Salud
8.
Tuberculosis (Edinb) ; 135: 102230, 2022 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35779498

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Ziehl-Neelsen acid-fast bacilli (AFB) smear is a rapid, cheap, widely available test for tuberculous meningitis (TBM). Yet, reported test sensitivity is highly variable. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis for CSF AFB smear vs. other mycobacterial tests to diagnose TBM. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE and Embase for studies reporting sensitivity and specificity of AFB smear against mycobacterial tests (reference standard) in adults (≥15 years) with suspected TBM. We used the QUADAS-2 tool to assess risk of bias. We estimated pooled sensitivity and specificity of AFB smear versus the reference standard using random-effects bivariate modeling. We used the I2 statistic to assess heterogeneity between studies. RESULTS: Of 981 articles identified, 11 were eligible for inclusion with a total of 1713 participants. Seven studies were from high-TB burden settings and 4 from low-TB burden settings. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of CSF AFB smear were 8% (95%CI 3-21) and 100% (95%CI 90-100), with substantial heterogeneity in diagnostic performance (I2 >95% for both) and reference standards. CONCLUSION: CSF AFB smear has poor sensitivity in most settings. If other more sensitive tests are available, those should be used preferentially rather than CSF AFB smear.


Asunto(s)
Mycobacterium tuberculosis , Tuberculosis Meníngea , Adulto , Pruebas Diagnósticas de Rutina , Humanos , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Tuberculosis Meníngea/microbiología
9.
J Med Libr Assoc ; 110(1): 47-55, 2022 Jan 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35210962

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Systematic reviews and other evidence syntheses, the pinnacle of the evidence pyramid, embody comprehensiveness and rigor; however, retracted data are being incorporated into these publications. This study examines the use of retracted publications in the field of pharmacy, describes characteristics of retracted publications cited by systematic reviews, and discusses factors associated with citation likelihood. METHODS: Using data from Retraction Watch, we identified retracted publications in the pharmacy field. We identified all articles citing these retracted publications in Web of Science and Scopus and limited results to systematic reviews. We classified the retraction reason, determined whether the citation occurred before or after retraction, and analyzed factors associated with the likelihood of systematic reviews citing a retracted publication. RESULTS: Of 1,396 retracted publications, 283 were cited 1,096 times in systematic reviews. Most (65.0%) (712/1096) citations occurred before retraction. Citations were most often to items retracted due to data falsification or manipulation (39.2%), followed by items retracted due to ethical misconduct including plagiarism (30.4%), or concerns about or errors in data or methods (26.2%). Compared to those not cited in systematic reviews, cited items were significantly more likely to be retracted due to data falsification and manipulation, were published in high impact factor journals, and had longer delays between publication and retraction. CONCLUSIONS: Further analysis of systematic reviews citing retracted publications is needed to determine the impact of flawed data. Librarians understand the nuances involved and can advocate for greater transparency around the retraction process and increase awareness of challenges posed by retractions.


Asunto(s)
Farmacia , Mala Conducta Científica , Bibliometría , Plagio , Revisiones Sistemáticas como Asunto
10.
Psychoneuroendocrinology ; 138: 105665, 2022 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35063687

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder is the most common neuropsychiatric comorbidity of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and women are more frequently affected in the general population and among those with HIV. The rate of depression in HIV is three times higher than the general population. Differences in biomarkers in neuroendocrine and inflammatory pathways are one possible explanation for the increased prevalence of depression in individuals with HIV, especially biological women. Therefore, we aimed to perform a systematic review identifying differences in neuroendocrine factors leading to depression in men versus women with HIV. METHODS: A comprehensive search of 8 databases was performed, followed by title and abstract screening and later full-text screening by two independent researchers. A risk of bias assessment was completed. RESULTS: Twenty-six full-text articles were included in the review. Significant correlations between depression and neuroendocrine marker levels were found for cortisol (both sexes), testosterone (only in men), oxytocin (only tested in women), and estradiol (only in women). No significant correlation between depression and hormone level was found for prolactin, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEAS), or sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG). Nearly all studies included only men or women and did not directly compare neuroendocrine markers between the two sexes. One study found that the correlation between cortisol levels and depression scores was stronger in women than men. CONCLUSION: Neuroendocrine systems are highly active in the brain and important in the development and persistence of mental illness. Given that HIV can, directly and indirectly, impact hormone signaling, it is likely contributing to the high rate of depression in individuals with HIV. However, few studies explore neuroactive hormones in depression and HIV, nor how this connection may differ between the sexes. More high-quality research is needed in this area to explore the link further and inform possible avenues of treatment.


Asunto(s)
Trastorno Depresivo Mayor , Infecciones por VIH , Caracteres Sexuales , Biomarcadores , Depresión/epidemiología , Trastorno Depresivo Mayor/epidemiología , Estradiol , Femenino , Hormonas Esteroides Gonadales , Infecciones por VIH/epidemiología , Infecciones por VIH/psicología , Humanos , Hidrocortisona , Masculino , Globulina de Unión a Hormona Sexual , Testosterona
11.
J Med Libr Assoc ; 110(3): 281-293, 2022 Jul 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36589297

RESUMEN

Background: Concerns over scientific reproducibility have grown in recent years, leading the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to require researchers to address these issues in research grant applications. Starting in 2020, training grants were required to provide a plan for educating trainees in rigor and reproducibility. Academic medical centers have responded with different solutions to fill this educational need. As experienced instructors with expertise in topics relating to reproducibility, librarians can play a prominent role in providing trainings, classes, and events to educate investigators and trainees, and bolstering reproducibility in their communities. Case Presentations: This special report summarizes efforts at five institutions to provide education in reproducibility to biomedical and life sciences researchers. Our goal is to expand awareness of the range of approaches in providing reproducibility services in libraries. Conclusions: Reproducibility education by medical librarians can take many forms. These specific programs in reproducibility education build upon libraries' existing collaborations, with funder mandates providing a major impetus. Collaborator needs shaped the exact type of educational or other reproducibility support and combined with each library's strengths to yield a diversity of offerings based on capacity and interest. As demand for and complexity of reproducibility education increases due to new institutional and funder mandates, reproducibility education will merit special attention.


Asunto(s)
Bibliotecólogos , Bibliotecas Médicas , Estados Unidos , Humanos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Centros Médicos Académicos , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Investigadores/educación
12.
BJU Int ; 130(1): 6-17, 2022 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34825456

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of posterior musculofascial reconstruction robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (PR-RALP) compared to no PR during standard RALP (S-RALP) for the treatment of clinically localised prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a systematic search with no restrictions including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing variations of PR-RALP vs S-RALP for clinically localised prostate cancer. The quality of evidence was assessed on outcome basis according to Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Our search identified 13 records of eight unique RCTs, of which six were published studies, and two were abstract proceedings. There were 1085 randomised patients, of whom 963 completed the trials. All patients had either cT1c or cT2 or cT3a disease. RESULTS: A PR-RALP may improve urinary continence 1 week after catheter removal compared to no PR (risk ratio [RR] 1.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-1.73; I2 = 42%, five studies, 498 patients, low certainty of evidence [CoE]). A PR-RALP may have little to no effect on urinary continence 3 months after surgery compared to no PR (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.84-1.14; I2 = 67%, six studies, 842 patients, low CoE). A PR-RALP probably results in little to no difference in serious adverse events compared to no PR (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.29-1.92; I2 = 0%, six studies, 835 patients, moderate CoE). CONCLUSIONS: This review found evidence that PR-RALP may improve early continence 1 week after catheter removal but not thereafter. Meanwhile, adverse event rates are probably not impacted and positive surgical margin rates are likely similar. There was no difference in our subgroup analysis for all outcomes with anterior reconstruction technique when combined with PR vs only PR.


Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Robótica , Incontinencia Urinaria , Humanos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Masculino , Prostatectomía/métodos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/etiología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Incontinencia Urinaria/etiología , Incontinencia Urinaria/prevención & control , Incontinencia Urinaria/cirugía
13.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 8: CD013677, 2021 08 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34365635

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Delayed recovery of urinary continence is a major adverse effect of robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) in men undergoing prostate cancer treatment. To address this issue, a number of surgical techniques have been designed to reconstruct the posterior aspect of the rhabdosphincter, which is responsible for urinary continence after removal of the prostate; however, it is unclear how well they work.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of posterior musculofascial reconstruction RALP compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, trials registries, other sources of the grey literature, and conference proceedings, up to 12 March 2021. We applied no restrictions on publication language or status. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which participants were randomized to undergo variations of posterior musculofascial reconstruction RALP versus no posterior reconstruction during RALP for clinically localized prostate cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies. Primary outcomes were: urinary continence recovery within one week after catheter removal, at three months after surgery, and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes were: urinary continence recovery at six and twelve months after surgery, potency recovery twelve months after surgery, positive surgical margins (PSM), and biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS). We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model. We rated the certainty of evidence (CoE) according to the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: Our search identified 13 records of eight unique RCTs, of which six were published studies and two were abstract proceedings. We included 1085 randomized participants, of whom 963 completed the trials (88.8%). All participants had either cT1c or cT2 or cT3a disease, with a mean prostate-specific antigen level of 8.15 ng/mL. Primary outcomes Posterior reconstruction RALP (PR-RALP) may improve urinary continence one week after catheter removal compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP (risk ratio (RR) 1.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.73; I2 = 42%; studies = 5, participants = 498; low CoE) although the CI also includes the possibility of no effect. Assuming 335 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP are continent at this time point, this corresponds to 84 more men per 1000 (33 fewer to 244 more) reporting urinary continence recovery.  Posterior reconstruction may have little to no effect on urinary continence three months after surgery compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.14; I2 = 67%; studies = 6, participants = 842; low CoE). Assuming 701 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP are continent at this time point, this corresponds to 14 fewer men per 1000 (112 fewer to 98 more) reporting urinary continence after three months. PR-RALP probably results in little to no difference in serious adverse events compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.92; I2 = 0%; studies = 6, participants = 835; moderate CoE). Assuming 25 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP experience a serious adverse event at this time point, this corresponds to six fewer men per 1000 (17 fewer to 23 more) reporting serious adverse events.  Secondary outcomes PR-RALP may result in little to no difference in recovery of continence 12 months after surgery compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.07; I2 = 25%; studies = 3, participants = 602; low CoE). Assuming 918 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP are continent at this time point, this corresponds to 18 more men per 1000 (18 fewer to 64 more) reporting urinary continence recovery.  We are very uncertain about the effects of PR-RALP on recovery of potency 12 months after surgery compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.26; I2 = 3%; studies = 2, participants = 308; very low CoE). Assuming 433 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP are potent at this time point, this corresponds to nine more men per 1000 (78 fewer to 113 more) reporting potency recovery.  PR-RALP may result in little to no difference in positive surgical margins compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.33; I2 = 50%; studies = 3, participants = 517; low CoE). Assuming 130 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP have a positive surgical margin, this corresponds to 31 more men per 1000 (46 fewer to 173 more) reporting positive surgical margins.  PR-RALP may result in little to no difference in biochemical recurrence compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.74 to 2.52; I2 = 0%; studies = 2, participants = 468; low CoE). Assuming 70 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP have experienced biochemical recurrence at this time point, this corresponds to 25 more men per 1000 (18 fewer to 107 more) reporting biochemical recurrence.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review found evidence that PR-RALP may improve early continence one week after catheter removal but not thereafter. Meanwhile, adverse event rates are probably not impacted and surgical margins rates are likely similar. This review was unable to determine if or how these findings may be impacted by the person's age, nerve-sparing status, or clinical stage. Study limitations, imprecision, and inconsistency lowered the certainty of evidence for the outcomes assessed.


Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Masculino , Prostatectomía/efectos adversos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Calidad de Vida , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/efectos adversos
14.
BJU Int ; 128(1): 12-20, 2021 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33686742

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of Retzius-sparing (RS) robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) compared to standard RALP for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. METHODS: We performed a systematic search of multiple databases and the grey literature with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status, up until June 2020. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing RS-RALP with standard RALP. We performed a meta-analysis using a random-effect model. The quality of evidence was assessed on an outcome basis according to the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: Our search identified six records of five unique RCTs, of which two were published studies, one was in press, and two were abstract proceedings. There were 571 randomized participants, of whom 502 completed the trials. The mean age of participants was 64.6 years and the mean prostate-specific antigen level was 6.9 ng/mL. Approximately 54.2% of participants had cT1c disease, 38.6% had cT2a-b disease, and 7.1% had cT2c disease. RS-RALP probably improves continence within 1 week after catheter removal (risk ratio [RR] 1.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.41-2.14; I2 = 0%; studies = 4; participants = 410; moderate-certainty evidence). Assuming 335 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP are continent at this time point, this corresponds to 248 more men per 1000 (137 more to 382 more) reporting continence recovery. RS-RALP may increase continence at 3 months after surgery compared to standard RALP (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.06-1.68; I2 = 86%; studies = 5; participants = 526; low-certainty evidence). Assuming 750 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP are continent at this time point, this corresponds to 224 more men per 1000 (41 more to 462 more) reporting continence recovery. We are very uncertain about the effects of RS-RALP on serious adverse events compared to standard RALP (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.47-4.17; studies = 2; participants = 230; very low-certainty evidence). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review indicate that RS-RALP may result in better continence outcomes than standard RALP up to 6 months after surgery. Continence outcomes at 12 months may be similar. The disadvantages of RS-RALP may be higher positive surgical margin rates. We are very uncertain about the effect on biochemical recurrence-free survival and potency outcomes. Longer-term oncological and functional outcomes are lacking, and no preplanned subgroup analyses could be performed to explore the observed heterogeneity. Surgeons should discuss these trade-offs and the limitations of the evidence with their patients when considering this approach.


Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía , Tratamientos Conservadores del Órgano , Prostatectomía/métodos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Masculino , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología
15.
Res Nurs Health ; 44(1): 111-128, 2021 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33341989

RESUMEN

Chronic pain is a significant health issue that affects approximately 50 million adults in the United States. Traditional interventions are not always an effective treatment strategy for pain control. However, the wide adoption of smartphones and the rapid growth of health information technologies over the past decade have created opportunities to use mobile health (mHealth) applications (apps) for pain tracking and self-management. In this PRISMA-compliant systematic review, we assessed the current U.S.-based research on pain-related mHealth apps to describe the app components and determine the efficacy of these interventions for persons with acute or chronic pain. We conducted a comprehensive search of five databases based on methodological guidelines from the Joanna Briggs Institute. We included articles reporting original data on mHealth interventions with pain intensity as a primary or secondary outcome and excluded articles that utilized multimodal interventions. Of the original 4959 articles, only five studies met the eligibility criteria. Most of the interventions included feasibility or pilot studies, and all studies were published between 2015 and 2018. Two of the five studies used visual analog scales. Only two of the studies reported statistically significant pain intensity outcomes, and considerable heterogeneity between the studies limited our ability to generalize findings or conduct a meta-analysis. Research investigating the components and efficacy of pain-related mHealth apps as interventions is an emerging field. To better understand the potential clinical benefits of mHealth apps designed to manage pain, further research is needed.


Asunto(s)
Dolor Crónico/terapia , Aplicaciones Móviles/normas , Manejo del Dolor/normas , Autoeficacia , Dolor Crónico/psicología , Humanos , Manejo del Dolor/métodos , Manejo del Dolor/psicología
16.
J Med Libr Assoc ; 108(3): 389-397, 2020 Jul 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32843870

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Publications are retracted for many reasons, but the continued use and citation of retracted publications presents a problem for future research. This study investigated retractions in the dental literature to understand the characteristics of retracted publications, the reasons for their retractions, and the nature and context of their citations after retraction. METHODS: In September 2018, the authors identified retracted dentistry publications using the Retraction Watch database. Citations to those publications were retrieved from Scopus and Web of Science. Characteristics of retracted publications and their citations were collected, including study design, reasons for retraction, and nature of citation (positive, negative, or neutral). We used chi-square tests to determine if there were notable differences between retracted publications that were cited following retraction and those that were not, and if there were relationships between the nature of the citation, the study design of the original publication, and its reason for retraction. RESULTS: Of the 136 retracted publications, 84 were cited after retraction. When restricted to English language, 81 retracted publications received citations from 685 publications. Only 5.4% of the citations noted the retracted status of the original publication, while 25.3% of citations were neutral and 69.3% were positive. Animal studies were more likely to be uncited after retraction, while in vitro studies and randomized controlled trials were more likely to be cited. Retracted publications that were cited negatively were more likely to have been retracted due to scientific distortion than those that were cited positively or neutrally. Retracted publications that were cited negatively were also more likely to be observational studies than those cited positively or neutrally. CONCLUSION: Retracted publications in dentistry are continually cited positively following their retraction, regardless of their study designs or reasons for retraction. This indicates that the continued citation of retracted publications in this field cannot be isolated to certain research methods or misconduct but is, instead, a more widespread issue.


Asunto(s)
Odontología , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto/normas , Retractación de Publicación como Asunto , Bibliometría , Bases de Datos Factuales , Humanos , Edición/normas , Proyectos de Investigación
17.
J Med Libr Assoc ; 108(3): 440-451, 2020 Jul 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32843875

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed health sciences librarians' attitudes toward interprofessional collaboration using the Interdisciplinary Education Perception Scale (IEPS) and gathered information on their involvement with interprofessional activities. METHODS: The authors sent a survey to librarians in the Medical Library Association's (MLA's) Interprofessional Education Special Interest Group and Research Section consisting of the IEPS and questions about their prior and current experiences with interprofessional practice and education (IPE). We compared mean IEPS scores between each MLA group and several other demographic factors to assess differences in attitudes. We also compared librarians' IEPS scores with those of previously published health professional students' IEPS scores and thematically analyzed two open-ended questions. RESULTS: Health sciences librarians' scores on the IEPS indicated positive attitudes toward IPE. There were no statistically significant differences between any group. Health sciences librarians' mean IEPS score was similar to the mean score of health professions students from a prior study. The most commonly reported interprofessional activity was teaching or facilitating learning activities for health professions students; fewer served on committees or engaged in non-curricular activities such as grand rounds and book clubs. CONCLUSION: Health sciences librarians in this study reported positive attitudes toward IPE, in line with the majority of other previously studied health professionals. Years of experience, previous health professional careers, and experience supporting IPE as a librarian had little bearing on the responses to the survey. This suggests that health sciences librarians have positive attitudes toward IPE, regardless of whether they directly support IPE programs or participate in interprofessional activities.


Asunto(s)
Actitud , Relaciones Interprofesionales , Bibliotecólogos/psicología , Bibliotecas Médicas/organización & administración , Estudios Transversales , Humanos , Proyectos Piloto , Estudiantes del Área de la Salud/psicología , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
18.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 8: CD013641, 2020 08 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32813279

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) is widely used to surgically treat clinically localized prostate cancer. It is typically performed using an approach (standard RALP) that mimics open retropubic prostatectomy by dissecting the so-called space of Retzius anterior to the bladder. An alternative, Retzius-sparing (or posterior approach) RALP (RS-RALP) has been described, which is reported to have better continence outcomes but may be associated with a higher risk of incomplete resection and positive surgical margins (PSM). OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of RS-RALP compared to standard RALP for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, trials registries, other sources of the grey literature, and conference proceedings, up to June 2020. We applied no restrictions on publication language or status. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included trials where participants were randomized to RS-RALP or standard RALP for clinically localized prostate cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently classified and abstracted data from the included studies. Primary outcomes were: urinary continence recovery within one week after catheter removal, at three months after surgery, and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes were: urinary continence recovery six and 12 months after surgery, potency recovery 12 months after surgery, positive surgical margins (PSM), biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS), and urinary and sexual function quality of life. We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: Our search identified six records of five unique randomized controlled trials, of which two were published studies, one was in press, and two were abstract proceedings. There were 571 randomized participants, of whom 502 completed the trials. Mean age of participants was 64.6 years and mean prostate-specific antigen was 6.9 ng/mL. About 54.2% of participants had cT1c disease, 38.6% had cT2a-b disease, and 7.1 % had cT2c disease. Primary outcomes RS-RALP probably improves continence within one week after catheter removal (risk ratio (RR) 1.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41 to 2.14; I2 = 0%; studies = 4; participants = 410; moderate-certainty evidence). Assuming 335 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP are continent at this time point, this corresponds to 248 more men per 1000 (137 more to 382 more) reporting continence recovery. RS-RALP may increase continence at three months after surgery compared to standard RALP (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.68; I2 = 86%; studies = 5; participants = 526; low-certainty evidence). Assuming 750 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP are continent at this time point, this corresponds to 224 more men per 1000 (41 more to 462 more) reporting continence recovery. We are very uncertain about the effects of RS-RALP on serious adverse events compared to standard RALP (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.47 to 4.17; studies = 2; participants = 230; very low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes There is probably little to no difference in continence recovery at 12 months after surgery (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.04; I2 = 0%; studies = 2; participants = 222; moderate-certainty evidence). Assuming 982 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP are continent at this time point, this corresponds to 10 more men per 1000 (29 fewer to 39 more) reporting continence recovery.  We are very uncertain about the effect of RS-RALP on potency recovery 12 months after surgery (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.80; studies = 1; participants = 55; very low-certainty evidence).  RS-RALP may increase PSMs (RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.20; I2 = 0%; studies = 3; participants = 308; low-certainty evidence) indicating a higher risk for prostate cancer recurrence. Assuming 129 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP have positive margins, this corresponds to 123 more men per 1000 (25 more to 284 more) with PSMs. We are very uncertain about the effect of RS-RALP on BCRFS compared to standard RALP (hazard ratio (HR) 0.45, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.60; I2 = 32%; studies = 2; participants = 218; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Findings of this review indicate that RS-RALP may result in better continence outcomes than standard RALP up to six months after surgery. Continence outcomes at 12 months may be similar. Downsides of RS-RALP may be higher positive margin rates. We are very uncertain about the effect on BCRFS and potency outcomes. Longer-term oncologic and functional outcomes are lacking, and no preplanned subgroup analyses could be performed to explore the observed heterogeneity. Surgeons should discuss these trade-offs and the limitations of the evidence with their patients when considering this approach.


Asunto(s)
Tratamientos Conservadores del Órgano/métodos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/prevención & control , Prostatectomía/métodos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodos , Incontinencia Urinaria/prevención & control , Anciano , Humanos , Calicreínas/sangre , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Masculino , Márgenes de Escisión , Persona de Mediana Edad , Tratamientos Conservadores del Órgano/efectos adversos , Erección Peniana , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Prostatectomía/efectos adversos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/efectos adversos , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Incontinencia Urinaria/epidemiología
19.
J Bone Joint Surg Am ; 102 Suppl 1: 36-46, 2020 May 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32251133

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The treatment of postoperative pain is an ongoing challenge for orthopaedic surgeons. Poorly controlled pain is associated with poorer patient outcomes, and the prescription of opioids may lead to prolonged, nonmedical use. Complementary and alternative medicine is widely adopted by the general public, and its use in chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions has been studied; however, its efficacy in a postoperative context has not yet been established. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review of 10 databases to identify all relevant publications. We extracted variables related to pain measurement and postoperative opioid prescriptions. RESULTS: We identified 8 relevant publications from an initial pool of 2,517 items. Of these, 5 were randomized studies and 3 were nonrandomized studies. All 8 studies addressed postoperative pain, with 5 showing significant decreases (p < 0.05) in postoperative pain. Also, 5 studies addressed postoperative opioid use, with 2 showing significant differences (p < 0.05) in opioid consumption. Substantial heterogeneity among the studies precluded meta-analysis. No articles were found to be free of potential bias. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, there is insufficient evidence to determine the efficacy of complementary and alternative medicines for postoperative pain management or as an alternative to opioid use following orthopaedic surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


Asunto(s)
Terapias Complementarias , Manejo del Dolor/métodos , Dolor Postoperatorio/terapia , Humanos , Resultado del Tratamiento
20.
Can Urol Assoc J ; 14(2): 61-68, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31348748

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to assess the effects of postoperative ureteral stent placement after uncomplicated ureteroscopy. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search with no restrictions on publication language or status up to February 1, 2019. We only included randomized trials. Two review authors independently examined full-text reports, identified relevant studies, assessed the eligibility of studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model and assessed the certainty of the evidence according to GRADE. RESULTS: We included 23 studies with 2656 randomized patients. Primary outcomes: It is uncertain whether stenting reduces the number of unplanned return visits (very low certainty of evidence [CoE]). Pain on the day of surgery is probably similar (mean difference [MD] 0.32; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.13-0.78; moderate CoE). Pain on postoperative days 1-3 may show little to no difference (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.25; 95% CI -0.32-0.82; low CoE). It is uncertain whether stented patients experience more pain on postoperative days 4-30 (very low CoE). Stenting may result in little to no difference in the need for secondary interventions (risk ratio [RR] 1.15; 95% CI 0.39-3.33; low CoE). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: We are uncertain whether stenting reduces the need for narcotics and reduces ureteral stricture rates up to 90 days (very low CoE). Rates of hospital admission may be slightly reduced (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.32-1.55; low CoE). This review was limited to patients in whom ureteroscopy was deemed 'uncomplicated.' In addition, time intervals for the grouping for the reported degree of pain were established post-hoc. The CoE for most outcomes was rated as low or very low for methodological reasons. CONCLUSIONS: Findings of this review illustrate the tradeoffs of risks and benefits faced by urologists and their patients when it comes to decision-making about stent placement after uncomplicated ureteroscopy for stone disease.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA