scholarly journals Statins Reduce Mortality After Non-severe but Not After Severe Pneumonia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mingwang Jia ◽  
Wenjie Huang ◽  
Li Li ◽  
Zhong Xu ◽  
Lichan Wu
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Protective Effect ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Pneumonia ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Pneumonia Severity ◽  
Cochrane Database ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Statin Use

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of statins on mortality for patients with non-severe pneumonia or severe pneumonia. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane central register of controlled trials and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched for the association between statins and non-severe/severe pneumonia. Eligible articles were analyzed in Stata 12.0. RESULTS: The database search yielded a total of 566 potential publications, 24 studies involving 312,309 patients met the eligibility criteria. Pooled unadjusted data showed that statin use was associated with lower mortality after non-severe pneumonia (odds ratio [OR] 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66-0.73), but not severe pneumonia (OR 1.05; 95% CI, 0.86-1.28). However, this protective effect of statins was weakened using adjusted estimates (OR 0.78, 95% CI, 0.75-0.82). Besides, protective effect of statins was attenuated by confounders in a subgroup analysis, especially when accounting for pneumonia severity indicators (OR 0.88; 95% CI, 0.80-0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Statin use was associated with reduced mortality after non-severe pneumonia but not severe pneumonia and this protective effect was weakened in subgroups. This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see “For Readers”) may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue’s contents page.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Spontaneous Swallow Frequency in Healthy People and Those With, or at Risk of Developing, Dysphagia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph M Bulmer ◽  
Caroline Ewers ◽  
Michael J Drinnan ◽  
Victoria C Ewan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Quality Criteria ◽  
Clinical Variable ◽  
Normative Values ◽  
Healthy Population ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Cochrane Database ◽  
Central Register

Abstract BackgroundDysphagia is a common, and frequently undetected, complication of many neurological disorders and of sarcopoenia in ageing persons. However it is difficult to detect dysphagia clinically until the point of visible aspiration, and there are relatively few trained speech and language therapists, whose time and remit are limited to those with obvious disorders. Reduction in spontaneous swallowing frequency (SSF) has been mooted as a possible proxy for dysphagia. We therefore conducted a systematic review of the literature to describe SSF in both the healthy population, and in disease specific populations, in order to assess its utility as a screening tool to identify dysphagia.MethodsWe searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Metadata were extracted, collated, and analysed via a random effects model to give quantitative insight.ResultsThree hundred and twelve articles were retrieved, with 19 meeting inclusion and quality criteria. Heterogeneity between studies was high (I2 = 98%), in part, due to the variety of methods for swallow identification reported. The mean SSF in Healthy younger groups was 0.98/min [CI: 0.78; 1.23]. In the Parkinson’s groups mean SSF was 0.59/min [0.41; 0.85]. Mean SSF in Healthy older, Higher risk and Dysphagic populations were similar (0.21/min [0.12; 0.37], 0.26/min [0.14; 0.85]), (0.27/min [0.17; 0.43] respectively).ConclusionsSSF is a novel, non-invasive clinical variable which warrants further explorations as to its potential to identify persons at risk of dysphagia. Larger, well-conducted studies are needed to develop objective, standardised methods for detecting SSF, and develop normative values in healthy populations.

scholarly journals Poststroke depression and risk of stroke recurrence and mortality: protocol of a meta-analysis and systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. e026316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wa Cai ◽  
Robert Stewart ◽  
Christoph Mueller ◽  
Yi-Jing Li ◽  
Wei-Dong Shen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Stroke Recurrence ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Poststroke Depression ◽  
Stroke Outcomes ◽  
Cochrane Database ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Registration Number

IntroductionA number of observational studies have indicated that poststroke depression could increase the risk of stroke outcomes. There is a meta-analysis indicating that poststroke depression is a risk factor of all-cause mortality. This paper reports the protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify the associations of poststroke depression with stroke recurrence and mortality in order to determine whether poststroke depression is a predictor of stroke outcomes according to data extracted from relevant observational studies.Methods and analysisMEDLINE, Web of Science databases, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews will be used to conduct the search. Published studies written in English will be included. The risk of bias for the studies included in the systematic review or meta-analysis will be assessed by the Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. HRs for stroke recurrence and mortality with 95% CIs will be included as primary outcomes. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression will be performed.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval will not be needed because the data used in this systematic review will be extracted from published studies. The results of the systematic review focusing on whether depression after stroke is a predictor for stroke recurrence and mortality will be disseminated by publication in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018107944.

scholarly journals Vitamin C for the treatment of COVID-19: A living systematic review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduard Baladia ◽  
Ana Beatriz Pizarro ◽  
Gabriel Rada
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Vitamin C ◽  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Randomised Trials ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Central Register

ABSTRACTObjectiveThis living systematic review aims to provide a timely, rigorous and continuously updated summary of the evidence available on the role of vitamin C in the treatment of patients with COVID-19.Data sourcesWe will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), grey literature and in a centralised repository in L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L·OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L·OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will cover the period until the day before submission to a journal.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methodsWe adapted an already published common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question.We will include randomised trials evaluating the effect of vitamin C, as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs, versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Randomised trials evaluating vitamin C in infections caused by other coronaviruses, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19 will be searched in case no direct evidence from randomised trials is found, or if the direct evidence provides low- or very low-certainty for critical outcomes.Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will pool the results using meta-analysis and will apply the GRADE system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it every time the conclusions change or whenever there are substantial updates.Ethics and disseminationNo ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.PROSPERO RegistrationSubmitted to PROSPERO (awaiting ID allocation).

scholarly journals Use of Anti-Inflammatory Drugs interventions for the treatment of Muscle Soreness: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Lohn Nahon ◽  
Anibal Monteiro de Magalhães Neto ◽  
Jaqueline Santos Silva Lopes ◽  
Aloa de Souza Machado ◽  
L. C. Cameron
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Muscle Soreness ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Anti Inflammatory ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Objective: To investigate the effects of pharmacological interventions in the treatment of Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness (DOMS). Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs). Data sources: The PubMed / MEDLINE, EMBASE, SPORTDiscus, Scielo and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) databases were searched from the oldest records to August 3, 2020. Eligibility criteria: 1) Tue used a RCTs design; 2) Evaluate the effects of Steroidal or Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) for treatment DOMS; and 3) Therapeutically used drugs, after exercise. Results: In total, 26 studies (patients = 934) were eligible for qualitative analysis on the treatment of DOMS. The results of the meta-analysis showed no superiority between the use or not of NSAIDs, in the improvement of late muscle pain, since statistically significant differences were not verified (21 studies, n= 955; SMD= 0.02; 95% CI -0.58, 0.63; p=0.94; I2=93%). The quality of the synthesized evidence was very low according to the criteria of Evaluation, Development and Evaluation of the Classification of Recommendations, associated with the significant heterogeneity among the included studies. Conclusion: The results demonstrate that the use of NSAIDs is not a superior treatment to the control / placebo on DOMS improvement. The variation between dose-response and exercise protocol used in the studies may have influenced the results. In addition, the high risk of identified bias characterizes limitation to be considered in profound interpretations.

scholarly journals Oxymetazoline for the treatment of rosacea-associated persistent facial erythema. Systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geovanna Cárdenas ◽  
Francisco Novillo ◽  
Shuheng Lai ◽  
Héctor Fuenzalida ◽  
Francisca Verdugo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Facial Erythema ◽  
Central Register ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACTObjectiveThe objective of this systematic review is to assess the impact of oxymetazoline in patients with moderate to severe rosacea.Data SourcesWe will conduct a comprehensive search in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Lilacs, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and grey literature, to identify all relevant randomized controlled trials regardless of language or publication status (published, unpublished, in press and in progress).Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methodsWe will include randomized trials evaluating the effect of oxymetazoline in patients with moderate to severe rosacea. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, data extraction, and assess the risk of bias. We will pool the results using meta-analysis and will apply the GRADE [1] system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.Ethics and DisseminationNo ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.Protocol and RegistrationThis protocol was adapted to the specificities of the question assessed in this review and registered to PROSPERO with the ID CRD42020150262.

scholarly journals Tolerability of statin-based management of patients with a history of statin-associated muscle symptoms: protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e052341
Author(s):  
Fanny Villoz ◽  
Christina Lyko ◽  
Cinzia Del Giovane ◽  
Nicolas Rodondi ◽  
Manuel R Blum
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Clinical Issue ◽  
Standard Data ◽  
Evaluation Approach ◽  
History Of

IntroductionStatin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMSs) are a major clinical issue in the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. Current guidelines advise various approaches mainly based on expert opinion. We will lead a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the tolerability and acceptability and effectiveness of statin-based therapy management of patients with a history of SAMS. We aim to provide evidence on the tolerability and different strategies of statin-based management of patients with a history of SAMS.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies with a control group. We will search in Data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov and Proquest from inception until April 2021. Two independent reviewers will carry out the study selection based on eligibility criteria. We will extract data following a standard data collection form. The reviewers will use the Cochrane Collaboration’s tools and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to appraise the study risk of bias. Our primary outcome will be tolerability and our secondary outcomes will be acceptability and effectiveness. We will conduct a qualitative analysis of all included studies. In addition, if sufficient and homogeneous data are available, we will conduct quantitative analysis. We will synthesise dichotomous data using OR with 95% CI and continuous outcomes by using mean difference or standardised mean difference (with 95% CI). We will determine heterogeneity visually with forest plots and quantitatively with I2 and Q-test. We will summarise the confidence in the quantitative estimate by using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.Ethics and disseminationAs a systematic review of literature without collection of new clinical data, there will be no requirement for ethical approval. We will disseminate findings through peer-reviewed publications.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020202619.

Use of opioids in patients with cancer with hepatic impairment—a systematic review

2021 ◽  
pp. bmjspcare-2021-003065
Author(s):  
Lewis Thomas Hughes ◽  
David Raftery ◽  
Paul Coulter ◽  
Barry Laird ◽  
Marie Fallon
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Hepatic Impairment ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Hepatic Function ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Assessment Development ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Central Register

PurposeOpioids are recommended for moderate-to-severe cancer pain; however, in patients with cancer, impaired hepatic function can affect opioid metabolism. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the evidence for the use of opioids in patients with cancer with hepatic impairment.MethodsA systematic review was conducted and the following databases searched: AMED (−2021), MEDLINE (−2021), EMBASECLASSIC + EMBASE (−2021) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (−2021). Eligible studies met the following criteria: patients with cancer-related pain, taking an opioid (as defined by the WHO Guidelines for the pharmacological and radiotherapeutic management of cancer pain in adults and adolescents); >18 years of age; patients with hepatic impairment defined using recognised or study-defined definitions; clinical outcome hepatic impairment related; and primary studies. All eligible studies were appraised using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.ResultsThree studies (n=95) were eligible but heterogeneity meant meta-analysis was not possible. Each individual study focused on only one each of oxycodone±hydrocotarnine, oxycodone/naloxone and morphine. No recommendations could be formulated on the preferred opioid in patients with hepatic impairment.ConclusionsMorphine is the preferred opioid in hepatic impairment owing to clinical experience and pharmacokinetics. This review, however, found little clinical evidence to support this. Dose adjustments of morphine and the oxycodone formulations reviewed remain necessary in the absence of quality evidence. Overall, the quality of existing evidence on opioid treatments in cancer pain and hepatic impairment is low and there remains a need for high-quality clinical studies examining this.

scholarly journals Análise da Revisão Cochrane: Alta Hospitalar Precoce para Hospitalização Domiciliária. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;6:CD000356.

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (12) ◽  
pp. 835
Author(s):  
Mariana Alves ◽  
Miguel Bigotte Vieira ◽  
João Costa ◽  
António Vaz Carneiro
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Care Group ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Cochrane Database ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Objective Evidence ◽  
Hospital At Home ◽  
At Home

Hospital at home is a service that provides active treatment by healthcare professionals in the patient’s home for a condition that otherwise would require acute hospital in-patient care. However, the clinical benefit of this intervention and its effect on health costs are not established. This Cochrane systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness and costs of managing patients with hospital at home compared with inpatient hospital care. A systematic review of the literature was carried out by searching the following databases to 9 January 2017: Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group (EPOC) register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, EconLit and clinical trials registries. Thirty-two randomized trials (2 of which unpublished), including 4746 patients, were included. The present review provides insufficient objective evidence of economic benefit (through a reduction in hospital length of stay) or improved health outcomes.

scholarly journals Protocol for a systematic review of research on HPV and cervical cancer in Ghana, up until the year 2017: informing research and policy direction on cervical cancer prevention in Ghana

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. e020183
Author(s):  
Adolf Kofi Awua ◽  
Edna Dzifa Doe
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Cervical Cancer Prevention ◽  
Specific Information ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Digital Collections ◽  
The Status

IntroductionFor a country that lacks a national cervical cancer screening/prevention programme, there is the need to assess the volume of country-specific information, and the status of research on HPV and cervical cancer, in order to provide evidence that will inform policy and further research. The aim of this protocol is to plan an intended systematic review, which is to identify research gaps, prevent unnecessary duplication of work and enable collaboration.Methods and analysisThis protocol, developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols statement and registered by PROSPERO (CRD42017075583), will apply a 13-point eligibility criteria to screening and selecting peer-reviewed research articles and grey literature. These will be obtained from searches in databases, including, among others, those of the National Centre for Biotechnology Information, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar and the digital collections database of research publications of Universities in Ghana. Collected data will be aggregated and summarised according to emerging themes and simple descriptive statistics.Ethics and disseminationThe study will use publicly available data and will not identify authors of the publication by name. In light of these and as has been indicted, research ethics clearance is not required for evidence syntheses in such reviews. The review will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at local and internal conferences as the opportunity becomes available.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017075583.

Safety of Cochlear Implantation in Children 12 Months or Younger: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2022 ◽  
pp. 019459982110677
Author(s):  
Firas Sbeih ◽  
Malek H. Bouzaher ◽  
Swathi Appachi ◽  
Seth Schwartz ◽  
Michael S. Cohen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Ovid Medline ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Data Source ◽  
Anesthetic Complications ◽  
Full Text Screening

Objective To systematically review the literature to determine safety of cochlear implantation in pediatric patients 12 months and younger. Data Source Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched from inception to March 20, 2021. Review Methods Studies that involved patients 12 months and younger with report of intraoperative or postoperative complication outcomes were included. Studies selected were reviewed for complications, explants, readmissions, and prolonged hospitalizations. Two independent reviewers screened all studies that were selected for the systematic review and meta-analysis. All studies included were assessed for quality and risk of bias. Results The literature search yielded 269 studies, of which 53 studies underwent full-text screening, and 18 studies were selected for the systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of 449 patients and 625 cochlear implants were assessed. Across all included studies, major complications were noted in 3.1% of patients (95% CI, 0.8-7.1) and 2.3% of cochlear implantations (95% CI, 0.6-5.2), whereas minor complications were noted in 2.4% of patients (95% CI, 0.4-6.0) and 1.8% of cochlear implantations (95% CI, 0.4-4.3). There were no anesthetic complications reported across all included studies. Conclusion The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that cochlear implantation in patients 12 months and younger is safe with similar rates of complications to older cohorts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document