Search

To date, more than 761 million confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections have been recorded globally, and more than half of all children are estimated to be seropositive. Despite high SARS-CoV-2 infection incidences, the rate of severe COVID-19 in children is low. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy or effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines approved in the EU for children aged 5–11 years.

Only very few Cochrane nutrition reviews include cohort studies (CSs), but most evidence in nutrition research comes from CSs. We aimed to pool bodies of evidence (BoE) from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) derived from Cochrane reviews with matched BoE from CSs. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and MEDLINE were searched for systematic reviews (SRs) of RCTs and SRs of CSs. BoE from RCTs were pooled together with BoE from CSs using random-effects and common-effect models. Heterogeneity, 95% prediction intervals, contributed weight of BoE from RCTs to the pooled estimate, and whether integration of BoE from CSs modified the conclusion from BoE of RCTs were evaluated. Overall, 80 diet–disease outcome pairs based on 773 RCTs and 720 CSs were pooled. By pooling BoE from RCTs and CSs with a random-effects model, for 45 (56%) out of 80 diet–disease associations the 95% CI excluded no effect and showed mainly a reduced risk/inverse association. By pooling BoE from RCTs and CSs, median I2= 46% and the median contributed weight of RCTs to the pooled estimates was 34%. The direction of effect between BoE from RCTs and pooled effect estimates was rarely opposite (n= 17; 21%). The integration of BoE from CSs modified the result (by examining the 95% CI) from BoE of RCTs in 35 (44%) of the 80 diet–disease associations.

ObjectivesTo evaluate the development and quality of actionable statements that qualify as good practice statements (GPS) reported in COVID-19 guidelines.Design and settingSystematic review . We searched MEDLINE, MedSci, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), databases of Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Guidelines, NICE, WHO and Guidelines International Network (GIN) from March 2020 to September 2021. We included original or adapted recommendations addressing any COVID-19 topic.Main outcome measuresWe used GRADE Working Group criteria for assessing the appropriateness of issuing a GPS: (1) clear and actionable; (2) rationale necessitating the message for healthcare practice; (3) practicality of systematically searching for evidence; (4) likely net positive consequences from implementing the GPS and (5) clear link to the indirect evidence. We assessed guideline quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool.Results253 guidelines from 44 professional societies issued 3726 actionable statements. We classified 2375 (64%) as GPS; of which 27 (1%) were labelled as GPS by guideline developers. 5 (19%) were labelled as GPS by their authors but did not meet GPS criteria. Of the 2375 GPS, 85% were clear and actionable; 59% provided a rationale necessitating the message for healthcare practice, 24% reported the net positive consequences from implementing the GPS. Systematic collection of evidence was deemed impractical for 13% of the GPS, and 39% explained the chain of indirect evidence supporting GPS development. 173/2375 (7.3%) statements explicitly satisfied all five criteria. The guidelines’ overall quality was poor regardless of the appropriateness of GPS development and labelling.ConclusionsStatements that qualify as GPS are common in COVID-19 guidelines but are characterised by unclear designation and development processes, and methodological weaknesses.

ObjectiveTo provide insights into women’s attitudes towards a human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening strategy.Data sourcesMedline, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, CINAHL and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched for published and ongoing studies (last search conducted in August 2021).Methods of study selectionThe search identified 3162 references. Qualitative and quantitative studies dealing with women’s attitudes towards, and acceptance of, an HPV-based cervical cancer screening strategy in Western healthcare systems were included. For data analysis, thematic analysis was used and synthesised findings were presented descriptively.Tabulation, integration, and resultsTwelve studies (including 9928 women) from USA, Canada, UK and Australia met the inclusion criteria. Women’s attitudes towards HPV-based screening strategies were mainly affected by the understanding of (i) the personal risk of an HPV infection, (ii) the implication of a positive finding and (iii) the overall screening purpose. Women who considered their personal risk of HPV to be low and women who feared negative implications of a positive finding were more likely to express negative attitudes, whereas positive attitudes were particularly expressed by women understanding the screening purpose. Overall acceptance of an HPV-based screening strategy ranged between 13% and 84%.ConclusionThis systematic review provides insights into the attitudes towards HPV-based cervical cancer screening and its acceptability based on studies conducted with women from USA, Canada, UK and Australia. This knowledge is essential for the development of education and information strategies to support the implementation of HPV-based cervical cancer screening.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO (CRD42020178957).

Background: Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a life-limiting inherited hemoglobinopathy that results in significant complications and affects quality of life. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is currently the only curative intervention for SCD; however, guidelines are needed to inform how to apply HSCT in clinical practice. Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and health professionals in their decisions about HSCT for SCD. Methods: The multidisciplinary guideline panel formed by ASH included 2 patient representatives and was balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The Mayo Evidence-Based Practice Research Program supported the guideline development process, including performing systematic evidence reviews (through 2019). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, including GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks, to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. Results: The panel agreed on 8 recommendations to help patients and providers assess how individuals with SCD should consider the timing and type of HSCT. Conclusions: The evidence review yielded no randomized controlled clinical trials for HSCT in SCD; therefore, all recommendations are based on very low certainty in the evidence. Key recommendations include considering HSCT for those with neurologic injury or recurrent acute chest syndrome at an early age and to improve nonmyeloablative regimens. Future research should include the development of a robust SCD registry to serve as a comparator for HSCT studies.

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a life-limiting inherited hemoglobinopathy that results in significant complications and affects quality of life. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is currently the only curative intervention for SCD; however, guidelines are needed to inform how to apply HSCT in clinical practice.

The relation between meal frequency and measures of obesity is inconclusive. Therefore, this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) set out to compare the isocaloric effects of different meal frequencies on anthropometric outcomes and energy intake (EI). A systematic literature search was conducted in 3 electronic databases (Medline, Cochrane Library, Web of Science; search date, 11 March 2019). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included with ≥2 wk intervention duration comparing any 2 of the eligible isocaloric meal frequencies (i.e., 1 to ≥8 meals/d). Random-effects NMA was performed for 4 outcomes [body weight (BW), waist circumference (WC), fat mass (FM), and EI], and surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was estimated using a frequentist approach (P-score: value is between 0 and 1). Twenty-two RCTs with 647 participants were included. Our results suggest that 2 meals/d probably slightly reduces BW compared with 3 meals/d [mean difference (MD): −1.02 kg; 95% CI: −1.70, −0.35 kg) or 6 meals/d (MD: −1.29 kg; 95% CI: −1.74, −0.84 kg; moderate certainty of evidence). We are uncertain whether 1 or 2 meals/d reduces BW compared with ≥8 meals/d (MD1 meal/d vs. ≥8 meals/d: −2.25 kg; 95% CI: −5.13, 0.63 kg; MD2 meals/d vs. ≥8 meals/d: −1.32 kg; 95% CI: −2.19, −0.45 kg) and whether 1 meal/d probably reduces FM compared with 3 meals/d (MD: −1.84 kg; 95% CI: −3.72, 0.05 kg; very low certainty of evidence). Two meals per day compared with 6 meals/d probably reduce WC (MD: −3.77 cm; 95% CI: −4.68, −2.86 cm; moderate certainty of evidence). One meal per day was ranked as the best frequency for reducing BW (P-score: 0.81), followed by 2 meals/d (P-score: 0.74), whereas 2 meals/d performed best for WC (P-score: 0.96). EI was not affected by meal frequency. In conclusion, our findings indicate that there is little robust evidence that reducing meal frequency is beneficial.

We developed a risk score to predict event-free survival (EFS) after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for sickle cell disease. The study population (n = 1425) was randomly split into training (n = 1070) and validation (n = 355) cohorts. Risk factors were identified and validated via Cox regression models. Two risk factors of 9 evaluated were predictive for EFS: age at transplantation and donor type. On the basis of the training cohort, patients age 12 years or younger with an HLA-matched sibling donor were at the lowest risk with a 3-year EFS of 92% (score, 0). Patients age 13 years or older with an HLA-matched sibling donor or age 12 years or younger with an HLA-matched unrelated donor were at intermediate risk (3-year EFS, 87%; score, 1). All other groups, including patients of any age with a haploidentical relative or HLA-mismatched unrelated donor and patients age 13 years or older with an HLA-matched unrelated donor were high risk (3-year EFS, 57%; score, 2 or 3). These findings were confirmed in the validation cohort. This simple risk score may guide patients with sickle cell disease and hematologists who are considering allogeneic transplantation as a curative treatment relative to other available contemporary treatments.

We developed a risk score to predict event-free survival (EFS) after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for sickle cell disease. The study population (n = 1425) was randomly split into training (n = 1070) and validation (n = 355) cohorts. Risk factors were identified and validated via Cox regression models. Two risk factors of 9 evaluated were predictive for EFS: age at transplantation and donor type. On the basis of the training cohort, patients age 12 years or younger with an HLA-matched sibling donor were at the lowest risk with a 3-year EFS of 92% (score, 0). Patients age 13 years or older with an HLA-matched sibling donor or age 12 years or younger with an HLA-matched unrelated donor were at intermediate risk (3-year EFS, 87%; score, 1). All other groups, including patients of any age with a haploidentical relative or HLA-mismatched unrelated donor and patients age 13 years or older with an HLA-matched unrelated donor were high risk (3-year EFS, 57%; score, 2 or 3). These findings were confirmed in the validation cohort. This simple risk score may guide patients with sickle cell disease and hematologists who are considering allogeneic transplantation as a curative treatment relative to other available contemporary treatments.

The American Society of Hematology (ASH) convened 5 guideline panels to develop clinical practice recommendations addressing 5 management areas of highest importance to individuals living with sickle cell disease: pain, cerebrovascular complications, pulmonary and kidney complications, transfusion, and hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Panels were multidisciplinary and consisted of patient representatives, content experts, and methodologists. The Mayo Clinic Evidence-Based Practice Center conducted systematic reviews based on a priori selected questions. In this exposition, we describe the process used by ASH, including the GRADE approach (Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) for rating certainty of the evidence and the GRADE Evidence to Decision Framework. We also describe several unique challenges faced by the guideline panels and the specific innovations and solutions used to address them, including a curriculum to train patients to engage in guideline development, dealing with the opioid crisis, and working with indirect and noncomparative evidence.

The American Society of Hematology (ASH) convened 5 guideline panels to develop clinical practice recommendations addressing 5 management areas of highest importance to individuals living with sickle cell disease: pain, cerebrovascular complications, pulmonary and kidney complications, transfusion, and hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Panels were multidisciplinary and consisted of patient representatives, content experts, and methodologists. The Mayo Clinic Evidence-Based Practice Center conducted systematic reviews based on a priori selected questions. In this exposition, we describe the process used by ASH, including the GRADE approach (Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) for rating certainty of the evidence and the GRADE Evidence to Decision Framework. We also describe several unique challenges faced by the guideline panels and the specific innovations and solutions used to address them, including a curriculum to train patients to engage in guideline development, dealing with the opioid crisis, and working with indirect and noncomparative evidence.

Bereitstellung eines GRADE-Leitfadens für die Bewertung des Bias-Risikos eines Evidenzkörpers, wenn in systematischen Übersichtsarbeiten Daten von dichotomen und kontinuierlichen Endpunkten fehlen.

During 2021 and 2023, a team of researchers at the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) and partnering institutions conducted two living systematic reviews (LSRs) on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in different age groups to inform recommendations of the Standing Committee on Vaccination in Germany (Ständige Impfkommission, STIKO). Based on our experience from the realization of these LSRs, we developed certain criteria to assess the needs and feasibility of conducting LSRs. Combining these with previously established criteria, we developed the following set to inform future planning of LSRs for STIKO: Needs criterion (N)1: Relevance of the research question, N2: Certainty of evidence (CoE) at baseline; N3: Expected need for Population-Intervention-Comparator-Outcome (PICO) adaptations; N4: Expected new evidence over time; N5: Expected impact of new evidence on CoE; Feasibility criterion (F)1: Availability of sufficient human resources; F2: Feasibility of timely dissemination of the results to inform decision-making. For each criterion we suggest rating options which may support the decision to conduct an LSR or other forms of evidence synthesis when following the provided flowchart.

Die Qualität der Erstellung von Leitlinienberichten in der Gesundheitsversorgung ist oft gering und es fehlt an allgemein anerkannten Leitfäden oder Standards für solche Leitlinien. Die international besetzte RIGHT-Arbeitsgruppe (Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare; Punkte zur Erstellung von Leitlinienberichten in der Gesundheitsversorgung) wurde gegründet, um diese Lücke zu schließen. Die Gruppe richtete sich nach einer bestehenden Vorgehensweise zur Entwicklung von Leitlinien für die Berichterstellung in der Gesundheitsforschung und dem Ansatz des EQUATOR-Netzwerks (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparceny Of health Research; Verbesserung der Qualität und Transparenz von Gesundheitsforschung). Sie entwickelte eine Checkliste und ein Begleitdokument mit Erläuterungen und ausführlicher Darstellung (RIGHT explanation and elaboration statement). Die RIGHT-Checkliste enthält 22 Punkte, die für die gute Berichterstellung von Leitlinien als notwendig angesehen werden: allgemeine Informationen (Punkte 1 bis 4), Hintergrund (Punkte 5 bis 9), Evidenz (Punkte 10 bis 12), Empfehlungen (Punkte 13 bis 15), Begutachtung und Qualitätssicherung (Punkte 16 und 17), Finanzierung sowie Erklärung von und Umgang mit Interessen (Punkte 18 und 19) und sonstige Informationen (Punkte 20 bis 22). Die RIGHT-Checkliste kann LeitlinienentwicklerInnen bei der Erstellung von Leitlinienberichten Hilfestellung leisten, HerausgeberInnen und GutachterInnen von Zeitschriften bei der Begutachtung von Leitlinienberichten unterstützen und Gesundheitsfachleuten helfen, eine Leitlinie zu verstehen und in der Praxis zu implementieren.

Dieser Artikel soll aufzeigen wie Gerechtigkeit im Gesundheitswesen in wichtigen Schritten des Leitlinienentwicklungsprozesses berücksichtigt werden kann.

Donors other than matched siblings and low-intensity conditioning regimens are increasingly used in haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. We aimed to compare the relative risk of donor type and conditioning regimen intensity on the transplantation outcomes of in patients with sickle cell disease.

Traditional pairwise meta-analysis (PMA) is a very useful method that pools evidence from one study design type if appropriate; its widespread use in nutrition research is an important phenomenon. Recently, a promising method for more advanced evidence-synthesis, called network meta-analysis (NMA), was introduced. NMA is an extension of PMA that enables simultaneous comparison of multiple interventions. NMA combines direct evidence (i.e., trials comparing 2 interventions directly) and indirect evidence (i.e., from a connected route via ≥1 comparators, e.g. placebo) in a network of studies. NMAs have the potential to advance knowledge in the field of nutrition as they provide insights that cannot be obtained by individual 2-arm randomized controlled trials or PMA. Thus, in this perspective paper, we aim to summarize the current (methodologic) status of published NMAs in nutrition research and emphasize advances and strengths in comparison with traditional PMA through specific examples, and highlight potential pitfalls and limitations. NMA is an emerging methodology in the field of nutrition research. A PubMed search identified only 23 nutrition research-related NMAs published since the inception of journals up to January 8, 2019 (61% of them published since 2017), compared with >5000 published PMAs. Moreover, we aim to highlight the scientific concepts and standards through the use of the following NMA example: “Which type of oils/solid fats offers the greatest impact on blood lipids?” In this regard, we discuss intervention definitions, transitivity/similarity, statistical methods, description and visualization of results, inconsistency, ranking, dissemination bias, assessing the certainty of evidence by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation, and reporting guidelines. We expect that rigorously conducted NMAs based on high-quality systematic reviews will become the new evidence synthesis benchmark in nutrition research. However, caution is warranted because abuse and misinterpretations of PMA and NMA findings could hamper the scientific field and possibly decision-making regarding public policy.

IMPORTANCE: Controversies about the choice of antibiotic agent and treatment modality exist in the management of erythema migrans in early cutaneous Lyme borreliosis (LB). OBJECTIVE: To conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) of all randomized clinical trials on various antibiotic agents and treatment modalities in early cutaneous LB. DATA SOURCES: Electronic searches in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were conducted from inception until July 2017. The reference lists of the included studies were hand searched, authors were contacted, and ongoing trials were searched at ClinicalTrials.gov. STUDY SELECTION: One reviewer screened the titles and abstracts of the 9975 reports identified by the electronic searches. Full-text copies of 161 potentially relevant articles were obtained, and 2 reviewers independently assessed those articles for inclusion. Adults with a physician-confirmed early localized skin infection who were treated with antibiotics of any dose or duration were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data on study, patient, and intervention characteristics. Network meta-analyses on treatment effects and adverse outcomes were calculated with a frequentist approach using the R package netmeta. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidance for NMA was used to assess the certainty of evidence. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Treatment effects for response to treatment (resolution of symptoms) and treatment-related adverse events. RESULTS: Overall, 19 studies (2532 patients) were included. The mean patient age ranged between 37 and 56 years, and the percentage of female patients ranged from 36% to 60%. The antibiotics investigated were doxycycline, cefuroxime axetil, ceftriaxone, amoxicillin, azithromycin, penicillin V, and minocycline. Pooled effect sizes from NMAs did not suggest any significant differences in treatment response by antibiotic agent (eg, amoxicillin vs doxycycline odds ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.41-3.87), dose, or duration (eg, doxycycline, 200 mg/d for 3 weeks, vs doxycycline, 200 mg/d for 2 weeks, odds ratio, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.49-3.34). Treatment failures were rare at both 2 months (4%; 95% CI, 2%-5%) and 12 months (2%, 95% CI, 1%-3%) after treatment initiation. There were also no differences in the effect sizes among antibiotic agents and treatment modalities for treatment-related adverse outcomes, which were generally mild to moderate. Certainty of evidence was categorized as low and very low mostly because of imprecision, indirectness, and study limitations (high risk of bias) of the included studies. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This NMA suggests that neither the antibiotic agent nor treatment modality contributed to comparative effectiveness or drug-related adverse outcomes. This finding is relevant for physicians treating patients with LB and for patient decision making.

Evidenzbasierte Leitlinien- und Impfempfehlungen sollten fortlaufend auf dem aktuellsten Stand sein, um eine angemessene Gesundheitsversorgung zu unterstützen Gleichzeitig sind die Ressourcen für die Aktualisierung von Leitlinien begrenzt.

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text.We evaluated early discontinuation and nonpublication of surgical trials approved in Canada, Germany, and Switzerland. Forty-three percent were stopped early, 18% for slow recruitment. Trial discontinuation was strongly associated with nonpublication. These findings are relevant when interpreting surgical literature, and surgical trialists should consider feasibility studies before starting full-scale trials.

Der Artikel beschreibt den Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE)-Ansatz zur Klassifizierung der Richtung und Stärke von Empfehlungen. Die Stärke der Empfehlung, die in stark und schwach eingeteilt werden kann, wird definiert als das Ausmaß des Vertrauens, dass eine Intervention mehr wünschenswerte als unerwünschte Folgen hat.

Wenn kontinuierliche Endpunkte in Summary-of-Findings-Tabellen dargestellt werden, stellt deren Interpretation eine besondere Herausforderung dar. Wenn jede Studie den Endpunkt auf dieselbe Art und Weise erfasst hat und die Einheiten dieses Maßes intuitiv interpretierbar sind (z.B. Dauer des Krankenhausaufenthalts, Dauer von Symptomen), empfiehlt es sich, die Mittelwertdifferenz darzustellen. Wenn die natürlichen Einheiten dieses Maßes jedoch nicht leicht zu interpretieren sind, ist es womöglich besser, einen Schwellenwert festzulegen, um den Endpunkt zu dichotomisieren, und dann relative und absolute Effekte darzustellen.