Music-based Intervention for Improving Sleep Quality of Adults without Sleep Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Listening to music is often used as a self-help intervention to improve sleep quality, but its efficacy among individuals without sleep disorder remains unclear. METHODS: A search was performed on five databases to identify for studies that examined the use of music-based intervention to improve sleep quality among individuals without sleep disorder. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). RESULTS: Twenty-two articles which recruited 1,514 participants were included for review. Meta-analysis of six studies including 424 participants did not find an improvement in sleep quality among recipients of music-based intervention compared to those with standard care (mean difference: -0.80; 95% CI: -2.15 to 0.54, low-quality evidence). Subgroup analysis showed a clear improvement in sleep quality when interventions were administered for at least 3 weeks (-2.09; -3.84 to -0.34, n = 3). No difference in terms of sleep onset latency (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.32; 95% CI -0.88 to 0.25, n = 4, very-low quality evidence) and sleep efficiency (SMD: -0.59; 95% CI -3.15 to 1.97, n = 2, very-low quality evidence) were observed. The effect of music-based intervention on anxiety, depression and quality of life were mixed with suggestions of possible benefits. CONCLUSION: Music-based intervention in addition to standard care appears to be a promising strategy to improve sleep quality when delivered for 3 week or longer. However, effects are inconsistent across studies and larger randomized controlled studies reporting long-term outcomes are needed before it can be recommended for routine use. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42018081193.

The Health Effects of Chocolate and Cocoa: A Systematic Review.

Chocolate has a history of human consumption tracing back to 400 AD and is rich in polyphenols such as catechins, anthocyanidins, and pro anthocyanidins. As chocolate and cocoa product consumption, along with interest in them as functional foods, increases worldwide, there is a need to systematically and critically appraise the available clinical evidence on their health effects. A systematic search was conducted on electronic databases such as MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) using a search strategy and keywords. Among the many health effects assessed on several outcomes (including skin, cardiovascular, anthropometric, cognitive, and quality of life), we found that compared to controls, chocolate or cocoa product consumption significantly improved lipid profiles (triglycerides), while the effects of chocolate on all other outcome parameters were not significantly different. In conclusion, low-to-moderate-quality evidence with short duration of research (majority 4-6 weeks) showed no significant difference between the effects of chocolate and control groups on parameters related to skin, blood pressure, lipid profile, cognitive function, anthropometry, blood glucose, and quality of life regardless of form, dose, and duration among healthy individuals. It was generally well accepted by study subjects, with gastrointestinal disturbances and unpalatability being the most reported concerns.

Use of Composite Outcomes in Neonatal Trials: An Analysis of the Cochrane Reviews.

INTRODUCTION: Composite outcomes are used to increase the power of a study by combining event rates. Many composite outcomes in adult clinical trials have components that differ substantially in patient importance, event rate, and effect size, making interpretation challenging. Little is known about the use of composite outcomes in neonatal randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: We assessed the use of composite outcomes in neonatal RCTs included in Cochrane Neonatal reviews published till November 2017. Two authors reviewed the components of the composite outcomes to compare their patient importance and computed the ratios of effect sizes and event rates between the components, with an a priori threshold of 1.5, indicating a substantial difference. Descriptive statistics were presented. RESULTS: We extracted 7,766 outcomes in 2,134 RCTs in 312 systematic reviews. Among them, 55 composite outcomes (0.7%) were identified in 46 RCTs. The vast majority (92.7%) of composite outcomes had 2 components, with death being the most common component (included 51 times [92.7%]). The components in nearly three-quarters of the composite outcomes (n = 40 [72.7%]) had different patient importance, while the effect sizes and event rates differed substantially between the components in 27 (49.1%) and 35 (63.6%) outcomes, respectively, with up to 43-fold difference in the event rates observed. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of composite outcomes in neonatal RCTs had different patient importance with contrasting effect sizes and event rates between the components. In patient communication, clinicians should highlight individual components, rather than the composites, with explanation on the relationship between the components, to avoid misleading impression on the effect of the intervention. Future trials should report the estimates of all individual components alongside the composite outcomes presented.