Prevalence of orofacial pain in individuals with mild cognitive impairment or dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review investigated the prevalence of orofacial pain in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The search was conducted in five databases (Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL, Scopus and LILACS), in three grey literature sources and in included articles' reference lists. Three independent reviewers performed study selection, quality appraisal and data extraction. The risk of bias was assessed with the National Institutes of Health tool. Prevalence was calculated using the random-effects model. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were used to explore the heterogeneity of results. RESULTS: The database and grey literature search led to 12 246 results, from which nine studies were included; a further four were selected through citation searching. The total sample comprised 6115 patients with dementia and 84 with MCI. All studies had high risk of bias. The overall estimated pooled prevalence of orofacial pain among dementia participants was 19.0% (95% CI, 11.0%-27.0%; I2 , 97.1%, P < .001). Only one study included MCI participants, among which the prevalence of orofacial pain was 20.5%. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that the different sources of diagnosis might explain the heterogeneity. A higher prevalence of orofacial pain was observed in dementia participants aged over 80 years or living in nursing homes. Meta-regression analysis showed a nonlinear relationship between age and the prevalence of orofacial pain. CONCLUSIONS: The pooled data from the primary studies revealed that 2 out of 10 patients with dementia have orofacial pain. Further research is needed to clarify the magnitude in individuals with MCI.

Online information on medical cannabis is not always aligned with scientific evidence and may raise unrealistic expectations.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing literature on the potential medical uses of Cannabis sativa and cannabinoid compounds. Although these have only been approved by regulatory agencies for a few indications, there is a hype about their possible benefits in a variety of conditions and a large market in the wellness industry. As in many cases patients search for information on cannabis products online, we have analyzed the information on medical cannabis available on the Internet. Therefore, this study aims at assessing the quality of the information available online on medical cannabis. METHODS: We searched "medical cannabis" on June 2019 using google.com and downloaded the first 243 websites. After excluding dead links or websites with no information about cannabis, 176 websites were included. They were then classified for their typology (e.g., commercial, government, news outlets). As an indicator of trustworthiness, we used the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) score, which assesses the indication of date, author, ownership of the website, and the presence of references. We also considered if a website is certified by Health-On-the-Net (HON), an independent organization, by displaying a HONCode symbol. Subsequently, we performed a content analysis to assess both the medical cannabis indications mentioned by webpages and the completeness of the information provided (whether they mentioned potential side effects and legal/regulatory issues or not). RESULTS: Analyzing 176 webpages returned by a search engine, we found that 52% of them were news websites. Pain, epilepsy, and multiple sclerosis were the most frequently mentioned therapeutic areas (cited in 92, 84 and 80 webpages, respectively), which did not always match those for which there is regulatory approval. Information was also incomplete, with only 22% of the webpages mentioning potential side effects. Health portal websites provided the most complete information, with all of them (n = 7) reporting side effects. On average, 80% of webpages had a neutral stance on the potential benefits of medical cannabis, with commercial websites having more frequently a positive stance (67%). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the information that can be found online is not always aligned in terms of the therapeutic areas for which science-based evidence is often still weak.

Corrigendum: Fake News or Weak Science? Visibility and Characterization of Antivaccine Webpages Returned by Google in Different Languages and Countries.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.01215.].

Fake News or Weak Science? Visibility and Characterization of Antivaccine Webpages Returned by Google in Different Languages and Countries.

The 1998 Lancet paper by Wakefield et al., despite subsequent retraction and evidence indicating no causal link between vaccinations and autism, triggered significant parental concern. The aim of this study was to analyze the online information available on this topic. Using localized versions of Google, we searched "autism vaccine" in English, French, Italian, Portuguese, Mandarin, and Arabic and analyzed 200 websites for each search engine result page (SERP). A common feature was the newsworthiness of the topic, with news outlets representing 25-50% of the SERP, followed by unaffiliated websites (blogs, social media) that represented 27-41% and included most of the vaccine-negative websites. Between 12 and 24% of websites had a negative stance on vaccines, while most websites were pro-vaccine (43-70%). However, their ranking by Google varied. While in Google.com, the first vaccine-negative website was the 43rd in the SERP, there was one vaccine-negative webpage in the top 10 websites in both the British and Australian localized versions and in French and two in Italian, Portuguese, and Mandarin, suggesting that the information quality algorithm used by Google may work better in English. Many webpages mentioned celebrities in the context of the link between vaccines and autism, with Donald Trump most frequently. Few websites (1-5%) promoted complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) but 50-100% of these were also vaccine-negative suggesting that CAM users are more exposed to vaccine-negative information. This analysis highlights the need for monitoring the web for information impacting on vaccine uptake.

Health information quality of websites on periodontology.

AIM: This study aimed to assess the quality of the information available on the Web on gum disease. METHODS: The term "gum disease" was searched in Google and in MedlinePlus. The first 200 websites were analysed by the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) criteria and the Health On the Net Foundation (HONCode) certification, instruments for assessing quality of health information. Data were analysed the Mann-Whitney test or Kruskal-Wallis test, followed by the Dunn's test, using the GraphPad Prism Software version 6. RESULTS: MedlinePlus presented a significantly higher JAMA score than Google. Google's first 10 results had a higher JAMA score than the remaining websites. Journalism and health portals the most reliable affiliations, while commercial and dental practices had low JAMA scores. JAMA score was significantly higher in websites with the HONCode certification compared to the ones without it. CONCLUSION: Currently, there are concerns regarding patients' use of the Internet for accessing health information. However, the conclusion we can make is that Google seems to favour websites with high quality information, at least in terms of JAMA score or HONCode accreditation. The JAMA score of dental practices' websites could be improved by providing basic information such as authorship and date.