40 research outputs found
Guest Editorial - Grading the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations: the GRADE approach to improving dental Clinical Guidelines
Síndrome de Stevens-Johnson. Apresentação de Caso Clínico
Introdução: A Síndrome de Stevens-Johnson (SSJ) é uma doença mucocutânea rara e potencialmente fatal, mais frequente no sexo masculino, cuja incidência aumenta com a idade e em determinados grupos de risco. A SSJ e a Necrólise Tóxica Epidérmica (NET) são duas entidades da mesma doença, com severidade diferente. A etiologia não é clara, mas pensa-se que se deva maioritariamente a reacções adversas a fármacos.
Caso clínico: Um jovem de 17 anos de idade, sem antecedentes pessoais relevantes, foi observado no Serviço de Urgência por surgimento de lesões maculopapulares, com 3 dias de evolução, dispersas pela face, cavidade oral, tronco e extremidades, com prostração e taquicardia. Foi internado com o diagnóstico de SSJ.
Discussão e Conclusões: O SSJ e a NET têm grande morbilidade e considerável mortalidade. O rápido reconhecimento desta identidade, com a remoção do fármaco desencadeador é essencial. A perda da função de barreira da pele, com a consequente alteração da homeostasia, implica muitas vezes a manutenção da terapêutica de suporte em Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos ou de Queimados.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio
Interleukin-6 and interleukin-10 gene polymorphisms and the risk of further periodontal disease progression
Primary versus secondary source of data in observational studies and heterogeneity in meta-analyses of drug effects: a survey of major medical journals
The data from individual observational studies included in meta-analyses of drug effects are collected either from ad hoc methods (i.e. "primary data") or databases that were established for non-research purposes (i.e. "secondary data"). The use of secondary sources may be prone to measurement bias and confounding due to over-the-counter and out-of-pocket drug consumption, or non-adherence to treatment. In fact, it has been noted that failing to consider the origin of the data as a potential cause of heterogeneity may change the conclusions of a meta-analysis. We aimed to assess to what extent the origin of data is explored as a source of heterogeneity in meta-analyses of observational studies.publishe
Porous titanium granules in the treatment of peri-implant osseous defects—a 7-year follow-up study
Defining the process to literature searching in systematic reviews: a literature review of guidance and supporting studies
BACKGROUND: Systematic literature searching is recognised as a critical component of the systematic review process. It involves a systematic search for studies and aims for a transparent report of study identification, leaving readers clear about what was done to identify studies, and how the findings of the review are situated in the relevant evidence. Information specialists and review teams appear to work from a shared and tacit model of the literature search process. How this tacit model has developed and evolved is unclear, and it has not been explicitly examined before. The purpose of this review is to determine if a shared model of the literature searching process can be detected across systematic review guidance documents and, if so, how this process is reported in the guidance and supported by published studies. METHOD: A literature review. Two types of literature were reviewed: guidance and published studies. Nine guidance documents were identified, including: The Cochrane and Campbell Handbooks. Published studies were identified through 'pearl growing', citation chasing, a search of PubMed using the systematic review methods filter, and the authors' topic knowledge. The relevant sections within each guidance document were then read and re-read, with the aim of determining key methodological stages. Methodological stages were identified and defined. This data was reviewed to identify agreements and areas of unique guidance between guidance documents. Consensus across multiple guidance documents was used to inform selection of 'key stages' in the process of literature searching. RESULTS: Eight key stages were determined relating specifically to literature searching in systematic reviews. They were: who should literature search, aims and purpose of literature searching, preparation, the search strategy, searching databases, supplementary searching, managing references and reporting the search process. CONCLUSIONS: Eight key stages to the process of literature searching in systematic reviews were identified. These key stages are consistently reported in the nine guidance documents, suggesting consensus on the key stages of literature searching, and therefore the process of literature searching as a whole, in systematic reviews. Further research to determine the suitability of using the same process of literature searching for all types of systematic review is indicated