Search

Rapid reviews have been widely employed to support timely decision-making, and limiting the search date is the most popular approach in published rapid reviews. We assessed the accuracy and workload of search date limits on the meta-analytical results to determine the best rapid strategy. The meta-analyses data were collected from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). We emulated the rapid reviews by limiting the search date of the original CDSR to the recent 40, 35, 30, 25, 20, 15, 10, 7, 5, and 3 years, and their results were compared to the full meta-analyses. A random sample of 10% was drawn to repeat the literature search by the same timeframe limits to measure the relative workload reduction (RWR). The relationship between accuracy and RWR was established. We identified 21,363 meta-analyses of binary outcomes and 7683 meta-analyses of continuous outcomes from 2693 CDSRs. Our results suggested that under a maximum tolerance of 5% and 10% on the bias of magnitude, a limit on the recent 20 years can achieve good accuracy and at the same time save the most workload. Under the tolerance of 15% and 20% on the bias, a limit on the recent 10 years and 15 years could be considered. Limiting the search date is a valid rapid method to produce credible evidence for timely decisions. When conducting rapid reviews, researchers should consider both the accuracy and workload to make an appropriate decision.

The author should give careful consideration to the study eligibility criteria of systematic reviews (SRs) and follow it after review protocol development to reduce the possibility of manipulation of inclusion. Our aim was to investigate the prevalence of differences in study eligibility criteria between non-Cochrane SRs and their pre-registered protocols on PROSPERO, and determined what changes were involved as well as whether those changes were explained. We searched the protocols registered on PROSPERO platform in the year of 2018 and then selected these protocols which full-text have been published up to June 9, 2020. A random sample (n = 100) was included. Published full-texts were identified through the protocol's final publication citation. The following five key components of study eligibility criteria were compared: participants, intervention(s)/exposure(s), comparator(s), types of study design, and outcome(s). A total of 90% of included SRs exhibited differences in study eligibility criteria, and 59/90 altered in no less than two key components. Only one SR reported and explained the rationale for changes to the individual key component (the definition of exposure). The "Outcome(s)" exhibited the greatest variation, with changes in 61% of the SRs. The "Comparator(s)/control" exhibited the smallest variation, with changes in 20% of the SRs. Differences in study eligibility criteria between the non-Cochrane SRs and their protocols registered on PROSPERO were widespread but were seldom explained. Authors themselves, PROSPERO platform, as well as peer-review journals and their peer-reviewers should play a role in further improving transparency.

Rapid reviews have been widely employed to support timely decision‐making, and limiting the search date is the most popular approach in published rapid reviews. We assessed the accuracy and workload of search date limits on the meta‐analytical results to determine the best rapid strategy. The meta‐analyses data were collected from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). We emulated the rapid reviews by limiting the search date of the original CDSR to the recent 40, 35, 30, 25, 20, 15, 10, 7, 5, and 3 years, and their results were compared to the full meta‐analyses. A random sample of 10% was drawn to repeat the literature search by the same timeframe limits to measure the relative workload reduction (RWR). The relationship between accuracy and RWR was established. We identified 21,363 meta‐analyses of binary outcomes and 7683 meta‐analyses of continuous outcomes from 2693 CDSRs. Our results suggested that under a maximum tolerance of 5% and 10% on the bias of magnitude, a limit on the recent 20 years can achieve good accuracy and at the same time save the most workload. Under the tolerance of 15% and 20% on the bias, a limit on the recent 10 years and 15 years could be considered. Limiting the search date is a valid rapid method to produce credible evidence for timely decisions. When conducting rapid reviews, researchers should consider both the accuracy and workload to make an appropriate decision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The research aim was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the ability of acupressure to reduce anxiety. Design: Randomized controlled trials were obtained through a search of electronic medical databases (four in English and one in Chinese) from inception to October 5, 2020. Two authors searched the databases, evaluated studies' methodological quality, and performed data extraction independently. The final studies for analysis were identified after discussion with the third author. Results: We obtained 27 studies for our systematic review and meta-analysis. Eight studies had a low overall risk of bias, and 13 had some bias concerns with methodological quality. According to the results, acupressure significantly reduced patient anxiety (standardized mean difference = 1.152; 95% confidence interval: 0.847-1.459, p < 0.001), and the study heterogeneity was high (Q= 299.74, p < 0.001, I² = 91.333%). Two studies reported acupressure-associated adverse events. We also performed a sensitivity analysis by omitting one outlier study, which had the largest effect size; however, high heterogeneity remained (I² = 87.816%). A subgroup analysis revealed significant differences between participant types (Q= 46.573, p < 0.001), levels of methodological quality (Q= 6.228, p = 0.044), and massage equipment (Q= 4.642, p = 0.031). Conclusions: Our meta-analysis suggests that acupressure can alleviate anxiety. Acupressure was more effective for inpatients and preoperative patients when finger massage was applied. In individuals with anxiety and a stable hemodynamic status, acupressure could be a promising treatment option. However, the substantial heterogeneity across studies means that any inference from the results should be performed cautiously. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Public or patient versions of guidelines (PVGs) are derivative documents that "translate" recommendations and their rationale from clinical guidelines for health professionals into a more easily understandable and usable format for patients and the public. PVGs from different groups and organizations vary considerably in terms of quality of their reporting. In order to address this issue, we aimed to develop a reporting checklist for developers of PVGs and other potential users.Methods: First, we collected a list of potential items through reviewing a sample of PVGs, existing guidance for developing and reporting PVGs or other similar evidence-based patient tools, as well as qualitative studies on original studies of patients' needs about the content and/or reporting of information in PVGs or similar evidence-based patient tools. Second, we conducted a two-round Delphi consultation to determine the level of consensus on the items to be included in the final reporting checklist. Third, we invited two external reviewers to provide comments on the checklist.Results: We generated the initial list of 45 reporting items based on a review of a sample of 30 PVGs, four PVG guidance documents, and 46 relevant studies. After the two-round Delphi consultation, we formed a checklist of 17 items grouped under 12 topics for reporting PVGs.Conclusion: The RIGHT-PVG reporting checklist provides an international consensus on the important criteria for reporting PVGs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Current guidelines recommend restrictive criteria for red blood-cell transfusion in most clinical settings. However, patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery may require distinct transfusion criteria since benefits and potential harm often vary considerably based on patient characteristics and surgical procedures. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of restrictive transfusion in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery, especially in important subgroups.Methods: Electronic databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials investigating restrictive (mostly a hemoglobin level of 8.0 g/dL or symptomatic anemia) versus liberal (mostly a hemoglobin level of 10.0 g/dL) transfusion in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery. For the primary outcome of cardiovascular events, we performed random-effects meta-analyses to synthesize the evidence and to assess the effects in different subgroups according to patient characteristics (with versus without preexisting cardiovascular disease) and surgical procedures (hip fracture surgery versus elective arthroplasty).Results: Ten trials involving 3,968 participants who underwent hip or knee surgery were included. Mean participant age ranged from 68.7 to 86.9 years. Compared with liberal transfusion, restrictive transfusion increased the risk of cardiovascular events (8 trials; 3,618 participants; relative risk [RR], 1.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16 to 1.98; p = 0.003; with no heterogeneity across all trials), irrespective of preexisting cardiovascular disease (pinteraction = 0.63). In a subgroup analysis, the increase was observed in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery (RR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.08 to 2.10; p = 0.02), but did not reach significance in those undergoing elective arthroplasty (RR, 1.53; 95% CI, 0.96 to 2.44; p = 0.07). To minimize the bias caused by variations in transfusion threshold, we conducted an analysis that only included trials using 8.0 g/dL hemoglobin or symptomatic anemia as the threshold for restrictive transfusion and obtained identical results (6 trials; 2,872 participants; RR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.09 to 2.08; p = 0.01; I = 0%). The 2 arms did not differ with respect to the rates of all infections, 30-day mortality, thromboembolic events, wound infection, pulmonary infection (mainly pneumonia), and cerebrovascular accidents (mainly stroke).Conclusions: In patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery, when compared with liberal transfusion, restrictive transfusion increases the risk of cardiovascular events irrespective of preexisting cardiovascular disease. Importantly, the increased risk was observed in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery but did not reach significance in those undergoing elective arthroplasty.Level Of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) affects 4 to 28.9/100 000 people worldwide, and antiepileptic drugs such as carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine are the firstline treatment options. However, the efficacy and safety of other antiepileptic drugs remain unclear due to insufficient direct comparisons. Objective To compare the efficacy and acceptability of all currently available antiepileptic agents for the treatment of patients with classical TN. Methods We will search the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases for unpublished or undergoing research listed in registry platforms. We will include all randomised controlled trials comparing two different antiepileptic drugs or one antiepileptic drug with placebo in patients with classical TN. The primary outcomes will be the proportion of responders and the number of subjects who dropout during the treatment. The secondary outcomes will include the two primary outcomes but in the follow-up period, changes in the self-reporting assessment scale for neuralgia and quality of life assessment. In terms of network meta-analysis, we will fit our model to a Bayesian framework using the JAGS and pcnetmeta packages of the R project. Ethics and dissemination This protocol will not disseminate any private patient data. The results of this review will be disseminated through peer reviewed publication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common condition affecting men of all ages. Acupuncture may be an effective treatment option for CP/CPPS, but evidence is limited. We propose to evaluate the effectiveness of acupuncture in a rigorously conducted trial.Methods: Ten hospitals will recruit 440 participants with CP/CPPS in China from October 2017 to December 2019. Participants will be randomly allocated to acupuncture or sham acupuncture with a 1:1 ratio using computerized simple random sampling. The whole study consists of 2-week baseline, 8-week treatment, and 24-week follow up. Twenty 30-mintute sessions of acupuncture or sham acupuncture treatment will be provided between week 1 and 8. The two co-primary outcomes are the proportion of responders at week 8 and week 32. Secondary outcomes include proportion of responders in the two groups at different time points; change in the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) total score; change in the NIH-CPSI subscales; change in the International Prostate Symptom Score; change in the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; expectation assessments; proportions of participants in each response category of the Global Response Assessment; change in the International Index of Erectile Function 5; change in the five-level EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire and a visual analogue scale; and changes in peak and average urinary flow rate.Discussion: This study will provide robust evidence on whether acupuncture is effective for relieving symptoms of CP/CPPS.Trials Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03213938. Registered on 5 July 2017. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]