Need for evidence synthesis for quality control of healthcare decision-making

Systematic reviews that are out-of-date delay policymaking, create controversy, and can erode trust in research. To avoid this issue, it is preferable to keep summaries of the study evidence. Living evidence is a synthesis approach that provides up-to-date rigorous research evidence summaries to decision-makers. This strategy is particularly useful in rapidly expanding research domains, uncertain existing evidence, and new research that may impact policy or practice, ensuring that physicians have access to the most recent evidence. Addressing global challenges – ranging from public health crises to climate change or political instability - requires evidencebased judgements. An obsolete, biased, or selective information poses risks of poor decisions and resource misallocation. The relatively nascent practice of living evidence proves invaluable in maintaining continuous interest and team engagement. The concept of living evidence has been particularly relevant during the COVID19 pandemic due to the rapidly evolving nature of the virus, the urgent need for timely information, and the continuous emergence of new research findings. Although the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of evidence systems, researchers and funders of research should rigorously test the living-evidence model across diverse domains to further advance and optimize its methodolog

The effects of green coffee bean extract supplementation on lipid profile in humans: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background and aim: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the effects of green coffee bean extract (GCBE) supplementation on lipid profile in adults. Methods and results: The PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of sciences, and Google Scholar were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials available in English and published before February 2019. The meta-analysis was conducted using fixed effects models, and between-study heterogeneity was assessed by Cochran's Q test and I2. A total of 17 effect sizes were included in the meta-analysis. Combined effect sizes on serum total cholesterol concentrations revealed significant effects of GCBE supplementation on serum total cholesterol weighted mean difference (WMD): �4.51 mg/dL, 95% confidence interval (CI): �6.89, �2.12, p < 0.001, low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) (WMD: �4.38 mg/dL, 95% CI: �6.44, �2.31, p < 0.001), and high density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) (WMD: 2.63 mg/dL, 95% CI: 2.20, 3.07, p < 0.001) compared to controls. Nevertheless, no significant changes were observed in serum triglycerides levels (WMD: �4.34 mg/dL, 95% CI: �9.00, 0.32, p = 0.068). Conclusion: The evidence from available studies suggests that the GCBE supplementation leads to significant reductions in total cholesterol, HDL-C, and LDL-C levels, and has modest, but, non-significant effects on triglycerides levels. © 2019 The Italian Society of Diabetology, the Italian Society for the Study of Atherosclerosis, the Italian Society of Human Nutrition, and the Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Federico II Universit

Características e estabilidade no armazenamento de sucos tropicais mistos com elevada capacidade antioxidante.

bitstream/item/152270/1/BPD16014.pd

Mortality from gastrointestinal congenital anomalies at 264 hospitals in 74 low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries: a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study

Background: Congenital anomalies are the fifth leading cause of mortality in children younger than 5 years globally. Many gastrointestinal congenital anomalies are fatal without timely access to neonatal surgical care, but few studies have been done on these conditions in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared outcomes of the seven most common gastrointestinal congenital anomalies in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries globally, and identified factors associated with mortality. // Methods: We did a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of patients younger than 16 years, presenting to hospital for the first time with oesophageal atresia, congenital diaphragmatic hernia, intestinal atresia, gastroschisis, exomphalos, anorectal malformation, and Hirschsprung's disease. Recruitment was of consecutive patients for a minimum of 1 month between October, 2018, and April, 2019. We collected data on patient demographics, clinical status, interventions, and outcomes using the REDCap platform. Patients were followed up for 30 days after primary intervention, or 30 days after admission if they did not receive an intervention. The primary outcome was all-cause, in-hospital mortality for all conditions combined and each condition individually, stratified by country income status. We did a complete case analysis. // Findings: We included 3849 patients with 3975 study conditions (560 with oesophageal atresia, 448 with congenital diaphragmatic hernia, 681 with intestinal atresia, 453 with gastroschisis, 325 with exomphalos, 991 with anorectal malformation, and 517 with Hirschsprung's disease) from 264 hospitals (89 in high-income countries, 166 in middle-income countries, and nine in low-income countries) in 74 countries. Of the 3849 patients, 2231 (58·0%) were male. Median gestational age at birth was 38 weeks (IQR 36–39) and median bodyweight at presentation was 2·8 kg (2·3–3·3). Mortality among all patients was 37 (39·8%) of 93 in low-income countries, 583 (20·4%) of 2860 in middle-income countries, and 50 (5·6%) of 896 in high-income countries (p<0·0001 between all country income groups). Gastroschisis had the greatest difference in mortality between country income strata (nine [90·0%] of ten in low-income countries, 97 [31·9%] of 304 in middle-income countries, and two [1·4%] of 139 in high-income countries; p≤0·0001 between all country income groups). Factors significantly associated with higher mortality for all patients combined included country income status (low-income vs high-income countries, risk ratio 2·78 [95% CI 1·88–4·11], p<0·0001; middle-income vs high-income countries, 2·11 [1·59–2·79], p<0·0001), sepsis at presentation (1·20 [1·04–1·40], p=0·016), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score at primary intervention (ASA 4–5 vs ASA 1–2, 1·82 [1·40–2·35], p<0·0001; ASA 3 vs ASA 1–2, 1·58, [1·30–1·92], p<0·0001]), surgical safety checklist not used (1·39 [1·02–1·90], p=0·035), and ventilation or parenteral nutrition unavailable when needed (ventilation 1·96, [1·41–2·71], p=0·0001; parenteral nutrition 1·35, [1·05–1·74], p=0·018). Administration of parenteral nutrition (0·61, [0·47–0·79], p=0·0002) and use of a peripherally inserted central catheter (0·65 [0·50–0·86], p=0·0024) or percutaneous central line (0·69 [0·48–1·00], p=0·049) were associated with lower mortality. // Interpretation: Unacceptable differences in mortality exist for gastrointestinal congenital anomalies between low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries. Improving access to quality neonatal surgical care in LMICs will be vital to achieve Sustainable Development Goal 3.2 of ending preventable deaths in neonates and children younger than 5 years by 2030

Estimating global injuries morbidity and mortality: methods and data used in the Global Burden of Disease 2017 study

BACKGROUND: While there is a long history of measuring death and disability from injuries, modern research methods must account for the wide spectrum of disability that can occur in an injury, and must provide estimates with sufficient demographic, geographical and temporal detail to be useful for policy makers. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 study used methods to provide highly detailed estimates of global injury burden that meet these criteria. METHODS: In this study, we report and discuss the methods used in GBD 2017 for injury morbidity and mortality burden estimation. In summary, these methods included estimating cause-specific mortality for every cause of injury, and then estimating incidence for every cause of injury. Non-fatal disability for each cause is then calculated based on the probabilities of suffering from different types of bodily injury experienced. RESULTS: GBD 2017 produced morbidity and mortality estimates for 38 causes of injury. Estimates were produced in terms of incidence, prevalence, years lived with disability, cause-specific mortality, years of life lost and disability-adjusted life-years for a 28-year period for 22 age groups, 195 countries and both sexes. CONCLUSIONS: GBD 2017 demonstrated a complex and sophisticated series of analytical steps using the largest known database of morbidity and mortality data on injuries. GBD 2017 results should be used to help inform injury prevention policy making and resource allocation. We also identify important avenues for improving injury burden estimation in the future