A meta-review of transparency and reproducibility-related reporting practices in published meta-analyses on clinical psychological interventions (2000–2020)

Meta-analysis is a powerful and important tool to synthesize the literature about a research topic. Like other kinds of research, meta-analyses must be reproducible to be compliant with the principles of the scientific method. Furthermore, reproducible meta-analyses can be easily updated with new data and reanalysed applying new and more refined analysis techniques. We attempted to empirically assess the prevalence of transparency and reproducibility-related reporting practices in published meta-analyses from clinical psychology by examining a random sample of 100 meta-analyses. Our purpose was to identify the key points that could be improved, with the aim of providing some recommendations for carrying out reproducible meta-analyses. We conducted a meta-review of meta-analyses of psychological interventions published between 2000 and 2020. We searched PubMed, PsycInfo and Web of Science databases. A structured coding form to assess transparency indicators was created based on previous studies and existing meta-analysis guidelines. We found major issues concerning: completely reproducible search procedures report, specification of the exact method to compute effect sizes, choice of weighting factors and estimators, lack of availability of the raw statistics used to compute the effect size and of interoperability of available data, and practically total absence of analysis script code sharing. Based on our findings, we conclude with recommendations intended to improve the transparency, openness, and reproducibility-related reporting practices of meta-analyses in clinical psychology and related areas.This research has been funded with a grant from the Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación and by FEDER funds (Project n° PID2019-104080GB-I00)

Effectiveness, Feasibility, and Acceptability of Dynamic Elastomeric Fabric Orthoses (DEFO) for Managing Pain, Functional Capacity, and Quality of Life during Prenatal and Postnatal Care: A Systematic Review

Conservative interventions for addressing prenatal and postnatal ailments have been described in the research literature. Research results indicated that maternity support belts assist with reducing pain and other symptoms in these phases; however, compliance in wearing maternity support belts is poor. To combat poor compliance, commercial manufacturers designed dynamic elastomeric fabric orthoses (DEFO)/compression garments that target prenatal and postnatal ailments. This systematic review aimed to identify, critically appraise, and synthesize key findings on the effectiveness, the feasibility, and the acceptability of using DEFO to manage ailments during pre-natal and postnatal phases of care. Electronic databases were systematically searched to identify relevant studies, resulting in 17 studies that met the eligibility criteria. There were variations in DEFO descriptors, including hosiery, support belts, abdominal binders and more, making it difficult to compare findings from the research articles regarding value of DEFO during prenatal and/or postnatal phases. A meta-synthesis of empirical research findings suggests wearing DEFOs during pregnancy has a significant desirable effect for managing pain and improving functional capacity. Further research is required to investigate the use of DEFOs for managing pain in the postnatal period and improving quality life during prenatal and postnatal care

Is it possible to establish reference values for ankle muscle isokinetic strength? A meta-analytical study

BACKGROUND: The importance of measuring ankle muscle strength (AMS) has been demonstrated in a variety of clinical areas. Much data has been accumulated using the Cybex Norm isokinetic dynamometer but a uniform framework does not exist. OBJECTIVE: To identify pertinent studies which have used the Cybex Norm to measure AMS in order to establish reference values. METHODS: A narrative review of the literature was used to identify papers that have used the Cybex Norm to measure isokinetic concentric and eccentric AMS. RESULTS: Fifty five research papers were identified but each study used a different isokinetic protocol. CONCLUSIONS: It is not possible to produce AMS reference values due to the wide variation in data collection methods. This is therefore an area of research that needs further exploration

A systematic review of biomarkers for disease progression in Parkinson's disease

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

The bitter truth about sugar and willpower

Dual-process theories of higher order cognition (DPTs) have been enjoying much success, particularly since Kahneman’s 2002 Nobel prize address and recent book Thinking, Fast and Slow (2009). Historically, DPTs have attempted to provide a conceptual framework that helps classify and predict differences in patterns of behavior found under some circumstances and not others in a host of reasoning, judgment, and decision-making tasks. As evidence has changed and techniques for examining behavior have moved on, so too have DPTs. Killing two birds with one stone, Evans and Stanovich (2013, this issue) respond to five main criticisms of DPTs. Along with addressing each criticism in turn, they set out to clarify the essential defining characteristics that distinguish one form of higher order cognition from the other. The aim of this commentary is to consider the defining characteristics of Type 1 and Type 2 processing that have been proposed and to suggest that the evidence can be taken to support quantitative differences rather than qualitatively distinct processes