Supplemental Material for Estimating the Standardized Mean Difference With Minimum Risk: Maximizing Accuracy and Minimizing Cost With Sequential Estimation

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Sequential Estimation ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Minimum Risk ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference

Teledentistry and mHealth for Promotion and Prevention of Oral Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 002203452110038
Author(s):  
C.E. Fernández ◽  
C.A. Maturana ◽  
S.I. Coloma ◽  
A. Carrasco-Labra ◽  
R.A. Giacaman
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Oral Health ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Text Messages ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Large Reduction ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference

The dental profession has experienced a dramatic acceleration in the use of communication systems and information-based technologies over recent years, originating new paradigms for the prevention and promotion of oral health. The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the effect of teledentistry-based (telematic) strategies, reported in randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized trials, with a focus on oral health prevention and promotion–related outcomes in patients of all ages. We searched Medline via PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science from inception until August 2020, regardless of the language of publication. We selected studies for inclusion and conducted data extraction, assessed risk of bias (Cochrane tool), and evaluated the certainty of the evidence (GRADE approach) in duplicate and independently. Out of 898 potentially eligible references, we selected 43 for full-text screening, of which 19 studies proved eligible: 18 randomized controlled trials and 1 quasi-randomized study. Virtual interventions were mostly asynchronous via apps ( n = 9), text messages ( n = 9), or computer-aided learning ( n = 1). The use of teledentistry as compared with conventional strategies may result in a large reduction in the plaque index (standardized mean difference, −1.18; 95% CI, −1.54 to −0.82; I2 = 92%; low certainty) and will likely result in a large reduction in the gingival index (standardized mean difference, −2.17; 95% CI, −3.15 to −1.19; I2 = 97%; moderate certainty) and in the incidence of white spot lesions (risk ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.66; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty), with an increased effect over time. Evidence suggests that teledentistry, particularly mHealth (messages and apps), is a promising clinical tool for preventing and promoting oral health, especially under the accelerated virtualization of dentistry. Future studies should include a broader spectrum of the population, including adults and elders, to better inform policy and implementation of teledentistry (PROSPERO: CRD42020192685).

Intralymphatic immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 283-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael T. Werner ◽  
John V. Bosso
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Adverse Event ◽  
Skin Prick Testing ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Random Effects Model ◽  
Nasal Provocation ◽  
Intralymphatic Immunotherapy ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference

Background: Only a fraction of patients with allergic rhinitis receive allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT). AIT is most commonly delivered subcutaneously in a series of injections over 3‐5 years. Common obstacles to completing this therapy include cost and inconvenience. Intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) has been proposed as a faster alternative, which requires as few as three injections spaced 4 weeks apart. Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the current evidence that supports the use of ILIT for allergic rhinitis. Methods: Clinical trials were identified in the published literature by using an electronic search strategy and were evaluated by using a risk of bias tool. Treatment outcome (symptom scores, medication scores, and combined symptom and medication scores) and provocation testing results (nasal provocation and skin-prick testing) were included in a meta-analysis of standardized mean difference with subgrouping by using a random-effects model. Overall adverse event rates were tabulated, and overall risk ratios were calculated by using a random-effects model. Results: We identified 17 clinical trials that met eligibility criteria. The standardized mean difference of ILIT on the symptom and medication score was ‐0.72 (95% confidence interval [CI], ‐0.98 to ‐0.46; p < 0.0001) (n = 10). The standardized mean difference of ILIT on nasal provocation and skin-prick testing was ‐1.00 (95% CI, ‐1.38 to ‐0.61; p < 0.0001) (n = 7) and ‐0.73 (95% CI, ‐0.99 to ‐0.47; p < 0.0001) (n = 7), respectively. No statistically significant heterogeneity was detected. The overall adverse event rate was 39.5% for ILIT and 23.5% for placebo. Also, 98.4% of adverse events were mild. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that ILIT was safe, conferred desensitization to seasonal and nonseasonal allergens, alleviated allergic rhinitis symptoms, and reduced medication use. A larger randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial will be necessary for wider adaptation of this form of AIT.

Efficacy of Adjuvant Magnesium for Posttonsillectomy Morbidity in Children: A Meta-analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 158 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hye Kyung Cho ◽  
In Joon Park ◽  
Ho Young Yoon ◽  
Se Hwan Hwang
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Postoperative Bleeding ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Local Administration ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Analgesic Requirement ◽  
Administration Routes ◽  
Randomized Controlled Studies ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference

Objectives The perioperative administration of magnesium is known to reduce postoperative morbidities in adults, such as pain, agitation, and laryngospasm. The objective is to assess the effects of perioperative magnesium as the adjuvant to tonsillectomy as compared with tonsillectomy in children. Data Source Five databases (PubMed, SCOPUS, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane). Method Two authors independently searched databases up to January 2017. We compared perioperative magnesium administration (magnesium groups) with no administration of magnesium (control group). The following outcomes were measured: postoperative pain intensity, analgesics administration, or other morbidities (laryngospasm, agitation, postoperative bleeding) in the postoperative 24 hours. Additionally, to evaluate the discrepancy of effects according to different administration routes, subgroup analyses regarding effects according to systemic or local administration of magnesium were performed. Results Nine prospective randomized controlled studies (n = 615) that evaluated the effect of magnesium in children having undergone tonsillectomy met inclusion criteria. Compared with control group, the time for first analgesic requirement was significantly delayed in magnesium groups (standardized mean difference = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.20-1.31; P = .0079). Laryngospasm (log odds ratio = −1.09; 95% CI,−2.11 to −0.07; P = .0362) and agitation score (standardized mean difference = −0.67; 95% CI, −0.97 to −0.36; P < .0001) in the recovery room also significantly decreased in magnesium groups. In subgroup analyses regarding pain and laryngospasm-related measurements, local administration of magnesium was shown to be more effective at reducing postoperative morbidities. Conclusions Perioperative magnesium regardless of route may offer pain, agitation, and laryngospasm relief without adverse effects in pediatric tonsillectomy. Based on the high heterogeneity of results within some parameters, further studies need to be performed to affirm these results.

scholarly journals The effect of unilateral and bilateral laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis on Anti-Mullerian Hormone (AMH) level after 3 and 6 months: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anisodowleh Nankali ◽  
Mohsen Kazeminia ◽  
Parnian Kord Jamshidi ◽  
Shamarina Shohaimi ◽  
Nader Salari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Growth Factors ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Work ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Transient Growth ◽  
Common Causes ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference

Abstract Background Endometriosis is one of the most common causes of infertility. The causes of the disease and its definitive treatments are still unclear. Moreover, Anti-Mullerian Hormone (AMH) is a glycoprotein dimer that is a member of the transient growth factors family. This research work aimed to identify the effect of unilateral and bilateral laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis on AMH levels after 3 months, and 6 months, using meta-analysis. Methods In this study, the articles published in national and international databases of SID, MagIran, IranMedex, IranDoc, Cochrane, Embase, Science Direct, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science (ISI) were searched to find electronically published studies between 2010 and 2019. The heterogeneous index between studies was determined using the I2 index. Results In this meta-analysis and systematic review, 19 articles were eligible for inclusion in the study. The standardized mean difference was obtained in examining of unilateral laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis (before intervention 2.8 ± 0.11, and after 3 months 2.05 ± 0.13; and before intervention 3.1 ± 0.46 and after 6 months 2.08 ± 0.31), and in examining bilateral laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis examination (before intervention 2.0 ± 08.08, and after 3 months 1.1 ± 0.1; and before intervention 2.9 ± 0.23 and after 6 months 1.4 ± 0.19). Conclusion The results of this study demonstrate that unilateral and bilateral laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis is effective on AMH levels, and the level decreases in both comparisons.

scholarly journals Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Peak Wall Stress and Peak Wall Rupture Index in Ruptured and Asymptomatic Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tejas P. Singh ◽  
Joseph V. Moxon ◽  
T. Christian Gasser ◽  
Jonathan Golledge
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Wall Stress ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference ◽  
Peak Wall Stress ◽  
Meta Analyses

Background Prior studies have suggested aortic peak wall stress (PWS) and peak wall rupture index (PWRI) can estimate the rupture risk of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), but whether these measurements have independent predictive ability over assessing AAA diameter alone is unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to compare PWS and PWRI in participants with ruptured and asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar diameter. Methods and Results Web of Science, Scopus, Medline, and The Cochrane Library were systematically searched to identify studies assessing PWS and PWRI in ruptured and asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar diameter. Random‐effects meta‐analyses were performed using inverse variance‐weighted methods. Leave‐one‐out sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of findings. Risk of bias was assessed using a modification of the Newcastle‐Ottawa scale and standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers. Seven case‐control studies involving 309 participants were included. Meta‐analyses suggested that PWRI (standardized mean difference, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.14–0.70; P =0.004) but not PWS (standardized mean difference, 0.13; 95% CI, −0.18 to 0.44; P =0.418) was greater in ruptured than intact AAAs. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the findings were not dependent on the inclusion of any single study. The included studies were assessed to have a medium to high risk of bias. Conclusions Based on limited evidence, this study suggested that PWRI, but not PWS, is greater in ruptured than asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar maximum aortic diameter.

The effectiveness of virtual reality-based technology on anatomy teaching: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
jingjie zhao ◽  
xinliang xu ◽  
Hualin Jiang ◽  
yi ding
Keyword(s):  
Virtual Reality ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Randomized Controlled Studies ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
Degree Of Satisfaction ◽  
Meta Regression ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference ◽  
Anatomy Teaching

Abstract Virtual reality (VR) is an innovation that permits the individual to discover and operate three-dimensional (3D) environment to gain practical understanding instantly. Recently, VR has been advanced as an encouraging tool in the course of clinical college. This research aimed to examine the general efficiency of VR for teaching medical anatomy. We executed a meta-analysis of randomized regulated studies of the performance of VR anatomy education. We browsed 5 databases from the year 1990 to 2019. Ultimately, 15 randomized controlled trials with a teaching outcome measure analysis were included. Tow authors separately chosen studies, extracted information, and examined the risk of bias. The primary outcomes were examination scores of the students. Secondary outcomes were the degree of satisfaction of the students. Random-effects models were used for the pooled evaluations. Standardized mean difference (SMD) was applied to assess the systematic results. The heterogeneity was determined by I2 statistics, and then was investigated by meta-regression and subgroup analyses. In this review, we screened and included fifteen randomized controlled researches (816 students). The pooled analysis of primary outcomes showed that VR improves test scores comparing with other approaches (standardized mean difference [SMD]= 0.53; 95% CI 0.09–0.97; I2= 87.8%). The high homogeneity indicated that the studies were different from each other. Therefore, we carried out meta-regression as well as subgroup analyses using 7 variables (year, country, learners, course, intervention, comparator, and duration). We found that VR improves postintervention test score of anatomy comparing with other types of teaching methods. Although the findings have high internal validity and limited, because of that anatomy teaching in medical universities appears to becoming a dilemma, VR may act as an efficient way to improve the learners’ level of anatomy knowledge. Future research should assess other factors like degree of satisfaction, cost-effectiveness, and adverse reactions when evaluating the teaching effectiveness of VR in anatomy.

scholarly journals Risks and benefits of unapproved disease-modifying treatments for neurodegenerative disease

Neurology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 94 (1) ◽  
pp. e1-e14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aden C. Feustel ◽  
Amanda MacPherson ◽  
Dean A. Fergusson ◽  
Karl Kieburtz ◽  
Jonathan Kimmelman
Keyword(s):  
Alzheimer Disease ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Parkinson Disease ◽  
Neurodegenerative Disease ◽  
Active Treatment ◽  
Huntington Disease ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Disease Modifying ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference

ObjectiveTo determine whether patients randomized to unapproved, disease-modifying interventions in neurodegenerative disease trials have better outcomes than patients randomized to placebo by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis of risk and benefit experienced by patients in randomized placebo-controlled trials testing investigational treatments for Alzheimer disease, Parkinson disease, Huntington disease, or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov for results of randomized trials testing non–Food and Drug Administration–approved, putatively disease-modifying interventions from January 2005 to May 2018. Trial characteristics were double-extracted. Coprimary endpoints were the treatment advantage over placebo on efficacy (standardized mean difference in outcomes) and safety (risk ratios of serious adverse events and withdrawals due to adverse events), calculated with random effects meta-analyses. The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018103798).ResultsWe included 113 trials (n = 39,875 patients). There was no significant efficacy advantage associated with assignment to putatively disease-modifying interventions compared to placebo for Alzheimer disease (standardized mean difference [SMD] −0.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.07 to 0.01), Parkinson disease (SMD −0.09, 95% CI −0.32 to 0.15), ALS (SMD 0.02, 95% CI −0.25 to 0.30), or Huntington disease (0.02, 95% CI −0.27 to 0.31). Patients with Alzheimer disease assigned to active treatment were at higher risk of experiencing serious adverse events (risk ratio [RR] 1.15, 95% CI 1.04–1.27) and withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.21–1.70).ConclusionsAssignment to active treatment was not beneficial for any of the indications examined and may have been slightly disadvantageous for patients with Alzheimer disease. Our findings suggest that patients with neurodegenerative diseases are not, on the whole, harmed by assignment to placebo when participating in trials.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document