Strategies for communicating scientific evidence on healthcare to managers and the population: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Health evidence needs to be communicated and disseminated in a manner that is clearly understood by decision-makers. As an inherent component of health knowledge translation, communicating results of scientific studies, effects of interventions and health risk estimates, in addition to understanding key concepts of clinical epidemiology and interpreting evidence, represent a set of essential instruments to reduce the gap between science and practice. The advancement of digital and social media has reshaped the concept of health communication, introducing new, direct and powerful communication platforms and gateways between researchers and the public. The objective of this scoping review was to identify strategies for communicating scientific evidence in healthcare to managers and/or population. METHODS: We searched Cochrane Library, Embase®, MEDLINE® and other six electronic databases, in addition to grey literature, relevant websites from related organizations for studies, documents or reports published from 2000, addressing any strategy for communicating scientific evidence on healthcare to managers and/or population. RESULTS: Our search identified 24 598 unique records, of which 80 met the inclusion criteria and addressed 78 strategies. Most strategies focused on risk and benefit communication in health, were presented by textual format and had been implemented and somehow evaluated. Among the strategies evaluated and appearing to yield some benefit are (i) risk/benefit communication: natural frequencies instead of percentages, absolute risk instead relative risk and number needed to treat, numerical instead nominal communication, mortality instead survival; negative or loss content appear to be more effective than positive or gain content; (ii) evidence synthesis: plain languages summaries to communicate the results of Cochrane reviews to the community were perceived as more reliable, easier to find and understand, and better to support decisions than the original summaries; (iii) teaching/learning: the Informed Health Choices resources seem to be effective for improving critical thinking skills. CONCLUSION: Our findings contribute to both the knowledge translation process by identifying communication strategies with potential for immediate implementation and to future research by recognizing the need to evaluate the clinical and social impact of other strategies to support evidence-informed policies. Trial registration protocol is prospectively available in MedArxiv (doi.org/10.1101/2021.11.04.21265922).

Effectiveness and Safety of Ozone Therapy in Dental Caries Treatment: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of ozone therapy for treating dental caries. METHODS: We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in 8 databases, from inception to April 4, 2020 (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, LILACS, Bibliografia Brasileira de Odontologia, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO, and OpenGrey). Primary outcome measures were antimicrobial effect and adverse events. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool to evaluate methodological quality of included RCTs and GRADE approach to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. We used the Review Manager software to conduct meta-analyses. RESULTS: We included 12 RCTs comparing ozone therapy with no ozone, chlorhexidine digluconate, fissure sealants (alone and added to ozone), and fluoride. Considering primary outcomes, ozone therapy showed (a) lower reduction in the bacterial number than chlorhexidine digluconate in children (mean difference [MD]: -5.65 [-9.79 to -1.51]), but no difference was observed in adults (MD: -0.10 [-1.07 to 0.88]); (b) higher reduction in the bacterial number than sealant (MD: 12.60 [3.86-21.34]), but no difference was observed after final excavation (MD: -0.00 [-0.01 to 0.01]). Regarding safety of ozone therapy, results from individual studies presented no adverse events during or after treatment. Most of these results are imprecise and should be interpreted with caution because of clinical and methodological concerns, small sample size, and wide confidence interval, precluding to determine the real effect direction. CONCLUSION: Based on a very low certainty of evidence, there is not enough support from published RCTs to recommend the use of ozone for the treatment of dental caries. Well-conducted studies should be encouraged, measuring mainly the antimicrobial effects of ozone therapy at long term and following the recommendations of the CONSORT statement for the reporting of RCTs.

Melatonin for preventing primary headache: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of melatonin for primary headache. METHODS: This systematic review following the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions recommendations and PRISMA Statement. RESULTS: Four randomized controlled trials were included (351 participants). According to the GRADE approach the quality of evidence was very low. The use of melatonin for migraine showed that (i) reduced the number of days with pain and the analgesic consumption when compared with placebo, (ii) no benefits on headache intensity, number of headache days and analgesics consumption when compared with amitriptyline, (iii) reduced the number of analgesic consumption, the attack frequency and the headache intensity when associated with propranolol plus nortriptyline vs placebo plus propranolol plus nortriptyline, and (iv) no difference for any of the interest outcomes when associated with propranolol plus nortriptyline vs sodium valproate plus propranolol plus nortriptyline. The use of melatonin for cluster headache when compared with placebo showed a reduction in the daily number of analgesic consumption and no difference in the number of daily attacks. Adverse events were poorly reported by all of the studies. CONCLUSION: This review found that so far there are few clinical trials, with poor methodological quality about melatonin for primary headaches. The available evidence is not sufficient to support the use of melatonin in clinical practice for this population. Further research is still necessary for assess its effects (benefits and harms) for primary headaches patients. Number of Protocol registration in PROSPERO database: CRD42017067105 (available at https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42017067105) .

Cannabinoids for nausea and vomiting related to chemotherapy: Overview of systematic reviews.

Nausea and vomiting are common and distressing adverse events of chemotherapy. This review focuses on the findings and quality of systematic reviews (SRs) of cannabinoids for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Review of SRs, a systematic literature search, was conducted in several electronic databases and included SRs evaluating cannabinoids for CINV in cancer patients. Methodological quality and quality of reporting were evaluated by AMSTAR and PRISMA, respectively. Initial search retrieved 2,206 records, and 5 SRs were included. On the basis of findings of the sole SR judged as high methodological quality, cannabinoids seem to be more effective than placebo, equal to prochlorperazine for reducing CINV, and to be preferred by patients. The response to different combinations of antiemetic agents seems to be equal to 1 antiemetic alone. The average of AMSTAR score was 5, and the average of PRISMA score was 13.2. Cannabinoids represent a valuable option for treating CINV, despite the adverse events related to treatment, such as drowsiness and cognitive impairment. There is no good quality evidence to recommend or not the use of cannabinoids for CINV. More studies are still needed to evaluate the effectiveness of cannabinoids when compared with modern antiemetics.

Effects of Caffeine Supplementation on Physical Performance of Soccer Players: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

CONTEXT: Caffeine is 1 of the most popular supplements consumed by athletes, and the evidence for improving soccer performance remains limited. OBJECTIVE: To investigate and update the effects (benefits and harms) of caffeine to improve performance on soccer players. DATA SOURCES: Electronic search in Medline (via PubMed), CENTRAL, Embase, SPORTDiscus, and LILACS, from inception to March 28, 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of caffeine on the performance of soccer players. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 1. DATA EXTRACTION: Data extraction was conducted independently by 2 authors using a piloted form. We assessed methodological quality (Cochrane risk-of-bias [RoB] table) and the certainty of the evidence (GRADE [Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation] approach). RESULTS: Sixteen RCTs were included. Overall methodological quality was classified as unclear to low risk of bias. When assessing aerobic endurance, meta-analyses did not demonstrate the differences between caffeine and placebo (mean difference [MD], 44.9 m; 95% confidence interval [CI], -77.7 to 167.6). Similarly, no difference was observed during time to fatigue test (MD, 169.8 seconds; 95% CI, -71.8 to 411.6). Considering anaerobic power, meta-analyses also did not find differences for vertical jump (MD, 1.01 cm; 95% CI, -0.68 to 2.69) and repeated sprint tests (MD, -0.02 seconds; 95% CI, -0.09 to 0.04), as well as reaction time agility test (MD, 0.02 seconds; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.04) and rating of perceived exertion (MD, 0.16 points; 95% CI, -0.55 to 0.87). Regarding safety, a few minor adverse events were reported. Based on the GRADE approach, the certainty of this evidence was classified as very low to low. CONCLUSION: We found no significant improvement in soccer-related performance with caffeine compared with placebo or no intervention. However, caffeine appears to be safe.

Reporting quality and adherence of randomized controlled trials about statins and/or fibrates for diabetic retinopathy to the CONSORT checklist.

BACKGROUND: A considerable amount of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been published on statins and/or fibrates for diabetic retinopathy, a clinical condition associated with high social and economic burden. Adherence to the CONSORT statement items is imperative to ensure transparency and reproducibility in clinical research. The aim of this study is to assess the reporting quality and the adherence to CONSORT of RCTs assessing statins and/or fibrates for diabetic retinopathy. METHODS: We conducted a critical appraisal study at Discipline of Evidence-based Medicine, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp). A sensitive literature search was performed to identify all relevant RCTs, with no time or language limits. Two authors independently evaluated the reporting quality of the selected RCTs using the CONSORT statement as a standard. RESULTS: Thirteen reports of RCTs were included in this study. The adherence of the reports to CONSORT items ranged from 24% to 68%. The median score was 11 (interquartile range (IQR) 8 to 13). When analyzed separately, the methods sections of the reports had a median of three items (IQR 2 to 4) judged adherent to the methods items of CONSORT (items 3 to 12). The most underreported items were those related to trial design, title and abstract, allocation concealment, implementation of the randomization sequence, and blinding. Other important items, such as the one related to the description of the inclusion criteria, also had low adherence. CONCLUSIONS: The overall adherence to the CONSORT checklist items was poor, especially in the items related to the methods section. RCT reports on statins and/or fibrates for diabetic retinopathy must be optimized to avoid reporting biases and to improve transparency and reproducibility.

Busca em bases de dados eletrônicas da área da saúde: por onde começar / Search in databases area electronics health: where to start

Introdução: Com o crescimento contínuo das informações disponíveis na área da saúde, é fundamental que o profissional da saúde desenvolva habilidades e competências para realizar buscas de evidências cientificas. Objetivo: Apresentar as principais bases da área da saúde e os mecanismos de busca específicos para cada uma delas. Métodos: Estudo descritivo desenvolvido na Disciplina de Medicina Baseada em Evidências da Escola Paulista de Medicina (EPM), Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp). Resultados: Este estudo apresentou os quatro passos do processo de busca em uma base de dados científica da área da saúde: (1) identificação da pergunta estruturada por meio dos acrônimos PICO/PECO, (2) escolha da base de dados (3) escolha e uso dos descritores em saúde apropriados para cada base (DeCS/MeSH/EMTREE) e (4) escolha e uso dos operadores booleanos (AND/OR/AND NOT). Conclusão: O processo de elaboração de uma estratégia de busca para bases de dados da área da saúde pode ser estruturado em quatro passos iniciais, que vão da identificação da pergunta estruturada ao uso dos operadores booleanos. Apropriar-se destes passos é fundamental para conseguir elaborar uma estratégia de busca adequada, capaz de recuperar os estudos de interesse e que abordem realmente a pergunta proposta.

Evidências de revisões sistemáticas Cochrane sobre o tratamento da gota / Evidence of Revisions Cochrane systematic reviews gout treatment

Contexto: A gota é uma doença articular metabólica inflamatória, caracterizada pelo acúmulo de cristais de monourato de sódio no líquido sinovial das articulações e em outros tecidos. Objetivo: apresentar as evidências de revisões sistemáticas Cochrane sobre efetividade e segurança de intervenções disponíveis para o manejo da gota. Métodos: Foram identificadas revisões sistemáticas a partir de busca na Biblioteca Cochrane. Dois autores avaliaram as revisões quanto aos critérios de elegibilidade das revisões encontradas e apresentaram síntese de seus achados. Resultados: Foram incluídas 13 revisões sistemáticas Cochrane (6 para gota aguda e 7 para gota crônica) que avaliaram intervenções medicamentosas sistêmicas e locais (tópica e intra-articular) e mudanças no estilo de vida. A confiança no corpo final das evidências encontradas variou de desconhecida a moderada entre os desfechos considerados. Os principais resultados mostraram que anti-inflamatórios não esteroidais (AINE) convencionais são tão efetivos quanto AINE inibidores da ciclo-oxigenase-2 e corticoides para controle da dor em pacientes com gota aguda. Para gota crônica, o alopurinol parece ser semelhante ao febuxostate e a benzbromarona na prevenção de crises de gota. Conclusão: Nenhum dos achados das revisões forneceu evidência de alta certeza sobre os efeitos das intervenções para gota, ou seja, estudos futuros podem, com variada probabilidade, modificar a estimativa que conhecemos hoje para os efeitos das intervenções avaliadas.

Iniciativa COMET. Escolhendo desfechos em ensaios clínicos randomizados / Initiative COMET. Choosing outcomes in randomized controlled trials

Introdução: A escolha dos desfechos de um ensaio clínico é complexa e, muitas vezes, subjetiva. Muitas variáveis podem interferir no processo de escolha, aumentando a heterogeneidade clínica entre os ensaios clínicos que se propõem a avaliar uma mesma questão clínica, além de aumentar o risco de viés de relato e levar a custos desnecessários com desfechos de pouca relevância. Objetivos: Apresentar a iniciativa COMET (Core Outcomes Measures in Effectiveness Trials, ou, em português, Medidas de Desfechos Principais em Ensaios Clínicos de Efetividade) e discutir a importância desta base de dados de desfechos para a avaliação da efetividade de intervenções em saúde. Métodos: Estudo descritivo realizado na Disciplina de Medicina Baseada em Evidências da Escola Paulista de Medicina (EPM), Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp). Resultados: A iniciativa COMET tem como objetivo identificar os desfechos mais relevantes para cada situação clínica e promover a sua disseminação. Por meio de uma base de dados, a iniciativa COMET disponibiliza os vários conjuntos de desfechos relevantes identificados. Esta base está disponível gratuitamente (http://www.comet-initiative.org/resources), ainda apenas na língua inglesa, para ser acessada por pesquisadores, gestores, profissionais da saúde e pacientes, e com o objetivo de orientar o processo de escolha dos desfechos de um ensaio clínico. Conclusão: A iniciativa COMET, por meio de sua base de dados, se apresenta como uma ferramenta útil para a definição dos desfechos mais relevantes em saúde, auxiliando o planejamento adequado de um ensaio clínico. Com a disseminação do uso desta base de dados, espera-se aumentar a homogeneidade entre os ensaios clínicos que avaliam uma mesma pergunta clínica, minimizar o risco de viés de relato seletivo dos desfechos e otimizar o uso de recursos no desenvolvimento de ensaios clínicos.

Análises econômicas em saúde. Estudo descritivo / Economic analysis in health. Descriptive study

Introdução: As avaliações econômicas são importantes para quantificar e comparar custos e consequências das alternativas disponíveis em saúde. Objetivos: Descrever as características e a utilidade dos principais tipos de estudos de análises econômicas. Métodos: Estudo descritivo e de análise crítica realizado na Disciplina de Medicina Baseada em Evidências da Escola Paulista de Medicina (EPM), Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp). Resultados: Apresentamos características e exemplos dos principais tipos de análises econômicas em saúde, como análise de custo-utility, análise de custo-minimização, análise de custo-efetividade e análise de custo-benefício. Conclusão: Existem diferentes tipos de análise econômica, destinados a responder perguntas específicas, que precisam ser bem planejados e conduzidos para embasar a tomada de decisão de gestores e profissionais da saúde, tornando o processo mais explícito e objetivo.