Global mapping of randomised trials related articles published in high-impact-factor medical journals: a cross-sectional analysis

BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) provide the most reliable information to inform clinical practice and patient care. We aimed to map global clinical research publication activity through RCT-related articles in high-impact-factor medical journals over the past five decades. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of articles published in the highest ranked medical journals with an impact factor > 10 (according to Journal Citation Reports published in 2017). We searched PubMed/MEDLINE (from inception to December 31, 2017) for all RCT-related articles (e.g. primary RCTs, secondary analyses and methodology papers) published in high-impact-factor medical journals. For each included article, raw metadata were abstracted from the Web of Science. A process of standardization was conducted to unify the different terms and grammatical variants and to remove typographical, transcription and/or indexing errors. Descriptive analyses were conducted (including the number of articles, citations, most prolific authors, countries, journals, funding sources and keywords). Network analyses of collaborations between countries and co-words are presented. RESULTS: We included 39,305 articles (for the period 1965-2017) published in forty journals. The Lancet (n = 3593; 9.1%), the Journal of Clinical Oncology (n = 3343; 8.5%) and The New England Journal of Medicine (n = 3275 articles; 8.3%) published the largest number of RCTs. A total of 154 countries were involved in the production of articles. The global productivity ranking was led by the United States (n = 18,393 articles), followed by the United Kingdom (n = 8028 articles), Canada (n = 4548 articles) and Germany (n = 4415 articles). Seventeen authors who had published 100 or more articles were identified; the most prolific authors were affiliated with Duke University (United States), Harvard University (United States) and McMaster University (Canada). The main funding institutions were the National Institutes of Health (United States), Hoffmann-La Roche (Switzerland), Pfizer (United States), Merck Sharp & Dohme (United States) and Novartis (Switzerland). The 100 most cited RCTs were published in nine journals, led by The New England Journal of Medicine (n = 78 articles), The Lancet (n = 9 articles) and JAMA (n = 7 articles). These landmark contributions focuse

The burden of premature mortality in Spain using standard expected years of life lost: a population-based study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Measures of premature mortality have been used to guide debates on future health priorities and to monitor the population health status. Standard expected years of life lost (SEYLL) is one of the methods used to assess the time lost due to premature death. This article affords an overview of premature mortality in Spain for the year 2008.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A population-based study was conducted estimating SEYLL by sex and age groups. SEYLL, a key component of the disability-adjusted life years measure of disease burden, was calculated using Princeton West standard life tables with life expectancy at birth fixed at 80 years for males and 82.5 years for females. Population data and specific death records were obtained from the official registers of the National Institute of Statistics. All data were analysed and prepared in GesMor and Epidat software packages.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The burden of premature mortality was estimated at 2.1 million SEYLL when age at death is taken into account. Males lost 60.9% and females lost 39.1% of total SEYLL. Malignant tumors (34.5%) and cardiovascular diseases (24.0%) were the leading categories in terms of SEYLL. Ischaemic heart disease (8.5%) and lung cancers (8.0%) were the most common specific causes of SEYLL followed by cerebrovascular diseases (5.9%), colorectal cancer (4.1%), road traffic accidents (3.5%), Alzheimer and other dementias (2.9%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (2.8%), breast cancer (2.8%) and suicides (2.6%).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In Spain, premature mortality was essentially due to chronic non-communicable diseases. Data provided in this study are relevant for a more balanced health agenda aimed at reducing the burden of premature mortality. This study also represents a first step in estimating the overall burden of disease in terms of premature death and disability.</p

Does the development of new medicinal products in the European Union address global and regional health concerns?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Since 1995, approval for many new medicinal products has been obtained through a centralized procedure in the European Union. In recent years, the use of summary measures of population health has become widespread. We investigated whether efforts to develop innovative medicines are focusing on the most relevant conditions from a global public health perspective.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We reviewed the information on new medicinal products approved by centralized procedure from 1995 to 2009, information that is available to the public in the European Commission Register of medicinal products and the European Public Assessment Reports from the European Medicines Agency. Morbidity and mortality data were included for each disease group, according to the Global Burden of Disease project. We evaluated the association between authorized medicinal products and burden of disease measures based on disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in the European Union and worldwide.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We considered 520 marketing authorizations for medicinal products and 338 active ingredients. New authorizations were seen to increase over the period analyzed. There was a positive, high correlation between DALYs and new medicinal product development (ρ = 0.619, p = 0.005) in the European Union, and a moderate correlation for middle-low-income countries (ρ = 0.497, p = 0.030) and worldwide (ρ = 0.490, p = 0.033). The most neglected conditions at the European level (based on their attributable health losses) were neuropsychiatric diseases, cardiovascular diseases, respiratory diseases, sense organ conditions, and digestive diseases, while globally, they were perinatal conditions, respiratory infections, sense organ conditions, respiratory diseases, and digestive diseases.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We find that the development of new medicinal products is higher for some diseases than others. Pharmaceutical industry leaders and policymakers are invited to consider the implications of this imbalance by establishing work plans that allow for the setting of future priorities from a public health perspective.</p

The pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents: A systematic review with network meta-analyses of randomised trials

BACKGROUND: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most commonly diagnosed psychiatric disorders in childhood. A wide variety of treatments have been used for the management of ADHD. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of pharmacological, psychological and complementary and alternative medicine interventions for the treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We performed a systematic review with network meta-analyses. Randomised controlled trials (≥ 3 weeks follow-up) were identified from published and unpublished sources through searches in PubMed and the Cochrane Library (up to April 7, 2016). Interventions of interest were pharmacological (stimulants, non-stimulants, antidepressants, antipsychotics, and other unlicensed drugs), psychological (behavioural, cognitive training and neurofeedback) and complementary and alternative medicine (dietary therapy, fatty acids, amino acids, minerals, herbal therapy, homeopathy, and physical activity). The primary outcomes were efficacy (treatment response) and acceptability (all-cause discontinuation). Secondary outcomes included discontinuation due to adverse events (tolerability), as well as serious adverse events and specific adverse events. Random-effects Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted to obtain estimates as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% credibility intervals. We analysed interventions by class and individually. 190 randomised trials (52 different interventions grouped in 32 therapeutic classes) that enrolled 26114 participants with ADHD were included in complex networks. At the class level, behavioural therapy (alone or in combination with stimulants), stimulants, and non-stimulant seemed significantly more efficacious than placebo. Behavioural therapy in combination with stimulants seemed superior to stimulants or non-stimulants. Stimulants seemed superior to behavioural therapy, cognitive training and non-stimulants. Behavioural therapy, stimulants and their combination showed the best profile of acceptability. Stimulants and non-stimulants seemed well tolerated. Among medications, methylphenidate, amphetamine, atomoxetine, guanfacine and clonidine seemed significantly more efficacious than placebo. Methylphenidate and amphetamine seemed more efficacious than atomoxetine and guanfacine. Methylphenidate and clonidine seemed better accepted than placebo and atomoxetine. Most of the efficacious pharmacological treatments were associated with harms (anorexia, weight loss and insomnia), but an increased risk of serious adverse events was not observed. There is lack of evidence for cognitive training, neurofeedback, antidepressants, antipsychotics, dietary therapy, fatty acids, and other complementary and alternative medicine. Overall findings were limited by the clinical and methodological heterogeneity, small sample sizes of trials, short-term follow-up, and the absence of high-quality evidence; consequently, results should be interpreted with caution. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical differences may exist between the pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment used for the management of ADHD. Uncertainties about therapies and the balance between benefits, costs and potential harms should be considered before starting treatment. There is an urgent need for high-quality randomised trials of the multiple treatments for ADHD in children and adolescents. PROSPERO, number CRD42014015008

Global collaborative networks on meta-analyses of randomized trials published in high impact factor medical journals: a social network analysis

BackgroundResearch collaboration contributes to the advancement of knowledge by exploiting the results of scientific efforts more efficiently, but the global patterns of collaboration on meta-analysis are unknown. The purpose of this research was to describe and characterize the global collaborative patterns in meta-analyses of randomized trials published in high impact factor medical journals over the past three decades.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional, social network analysis. We searched PubMed for relevant meta-analyses of randomized trials published up to December 2012. We selected meta-analyses (including at least randomized trials as primary evidence source) published in the top seven high impact factor general medical journals (according to Journal Citation Reports 2011): The New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, the BMJ, JAMA, Annals of Internal Medicine, Archives of Internal Medicine (now renamed JAMA Internal Medicine), and PLoS Medicine. Opinion articles, conceptual papers, narrative reviews, reviews without meta-analysis, reviews of reviews, and other study designs were excluded.ResultsOverall, we included 736 meta-analyses, in which 3,178 authors, 891 institutions, and 51 countries participated. The BMJ was the journal that published the greatest number of articles (39%), followed by The Lancet (18%), JAMA (15%) and the Archives of Internal Medicine (15%). The USA, the UK, and Canada headed the absolute global productivity ranking in number of papers. The 64 authors and the 39 institutions with the highest publication rates were identified. We also found 82 clusters of authors (one group with 55 members and one group with 54 members) and 19 clusters of institutions (one major group with 76 members). The most prolific authors were mainly affiliated with the University of Oxford (UK), McMaster University (Canada), and the University of Bern (Switzerland).ConclusionsOur analysis identified networks of authors, institutions and countries publishing meta-analyses of randomized trials in high impact medical journals. This valuable information may be used to strengthen scientific capacity for collaboration and to help to promote a global agenda for future research of excellence

Cardiovascular and renal outcomes of renin-angiotensin system blockade in adult patients with diabetes mellitus: a systematic review with network meta-analyses

Medications aimed at inhibiting the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) have been used extensively for preventing cardiovascular and renal complications in patients with diabetes, but data that compare their clinical effectiveness are limited. We aimed to compare the effects of classes of RAS blockers on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in adults with diabetes

Future and potential spending on health 2015-40: Development assistance for health, and government, prepaid private, and out-of-pocket health spending in 184 countries

Background: The amount of resources, particularly prepaid resources, available for health can affect access to health care and health outcomes. Although health spending tends to increase with economic development, tremendous variation exists among health financing systems. Estimates of future spending can be beneficial for policy makers and planners, and can identify financing gaps. In this study, we estimate future gross domestic product (GDP), all-sector government spending, and health spending disaggregated by source, and we compare expected future spending to potential future spending. Methods: We extracted GDP, government spending in 184 countries from 1980-2015, and health spend data from 1995-2014. We used a series of ensemble models to estimate future GDP, all-sector government spending, development assistance for health, and government, out-of-pocket, and prepaid private health spending through 2040. We used frontier analyses to identify patterns exhibited by the countries that dedicate the most funding to health, and used these frontiers to estimate potential health spending for each low-income or middle-income country. All estimates are inflation and purchasing power adjusted. Findings: We estimated that global spending on health will increase from US$9.21 trillion in 2014 to$24.24 trillion (uncertainty interval [UI] 20.47-29.72) in 2040. We expect per capita health spending to increase fastest in upper-middle-income countries, at 5.3% (UI 4.1-6.8) per year. This growth is driven by continued growth in GDP, government spending, and government health spending. Lower-middle income countries are expected to grow at 4.2% (3.8-4.9). High-income countries are expected to grow at 2.1% (UI 1.8-2.4) and low-income countries are expected to grow at 1.8% (1.0-2.8). Despite this growth, health spending per capita in low-income countries is expected to remain low, at $154 (UI 133-181) per capita in 2030 and$195 (157-258) per capita in 2040. Increases in national health spending to reach the level of the countries who spend the most on health, relative to their level of economic development, would mean $321 (157-258) per capita was available for health in 2040 in low-income countries. Interpretation: Health spending is associated with economic development but past trends and relationships suggest that spending will remain variable, and low in some low-resource settings. Policy change could lead to increased health spending, although for the poorest countries external support might remain essential

Global and national Burden of diseases and injuries among children and adolescents between 1990 and 2013

Importance The literature focuses on mortality among children younger than 5 years. Comparable information on nonfatal health outcomes among these children and the fatal and nonfatal burden of diseases and injuries among older children and adolescents is scarce. Objective To determine levels and trends in the fatal and nonfatal burden of diseases and injuries among younger children (aged <5 years), older children (aged 5-9 years), and adolescents (aged 10-19 years) between 1990 and 2013 in 188 countries from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2013 study. Evidence Review Data from vital registration, verbal autopsy studies, maternal and child death surveillance, and other sources covering 14 244 site-years (ie, years of cause of death data by geography) from 1980 through 2013 were used to estimate cause-specific mortality. Data from 35 620 epidemiological sources were used to estimate the prevalence of the diseases and sequelae in the GBD 2013 study. Cause-specific mortality for most causes was estimated using the Cause of Death Ensemble Model strategy. For some infectious diseases (eg, HIV infection/AIDS, measles, hepatitis B) where the disease process is complex or the cause of death data were insufficient or unavailable, we used natural history models. For most nonfatal health outcomes, DisMod-MR 2.0, a Bayesian metaregression tool, was used to meta-analyze the epidemiological data to generate prevalence estimates. Findings Of the 7.7 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 7.4-8.1) million deaths among children and adolescents globally in 2013, 6.28 million occurred among younger children, 0.48 million among older children, and 0.97 million among adolescents. In 2013, the leading causes of death were lower respiratory tract infections among younger children (905 059 deaths; 95% UI, 810 304-998 125), diarrheal diseases among older children (38 325 deaths; 95% UI, 30 365-47 678), and road injuries among adolescents (115 186 deaths; 95% UI, 105 185-124 870). Iron deficiency anemia was the leading cause of years lived with disability among children and adolescents, affecting 619 (95% UI, 618-621) million in 2013. Large between-country variations exist in mortality from leading causes among children and adolescents. Countries with rapid declines in all-cause mortality between 1990 and 2013 also experienced large declines in most leading causes of death, whereas countries with the slowest declines had stagnant or increasing trends in the leading causes of death. In 2013, Nigeria had a 12% global share of deaths from lower respiratory tract infections and a 38% global share of deaths from malaria. India had 33% of the world’s deaths from neonatal encephalopathy. Half of the world’s diarrheal deaths among children and adolescents occurred in just 5 countries: India, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Pakistan, Nigeria, and Ethiopia. Conclusions and Relevance Understanding the levels and trends of the leading causes of death and disability among children and adolescents is critical to guide investment and inform policies. Monitoring these trends over time is also key to understanding where interventions are having an impact. Proven interventions exist to prevent or treat the leading causes of unnecessary death and disability among children and adolescents. The findings presented here show that these are underused and give guidance to policy makers in countries where more attention is needed