Clinical practice guidelines for diagnostic and treatment of the chronic heart failure.

Chronic heart failure continues to be one of the main causes of impairment in the functioning and quality of life of people who suffer from it, as well as one of the main causes of mortality in our country and around the world. Mexico has a high prevalence of risk factors for developing heart failure, such as high blood pressure, diabetes, and obesity, which makes it essential to have an evidence-based document that provides recommendations to health professionals involved in the diagnosis and treatment of these patients. This document establishes the clinical practice guide (CPG) prepared at the initiative of the Mexican Society of Cardiology (SMC) in collaboration with the Iberic American Agency for the Development and Evaluation of Health Technologies, with the purpose of establishing recommendations based on the best available evidence and agreed upon by an interdisciplinary group of experts. This document complies with international quality standards, such as those described by the US Institute of Medicine (IOM), the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE), the Intercollegiate Network for Scottish Guideline Development (SIGN) and the Guidelines International Network (G-I-N). The Guideline Development Group was integrated in a multi-collaborative and interdisciplinary manner with the support of methodologists with experience in systematic literature reviews and the development of CPG. A modified Delphi panel methodology was developed and conducted to achieve an adequate level of consensus in each of the recommendations contained in this CPG. We hope that this document contributes to better clinical decision making and becomes a reference point for clinicians who manage patients with chronic heart failure in all their clinical stages and in this way, we improve the quality of clinical care, improve their quality of life and reducing its complications.

La insuficiencia cardiaca crónica sigue siendo unas de las principales causas de afectación en el funcionamiento y en la calidad de vida de las personas que la presentan, así como una de las primeras causas de mortalidad en nuestro país y en todo el mundo. México tiene una alta prevalencia de factores de riesgo para desarrollar insuficiencia cardiaca, tales como hipertensión arterial, diabetes y obesidad, lo que hace imprescindible contar con un documento basado en la evidencia que brinde recomendaciones a los profesionales de la salud involucrados en el diagnóstico y el tratamiento de estos pacientes. Este documento establece la guía de práctica clínica (GPC) elaborada por iniciativa de la Sociedad Mexicana de Cardiología (SMC) en colaboración con la Agencia Iberoamericana de Desarrollo y Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud, con la finalidad de establecer recomendaciones basadas en la mejor evidencia disponible y consensuadas por un grupo interdisciplinario y multicolaborativo de expertos. Cumple con estándares internacionales de calidad, como los descritos por el Institute of Medicine de los Estados Unidos de América (IOM), el National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) del Reino Unido, la Intercollegiate Network for Scottish Guideline Development (SIGN) de Escocia y la Guidelines International Network (G-I-N). El grupo de desarrollo de la guía se integró de manera interdisciplinaria con el apoyo de metodólogos con experiencia en revisiones sistemáticas de la literatura y en el desarrollo de GPC. Se llevó a cabo y se condujo metodología de panel Delphi modificado para lograr un nivel de consenso adecuado en cada una de las recomendaciones contenidas en esta GPC. Esperamos que este documento contribuya para la mejor toma de decisiones clínicas y se convierta en un punto de referencia para los clínicos que manejan pacientes con insuficiencia cardiaca crónica en todas sus etapas clínicas, y de esta manera logremos mejorar la calidad en la atención clínica, aumentar la calidad de vida de los pacientes y disminuir las complicaciones de la enfermedad.

Effectiveness and safety of injectable PCSK9 inhibitors in dyslipidaemias’ treatment and cardiovascular disease prevention: An overview of 86 systematic reviews and a network metaanalysis / Eficacia y seguridad de los inyectables inhibidores de la PCSK9 en el tratamiento de dislipidemias y la prevención de enfermedades cardiovasculares: una visión general de 86 revisiones sistemáticas y un metaanálisis en red

Objective Multiple systematic reviews (SR) have been performed on the effects of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i), often providing conflicting findings. This overview and network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to summarize SR findings on the efficacy and safety of PCSK9i and provide an updated NMA. Materials and methods MEDLINE (Pubmed), Scopus, Cochrane, Epistemonikos and Google Scholar were searched from inception to September 21, 2023 for SRs of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and from January 1, 2020 to September 21, 2023 for additional RCTs. Double-independent study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were performed. Qualitative analysis was performed for SRs and a frequentist random-effects model NMA was performed for RCTs. Results Totally, 86 SRs and 76 RCTs were included. Alirocumab (77/86 [90%]) and evolocumab (73/86 [85%]) were mostly analyzed. Associations from SRs (35/42 [83%]) and the updated NMA indicated PCSK9i benefit on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). Reductions were also noted for cerebrovascular events (47/66 [71%]), coronary revascularization (29/33 [88%]) and myocardial infarction (41/63 [65%]). Alirocumab was associated with reductions on all-cause mortality (RR=0.82, 95%CI [0.72,0.94]). Data on any CV event reduction were conflicting (7/16 [44%]). Inclisiran appeared effective only on MACEs (RR=0.76, 95%CI [0.61,0.94]). No reductions in heart failure were observed (0/16). No increases were identified between PCSK9i and any (0/35) or serious adverse events (0/52). However, PCSK9i were associated with injection-site reactions (20/28 [71%]). Conclusion PCSK9i appeared to be effective in CV outcomes and their clinical application was generally safe. (AU)

Objetivo Las revisiones sistemáticas (RS) sobre los efectos de los inhibidores de la proproteína convertasa subtilisina/kexina tipo 9 (PCSK9i), presentan resultados contradictorios. Esta revisión general y metaanálisis en red (MER) tiene como objetivo resumir los hallazgos sobre la eficacia y seguridad de los PCSK9i. Materiales y métodos Se realizaron búsquedas en MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, Cochrane, Epistemonikos y Google Scholar desde sus inicios hasta el 21 de septiembre de 2023 para las RS de ensayos controlados aleatorios (ECA) y desde el 1 de enero de 2020 hasta 21 de septiembre de 2023 para los ECA adicionales. La selección de estudios, extracción de datos y evaluación de calidad se llevaron a cabo de manera doble e independiente. Se realizó un análisis cualitativo de las SR y un modelo de efectos aleatorios frecuentistas MER para los ECA. Resultados En total, se incluyeron 86 SR y 76 RCT. Alirocumab (77/86 [90%]) y evolocumab (73/86 [85%]) fueron los más analizados. Se reconocieron beneficios de los PCSK9i en eventos cardiovasculares adversos mayores (ECVAM), reducción de eventos cerebrovasculares (47/66 [71%]), revascularización coronaria (29/33 [88%]) e infartos de miocardio (41/63 [65%]). Alirocumab redujo la mortalidad por todas las causas (RR: 0,82; IC del 95%: 0,72-0,94). Los resultados sobre la reducción de cualquier evento cardiovascular (CV) fueron contradictorios (7/16 [44%]). Inclisiran pareció ser efectivo solo en la reducción de ECVAM (RR: 0,76; IC del 95%: 0,61-0,94). No se observaron reducciones en insuficiencia cardíaca (0/16) o relación con eventos adversos serios (0/52). Sin embargo, se asociaron con reacciones en el lugar de la inyección (20/28 [71%]). (AU)

Effectiveness and safety of injectable PCSK9 inhibitors in dyslipidaemias' treatment and cardiovascular disease prevention: An overview of 86 systematic reviews and a network metaanalysis.

OBJECTIVE: Multiple systematic reviews (SR) have been performed on the effects of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i), often providing conflicting findings. This overview and network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to summarize SR findings on the efficacy and safety of PCSK9i and provide an updated NMA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE (Pubmed), Scopus, Cochrane, Epistemonikos and Google Scholar were searched from inception to September 21, 2023 for SRs of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and from January 1, 2020 to September 21, 2023 for additional RCTs. Double-independent study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were performed. Qualitative analysis was performed for SRs and a frequentist random-effects model NMA was performed for RCTs. RESULTS: Totally, 86 SRs and 76 RCTs were included. Alirocumab (77/86 [90%]) and evolocumab (73/86 [85%]) were mostly analyzed. Associations from SRs (35/42 [83%]) and the updated NMA indicated PCSK9i benefit on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). Reductions were also noted for cerebrovascular events (47/66 [71%]), coronary revascularization (29/33 [88%]) and myocardial infarction (41/63 [65%]). Alirocumab was associated with reductions on all-cause mortality (RR=0.82, 95%CI [0.72,0.94]). Data on any CV event reduction were conflicting (7/16 [44%]). Inclisiran appeared effective only on MACEs (RR=0.76, 95%CI [0.61,0.94]). No reductions in heart failure were observed (0/16). No increases were identified between PCSK9i and any (0/35) or serious adverse events (0/52). However, PCSK9i were associated with injection-site reactions (20/28 [71%]). CONCLUSION: PCSK9i appeared to be effective in CV outcomes and their clinical application was generally safe.

Síntesis de evidencia para intervenciones en COVID-19: informes de actualización de la Comisión Nacional de Evaluación de Tecnologías de Salud de Argentina / Evidence synthesis for COVID-19 interventions: update reports from Argentina's National Commission for Health Technology Assessment / Síntese de evidências para intervenções em COVID-19: relatórios de atualização da Comissão Nacional de Avaliação de Tecnologias em Saúde da Argentina

RESUMEN Este informe tiene por objetivo exponer el trabajo realizado sobre el diseño, la publicación y el impacto de las actualizaciones para intervenciones en COVID-19 basadas en la evidencia, para brindar síntesis de evidencia actualizadas a partir de revisiones sistemáticas vivas sobre intervenciones terapéuticas para dar soporte en la toma de decisiones. Para ello, se generó un grupo específico de trabajo en el ámbito de la Comisión Nacional de Evaluación de Tecnologías de Salud (CONETEC) en el Ministerio de Salud de Argentina en colaboración con la Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS). Se diseñó una metodología para elaborar y publicar documentos de evaluación orientados a dar apoyo en la toma de decisiones. Estos informes de actualización se respaldaron en la exploración de tres dominios: los efectos en la salud, la factibilidad de la implementación y las recomendaciones basadas en evidencia. Las conclusiones se adaptaron en un esquema semaforizado según el balance entre los beneficios y los aspectos negativos para los distintos escenarios clínicos, a fin de mejorar su interpretación y aplicación. Durante el año 2021 se publicaron 16 informes de síntesis de evidencia (13 originales y 3 actualizaciones completas) que recibieron un destacado número consultas desde la página web de CONETEC y la Base Regional de Informes de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud de las Américas (BRISA). Así se hizo visible la necesidad de disponer de resúmenes de evidencia robustos, actualizados y confiables con adaptación al contexto de aplicación en el sistema sanitario del país. El desafío se presenta, además, en la actualización constante de la información, la diseminación apropiada y el sostenimiento en la rigurosidad en el desarrollo de los informes.

ABSTRACT This report presents the work done on the design, publication, and impact of updates on evidence-based COVID-19 interventions, in order to support decision-making with updated evidence syntheses based on living systematic reviews of therapeutic interventions. To this end, a specific working group was created within the National Commission for Health Technology Assessment (CONETEC) of the Ministry of Health of Argentina, in collaboration with the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO). A methodology was designed to develop and publish assessment documents aimed at supporting decision-making. These update reports were based on the exploration of three areas: health effects, feasibility of implementation, and evidence-based recommendations. A color-coded system was used to present the conclusions according to the balance between their positive and negative effects in different clinical scenarios, in order to improve their interpretation and implementation. In 2021, 16 evidence synthesis reports were published (13 original reports and three full updates). These were downloaded many times from the CONETEC website and the Regional Database of Health Technology Assessment Reports of the Americas (BRISA), highlighting the need for robust, up-to-date, reliable evidence summaries adapted for implementation in the country's health system. Other challenges include constant updating of information, appropriate dissemination, and sustained rigorous preparation of the reports.

RESUMO Este relatório tem como objetivo apresentar o trabalho realizado sobre o delineamento, publicação e impacto das atualizações para intervenções em COVID-19 baseadas em evidências, que visam fornecer sínteses de evidências atualizadas provenientes de revisões sistemáticas vivas sobre intervenções terapêuticas para apoiar a tomada de decisões. Para isso, foi criado um grupo de trabalho específico no âmbito da Comissão Nacional de Avaliação de Tecnologias de Saúde (CONETEC, na sigla em espanhol), do Ministério da Saúde da Argentina, em parceria com a Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde (OPAS). Foi desenhada uma metodologia para a elaboração e publicação de documentos de avaliação destinados a apoiar a tomada de decisões. Esses relatórios de atualização se basearam na exploração de três domínios: efeitos na saúde, viabilidade da implementação e recomendações baseadas em evidências. As conclusões foram adaptadas a uma escala semafórica de acordo com o equilíbrio entre os benefícios e os aspectos negativos para os diferentes cenários clínicos, de forma a melhorar a sua interpretação e aplicação. Durante o ano de 2021, foram publicados 16 relatórios de síntese de evidências (13 originais e 3 atualizações completas), que receberam um número significativo de consultas no site da CONETEC e da Base Regional de Informes de Avaliação de Tecnologias em Saúde das Américas (BRISA). Assim, tornou-se visível a necessidade de contar com resumos de evidências robustos, atualizados e confiáveis adaptados ao contexto de aplicação no sistema de saúde do país. A atualização constante das informações, sua divulgação adequada e a manutenção do rigor na elaboração dos relatórios também apresentam desafios.

Guía de práctica clínica mexicana para el diagnóstico y tratamiento de las dislipidemias y enfermedad cardiovascular aterosclerótica.

ANTECEDENTES: Las enfermedades cardiovasculares son la principal causa mundial de mortalidad y México no es la excepción. Los datos epidemiológicos obtenidos en 1990 mostraron que los padecimientos cardiovasculares representaron el 19.8% de todas las causas de muerte en nuestro país; esta cifra se incrementó de manera significativa a un 25.5% para 2015. Diversas encuestas nacionales sugieren que más del 60% de la población adulta tiene al menos un factor de riesgo para padecer enfermedades cardiovasculares (obesidad o sobrepeso, hipertensión, tabaquismo, diabetes, dislipidemias). Por otro lado, datos de la Organización Panamericana de la Salud han relacionado el proceso de aterosclerosis como la primer causa de muerte prematura, reduciendo la expectativa de vida de manera sensible, lo que tiene una enorme repercusión social. OBJETIVO: Este documento constituye la guía de práctica clínica (GPC) elaborada por iniciativa de la Sociedad Mexicana de Cardiología en colaboración con la Sociedad Mexicana de Nutrición y Endocrinología, A.C., Asociación Nacional de Cardiólogos de México, A.C., Asociación Mexicana para la Prevención de la Aterosclerosis y sus Complicaciones, A.C., Comité Normativo Nacional de Medicina General, A.C., Colegio Nacional de Medicina Geriátrica, A.C., Colegio de Medicina Interna de México, A.C., Sociedad Mexicana de Angiología y Cirugía Vascular y Endovenosa, A.C., Instituto Mexicano de Investigaciones Nefrológicas, A.C. y la Academia Mexicana de Neurología, A.C.; con el apoyo metodológico de la Agencia Iberoamericana de Desarrollo y Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud, con la finalidad de establecer recomendaciones basadas en la mejor evidencia disponible y consensuadas por un grupo interdisciplinario de expertos. El objetivo de este documento es el de brindar recomendaciones basadas en evidencia para ayudar a los tomadores de decisión en el diagnóstico y tratamiento de las dislipidemias en nuestro país. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Este documento cumple con estándares internacionales de calidad, como los descritos por el Instituto de Medicina de EE.UU., el Instituto de Excelencia Clínica de Gran Bretaña, la Red Colegiada para el Desarrollo de Guías de Escocia y la Red Internacional de Guías de Práctica Clínica. Se integró un grupo multidisciplinario de expertos clínicos y metodólogos con experiencia en revisiones sistemáticas de la literatura y el desarrollo de guías de práctica clínica. Se consensuó un documento de alcances, se establecieron las preguntas clínicas relevantes, se identificó de manera exhaustiva la mejor evidencia disponible evaluada críticamente en revisiones sistemáticas de la literatura y se desarrollaron las recomendaciones clínicas. Se utilizó la metodología de Panel Delphi modificado para lograr un nivel de consenso adecuado en cada una de las recomendaciones contenidas en esta GPC. RESULTADOS: Se consensuaron 23 preguntas clínicas que dieron origen a sus respectivas recomendaciones clínicas. CONCLUSIONES: Esperamos que este documento contribuya a la mejor toma de decisiones clínicas y se convierta en un punto de referencia para los clínicos y pacientes en el manejo de las dislipidemias y esto contribuya a disminuir la morbilidad y mortalidad derivada de los eventos cardiovasculares ateroscleróticos en nuestro país. BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of mortality worldwide and Mexico is no exception. The epidemiological data obtained in 1990 showed that cardiovascular diseases represented 19.8% of all causes of death in our country. This figure increased significantly to 25.5% for 2015. Some national surveys suggest that more than 60% of the adult population has at least one risk factor for cardiovascular disease (obesity or overweight, hypertension, smoking, diabetes, dyslipidemias). On the other hand, data from the Pan American Health Organization have linked the process of atherosclerosis as the first cause of premature death, significantly reducing life expectancy, which has enormous social repercussions. OBJECTIVE: This document constitutes the Clinical Practice Guide (CPG) prepared at the initiative of the Mexican Society of Cardiology in collaboration with the Mexican Society of Nutrition and Endocrinology, AC, National Association of Cardiologists of Mexico, AC, Mexican Association for the Prevention of Atherosclerosis and its Complications, AC, National Normative Committee of General Medicine, AC, National College of Geriatric Medicine, AC, College of Internal Medicine of Mexico, AC, Mexican Society of Angiology and Vascular and Endovenous Surgery, AC, Mexican Institute of Research Nephrological, AC and the Mexican Academy of Neurology, A.C.; with the methodological support of the Ibero-American Agency for the Development and Evaluation of Health Technologies, in order to establish recommendations based on the best available evidence and agreed upon by an interdisciplinary group of experts. The objective of this document is to provide evidence-based recommendations to help decision makers in the diagnosis and treatment of dyslipidemias in our country. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This document complies with international quality standards, such as those described by the Institute of Medicine of the USA, the Institute of Clinical Excellence of Great Britain, the Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network and the Guidelines International Network. A multidisciplinary group of clinical experts and methodologists with experience in systematic reviews of the literature and the development of clinical practice guidelines was formed. A scope document was agreed upon, relevant clinical questions were established, the best available evidence critically evaluated in systematic literature reviews was exhaustively identified, and clinical recommendations were developed. The modified Delphi Panel methodology was used to achieve an adequate level of consensus in each of the recommendations contained in this CPG. RESULTS: 23 clinical questions were agreed upon which gave rise to their respective clinical recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: We consider that this document contributes to better clinical decision-making and becomes a point of reference for clinicians and patients in the management of dyslipidemias and this contributes to reducing the morbidity and mortality derived from atherosclerotic cardiovascular events in our country.

SCRUTATIOm: cómo detectar literatura retractada incluida en revisiones sistemáticas y metaanálisis usando SCOPUS© y ZOTERO© / SCRUTATIOm: how to detect retracted literature included in systematics reviews and metaanalysis using SCOPUS© and ZOTERO©

Una buena y precisa revisión de la literatura es un elemento clave de las revisiones sistemáticas y de los metaanálisis, pues deben basarse en estudios originales de alta calidad y lógicamente nunca retractados. El objetivo de la presente nota metodológica es proporcionar un sistema rápido, reproducible y fiable de detección de literatura retractada incluida en revisiones sistemáticas y metaanálisis, que permite verificar la consistencia de los resultados y habilita la posibilidad de poder comunicar la potencial presencia de errores a las revistas implicadas mediante un proceso de revisión posterior a la publicación (post peer review). La aplicación sistemática del método SCRUTATIOm permitiría saber si en nuestra área de trabajo se ha publicado un determinado estudio que puede no aportar evidencia consistente al cuerpo del conocimiento. (AU)

A good and accurate literature review is a key element of systematic reviews and meta-analyses and always needs to be based on high quality original studies and logically never retracted. The aim of this methodological note is to provide a fast, reproducible and reliable system for detecting retracted literature included in systematic reviews and meta-analyses, allowing the consistency of the results of these to be verified and enabling the possibility of being able to communicate the potential presence of errors to the journals involved by means of a post-publication or post-peer review process. The SCRUTATIOm method, apply routinely, allows us to know if a certain study has been published in our field of study, which may not provide consistent evidence to the body of knowledge. (AU)

[SCRUTATIOm: how to detect retracted literature included in systematics reviews and metaanalysis using SCOPUS© and ZOTERO©]. / SCRUTATIOm: cómo detectar literatura retractada incluida en revisiones sistemáticas y metaanálisis usando SCOPUS© y ZOTERO©.

A good and accurate literature review is a key element of systematic reviews and meta-analyses and always needs to be based on high quality original studies and logically never retracted. The aim of this methodological note is to provide a fast, reproducible and reliable system for detecting retracted literature included in systematic reviews and meta-analyses, allowing the consistency of the results of these to be verified and enabling the possibility of being able to communicate the potential presence of errors to the journals involved by means of a post-publication or post-peer review process. The SCRUTATIOm method, apply routinely, allows us to know if a certain study has been published in our field of study, which may not provide consistent evidence to the body of knowledge.

Guía de práctica clínica mexicana para el diagnóstico y tratamiento de las dislipidemias y enfermedad cardiovascular aterosclerótica / Mexican clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of dyslipidemias and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

resumen está disponible en el texto completo

Abstract Background: Cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of mortality worldwide and Mexico is no exception. The epidemiological data obtained in 1990 showed that cardiovascular diseases represented 19.8% of all causes of death in our country. This figure increased significantly to 25.5% for 2015. Some national surveys suggest that more than 60% of the adult population has at least one risk factor for cardiovascular disease (obesity or overweight, hypertension, smoking, diabetes, dyslipidemias). On the other hand, data from the Pan American Health Organization have linked the process of atherosclerosis as the first cause of premature death, significantly reducing life expectancy, which has enormous social repercussions. Objective: This document constitutes the Clinical Practice Guide (CPG) prepared at the initiative of the Mexican Society of Cardiology in collaboration with the Mexican Society of Nutrition and Endocrinology, AC, National Association of Cardiologists of Mexico, AC, Mexican Association for the Prevention of Atherosclerosis and its Complications, AC, National Normative Committee of General Medicine, AC, National College of Geriatric Medicine, AC, College of Internal Medicine of Mexico, AC, Mexican Society of Angiology and Vascular and Endovenous Surgery, AC, Mexican Institute of Research Nephrological, AC and the Mexican Academy of Neurology, A.C.; with the methodological support of the Ibero-American Agency for the Development and Evaluation of Health Technologies, in order to establish recommendations based on the best available evidence and agreed upon by an interdisciplinary group of experts. The objective of this document is to provide evidence-based recommendations to help decision makers in the diagnosis and treatment of dyslipidemias in our country. Material and methods: This document complies with international quality standards, such as those described by the Institute of Medicine of the USA, the Institute of Clinical Excellence of Great Britain, the Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network and the Guidelines International Network. A multidisciplinary group of clinical experts and methodologists with experience in systematic reviews of the literature and the development of clinical practice guidelines was formed. A scope document was agreed upon, relevant clinical questions were established, the best available evidence critically evaluated in systematic literature reviews was exhaustively identified, and clinical recommendations were developed. The modified Delphi Panel methodology was used to achieve an adequate level of consensus in each of the recommendations contained in this CPG. Results: 23 clinical questions were agreed upon which gave rise to their respective clinical recommendations. Conclusions: We consider that this document contributes to better clinical decision-making and becomes a point of reference for clinicians and patients in the management of dyslipidemias and this contributes to reducing the morbidity and mortality derived from atherosclerotic cardiovascular events in our country.

Búsqueda y evaluación de la literatura científica: juego de escape / Searching and evaluating scientific literature: escape room

La elaboración de una estrategia de búsqueda en las bases de datos de ciencias de la salud para obtener un resultado de evidencias equilibrado entre sensibilidad y especificidad resulta un auténtico reto. Es imprescindible conocer bien los diferentes tipos de recursos para seleccionar los más apropiados en cada caso, así como los operadores, vocabularios, filtros y otras opciones de la interfaz implementados en cada una de ellos. En este artículo, con un ejercicio práctico a modo de juego, se han descrito los elementos correspondientes a la lista de verificación PRISMA-S para la presentación de una revisión rápida: criterios de elegibilidad de los estudios en formato PICO, fuentes de información obligatorias, estrategias de búsqueda en PubMed y el formulario peer review para describir la metodología de todo el proceso. (AU)

Developing a search strategy in health sciences databases to obtain a balanced evidence result between sensitivity and specificity is a real challenge. It is essential to have a good understand- ing of the different types of resources in order to select the most appropriate in each case, as well as the operators, vocabularies, filters and other interface options implemented in each of them. In this article, with a practical exercise as a game, the elements corresponding to the PRISMA-S checklist for the presentation of a rapid review have been described: eligibility criteria for studies in PICO format, mandatory information sources, search strategies in PubMed, and the peer review form to describe the methodology of the entire process. (AU)

Revisiones de alcance, revisiones paraguas y síntesis enfocada en revisión de mapas: aspectos metodológicos y aplicaciones / Scoping reviews, umbrella reviews and focused mapping review synthesis: methodological aspects and applications

RESUMEN Nuestro objetivo fue comentar las diferencias metodológicas y aplicaciones de tres nuevos tipos de revisiones con especial atención a Latinoamérica. Entre estos nuevos tipos de revisiones tenemos a las revisiones de alcance, revisiones paraguas y síntesis enfocada en revisión de mapas. Las revisiones de alcance identifican la naturaleza y extensión de la evidencia, las revisiones paraguas se centran en la síntesis de todas las revisiones sistemáticas que abordan un mismo problema de salud, mientras que las síntesis enfocadas en la revisión de mapas son opciones válidas cuando resulta inviable un mapeo clásico de la evidencia, por abordar demasiados artículos. En la medida de que los investigadores en Latinoamérica se familiaricen con la metodología y utilidad de estos nuevos tipos de revisión, se observará un incremento de la producción científica.

ABSTRACT We aimed to comment on the methodological differences and applications of these three types of reviews with special attention to Latin America. Among these new types of reviews we have the scoping review, umbrella review and focused mapping review synthesis. Scoping reviews identify the nature and extent of the evidence, umbrella reviews focus on the synthesis of all systematic reviews that address the same health problem, while focused mapping review syntheses are valid options when a classical mapping of the evidence is not feasible, due to addressing too many articles. As researchers in Latin America become familiar with the methodology and usefulness of these new types of review, an increase in scientific production will be observed.

Revisiones de alcance, revisiones paraguas y síntesis enfocada en revisión de mapas: aspectos metodológicos y aplicaciones / Scoping reviews, umbrella reviews and focused mapping review synthesis: methodological aspects and applications

RESUMEN Nuestro objetivo fue comentar las diferencias metodológicas y aplicaciones de tres nuevos tipos de revisiones con especial atención a Latinoamérica. Entre estos nuevos tipos de revisiones tenemos a las revisiones de alcance, revisiones paraguas y síntesis enfocada en revisión de mapas. Las revisiones de alcance identifican la naturaleza y extensión de la evidencia, las revisiones paraguas se centran en la síntesis de todas las revisiones sistemáticas que abordan un mismo problema de salud, mientras que las síntesis enfocadas en la revisión de mapas son opciones válidas cuando resulta inviable un mapeo clásico de la evidencia, por abordar demasiados artículos. En la medida de que los investigadores en Latinoamérica se familiaricen con la metodología y utilidad de estos nuevos tipos de revisión, se observará un incremento de la producción científica.

ABSTRACT We aimed to comment on the methodological differences and applications of these three types of reviews with special attention to Latin America. Among these new types of reviews we have the scoping review, umbrella review and focused mapping review synthesis. Scoping reviews identify the nature and extent of the evidence, umbrella reviews focus on the synthesis of all systematic reviews that address the same health problem, while focused mapping review syntheses are valid options when a classical mapping of the evidence is not feasible, due to addressing too many articles. As researchers in Latin America become familiar with the methodology and usefulness of these new types of review, an increase in scientific production will be observed.

La declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para reportar revisiones sistemáticas / The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline to report systematic reviews

La declaración de ítems preferidos de reporte para revisiones sistemáticas y metaanálisis (PRISMA, por sus inicial es en inglés), publicada en 2009, fue diseñada para ayudar a los autores de revisiones sistemáticas a reportar de manera transparente las razones para realizar la revisión, y qué hicieron y encontraron los autores. Durante la última década, los avances en la metodología y la terminología de las revisiones sistemáticas requirieron una actualización de la guía. La declaración PRISMA 2020 reemplaza la declaración de 2009 e incluye una nueva guía de reporte que refleja los avances metodológicos para identificar, seleccionar, evaluar y sintetizar estudios. La estructura y presentación de los ítems se han modificado para facilitar su implementación. En este artículo, el autor resume los aspectos relevantes de la actualización del instrumento y presenta la lista de verificación PRISMA 2020 (de 27 elementos), la lista de verificación ampliada que detalla las recomendaciones para aplicar cada ítem, la lista de verificación de resúmenes de revisiones sistemáticas, y los diagramas de flujo para revisiones nuevas y actualizadas (traducidas al español en archivos MS Word para que puedan ser fácilmente editables y utilizables en la práctica). (AU)

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic review authors transparently report the reasons for conducting the review, and what the authors did and found. Over the last decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology required an update of the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes a new reporting guidelinethat reflects methodological advances in identifying, selecting, assessing and synthesising studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, the author summarises the relevant aspects of the updated instrument and presents the PRISMA 2020 checklist (of 27 items), the extended checklist detailing recommendations for implementing each item, the checklist for summaries of systematic reviews, and the flowcharts for new and updated reviews (translated into Spanish in MS Word files so that they can be easily editable and usable in practice). (AU)

Fundamentos y métodos de las revisiones sistemáticas / Fundamentals and method of systematic reviews

Las revisiones sistemáticas (RS) son síntesis cualitativas y, a veces, cuantitativas sobre la evidencia disponible respecto de un tema puntual. Este trabajo contextualiza su origen en el movimiento de la medicina basada en la evidencia y las define como un tipo de investigación orientada a identificar, valorar críticamente y sintetizar conocimiento científico previo. El método de RS se presenta aquí en una serie de fases o pasos: planteo del objetivo, búsqueda y selección de estudios, evaluación de calidad, extracción y análisis de datos, metaanálisis e interpretación de resultados. Los criterios de evaluación de la evidencia científica, un pilar fundamental de este tipo de investigación, son la validez interna, la precisión y la validez externa de los resultados. La calidad de la evidencia científica, junto con la cantidad y la consistencia, son la base sobre las cuales se pueden establecer recomendaciones. El método de RS es útil en la práctica profesional, donde se requiere el manejo de evidencia científica actualizada sobre los asuntos en los que a diario se deciden diagnósticos o intervenciones, así como un tipo de investigación que puede implementarse en grado o posgrado, ya que podría llegar a resultados originales mediante la síntesis de sus antecedentes

Systematic reviews (SR) are qualitative and, sometimes, quantitative syntheses on the available evidence regarding a specific topic. This work contextualizes its origin in the evidence-based medicine movement and defines it as a type of health research aimed to identify, critically appraise and synthesize previous scientific knowledge. The SR method is presented here in a series of steps: objective, search and selection of studies, quality assessment, data extraction and analysis, meta-analysis and interpretation of results. The internal validity, precision and external validity of the results are explained as criteria to assess the quality of the evidence. The quality of the evidence, together with the quantity and consistency, are the basis on which recommendations can be made. The SR method is useful in professional practice, where the management of up-to-date scientific evidence is required to make decisions on diagnoses or interventions daily, as well as a type of research that can be implemented in undergraduate or graduate studies, since it could arrive at original results by synthesizing the previous knowledge.