Interview with Petra Hauke: Sustainable Development Goals in medical libraries

The role of libraries in achieving the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has become an increasingly important topic in the last years. The authors of this paper talked to Petra Hauke, convenor of the “Environment, Sustainability and Libraries Special Interest Group” (ENSULIB) at the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) about her work and the ways medical libraries might contribute to implementing the SDGs

Green it! Planning more sustainable conferences

Climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic challenge us to re-evaluate the way we live and work. In the academic sector, this includes organising and attending conferences and other scientific meetings. The pandemic has led EAHIL 2020 to be moved online, which is “greener” than physical meetings, but has interactional drawbacks. On the other hand, planning of physical conferences can make use of existing guidance to improve the environmental impact in areas such as venue and travel arrangements, catering, waste reduction as well as communication. In the future, conference organisers can draw upon insights into remote and virtual collaboration gained during the pandemic. Hybrid conferences that allow physical and remote attendance might become an option for increased sustainability of scientific meetings

Vitamin D deficiency as a risk factor for dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Background Sunlight exposure and high vitamin D status have been hypothesised to reduce the risk of developing dementia. The objective of our research was to determine whether lack of sunlight and hypovitaminosis D over time are associated with dementia. Methods We systematically searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, ICONDA, and reference lists of pertinent review articles from 1990 to October 2015. We conducted random effects meta-analyses of published and unpublished data to evaluate the influence of sunlight exposure or vitamin D as a surrogate marker on dementia risk. Results We could not identify a single study investigating the association between sunlight exposure and dementia risk. Six cohort studies provided data on the effect of serum vitamin D concentration on dementia risk. A meta-analysis of five studies showed a higher risk for persons with serious vitamin D deficiency (<25\ua0nmol/L or 7\u201328\ua0nmol/L) compared to persons with sufficient vitamin D supply (\u226550\ua0nmol/L or 54\u2013159\ua0nmol/L) (point estimate 1.54; 95% CI 1.19\u20131.99, I 2 \u2009=\u200920%). The strength of evidence that serious vitamin D deficiency increases the risk of developing dementia, however, is very low due to the observational nature of included studies and their lack of adjustment for residual or important confounders (e.g. ApoE \u3b54 genotype), as well as the indirect relationship between Vitamin D concentrations as a surrogate for sunlight exposure and dementia risk. Conclusions The results of this systematic review show that low vitamin D levels might contribute to the development of dementia. Further research examining the direct and indirect relationship between sunlight exposure and dementia risk is needed. Such research should involve large-scale cohort studies with homogeneous and repeated assessment of vitamin D concentrations or sunlight exposure and dementia outcomes

Searching two or more databases decreased the risk of missing relevant studies: a metaresearch study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Assessing changes in coverage, recall, review, conclusions and references not found when searching fewer databases. METHODS: In randomly selected 60 Cochrane reviews, we checked included study publications' coverage (indexation) and recall (findability) using different search approaches with MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL and related them to authors' conclusions and certainty. We assessed characteristics of unfound references. RESULTS: Overall 1989/2080 included references, were indexed in ≥1 database (coverage = 96%). In reviews where using one of our search approaches would not change conclusions and certainty (n = 44-54), median coverage and recall were highest (range 87.9%-100.0% and 78.2%-93.3%, respectively). Here, searching ≥2 databases reached &gt;95% coverage and ≥87.9% recall. In reviews with unchanged conclusions but less certainty (n = 2-8): 63.3%-79.3% coverage and 45.0%-75.0% recall. In reviews with opposite conclusions (n = 1-3): 63.3%-96.6% and 52.1%-78.7%. In reviews where a conclusion was no longer possible (n = 3-7): 60.6%-86.0% and 20.0%-53.8%. The 265 references that were indexed but unfound were more often abstractless (30% vs. 11%) and older (28% vs. 17% published before 1991) than found references. CONCLUSION: Searching ≥2 databases improves coverage and recall and decreases the risk of missing eligible studies. If researchers suspect that relevant articles are difficult to find, supplementary search methods should be used

Travel-related control measures to contain the COVID-19 pandemic: an evidence map

OBJECTIVES To comprehensively map the existing evidence assessing the impact of travel-related control measures for containment of the SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN Rapid evidence map. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science, and COVID-19 specific databases offered by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the WHO. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA We included studies in human populations susceptible to SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19, SARS-CoV-1/severe acute respiratory syndrome, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus/Middle East respiratory syndrome or influenza. Interventions of interest were travel-related control measures affecting travel across national or subnational borders. Outcomes of interest included infectious disease, screening, other health, economic and social outcomes. We considered all empirical studies that quantitatively evaluate impact available in Armenian, English, French, German, Italian and Russian based on the team's language capacities. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS We extracted data from included studies in a standardised manner and mapped them to a priori and (one) post hoc defined categories. RESULTS We included 122 studies assessing travel-related control measures. These studies were undertaken across the globe, most in the Western Pacific region (n=71). A large proportion of studies focused on COVID-19 (n=59), but a number of studies also examined SARS, MERS and influenza. We identified studies on border closures (n=3), entry/exit screening (n=31), travel-related quarantine (n=6), travel bans (n=8) and travel restrictions (n=25). Many addressed a bundle of travel-related control measures (n=49). Most studies assessed infectious disease (n=98) and/or screening-related (n=25) outcomes; we found only limited evidence on economic and social outcomes. Studies applied numerous methods, both inferential and descriptive in nature, ranging from simple observational methods to complex modelling techniques. CONCLUSIONS We identified a heterogeneous and complex evidence base on travel-related control measures. While this map is not sufficient to assess the effectiveness of different measures, it outlines aspects regarding interventions and outcomes, as well as study methodology and reporting that could inform future research and evidence synthesis

Abbreviated and comprehensive literature searches led to identical or very similar effect estimates: a meta-epidemiological study

OBJECTIVES The objective of this study was to assess the agreement of treatment effect estimates from meta-analyses based on abbreviated or comprehensive literature searches. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING This was a meta-epidemiological study. We abbreviated 47 comprehensive Cochrane review searches and searched MEDLINE/Embase/CENTRAL alone, in combination, with/without checking references (658 new searches). We compared one meta-analysis from each review with recalculated ones based on abbreviated searches. RESULTS The 47 original meta-analyses included 444 trials (median 6 per review interquartile range (IQR) 3-11) with 360045 participants (median 1,371 per review IQR 685-8,041). Depending on the search approach, abbreviated searches led to identical effect estimates in 34-79{\%} of meta-analyses, to different effect estimates with the same direction and level of statistical significance in 15-51{\%}, and to opposite effects (or effects could not be estimated anymore) in 6-13{\%}. The deviation of effect sizes was zero in 50{\%} of the meta-analyses and in 75{\%} not larger than 1.07-fold. Effect estimates of abbreviated searches were not consistently smaller or larger (median ratio of odds ratio 1 IQR 1-1.01) but more imprecise (1.02-1.06-fold larger standard errors). CONCLUSION Abbreviated literature searches often led to identical or very similar effect estimates as comprehensive searches with slightly increased confidence intervals. Relevant deviations may occur

Assessing the validity of abbreviated literature searches for rapid reviews: protocol of a non-inferiority and meta-epidemiologic study

Abstract Background Systematic reviews offer the most reliable and valid support for health policy decision-making, patient information, and guideline development. However, they are labor intensive and frequently take longer than 1 year to complete. Consequently, they often do not meet the needs of those who need to make decisions quickly. Rapid reviews have therefore become a pragmatic alternative to systematic reviews. They are knowledge syntheses that abbreviate certain methodological aspects of systematic reviews to produce information more quickly. Methodological shortcuts often take place in literature identification. A potential drawback is less reliable results. To date, the impact of abbreviated searches on estimates of treatment effects and subsequent conclusions has not been analyzed systematically across multiple bodies of evidence. We aim to answer the research question: Do bodies of evidence that are based on abbreviated literature searches lead to different conclusions about benefits and harms of interventions compared with bodies of evidence that are based on comprehensive, systematic literature searches? Methods We will use a non-inferiority and meta-epidemiologic design. The primary outcome is the proportion of discordant conclusions based on different search approaches. Drawing of a pool of Cochrane reports published between 2012 and 2016, we will randomly select 60 reports. Eligible reports are those that present a summary-of-findings table, draw a clear conclusion, present data for meta-analyses, and document the search strategy clearly. We will conduct several abbreviated searches to detect whether included studies in these Cochrane reviews could be detected. If searches could not detect all studies, we will revise the original summary-of-findings table and ask review authors whether the missed evidence would change conclusions of their report. We will determine the proportion of discordant conclusions for each abbreviated search approach. We will consider an abbreviated search as non-inferior if the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of the proportion of discordant conclusions is below the non-inferiority margin, which is determined based on results of a survey for clinical and public health scenarios. Discussion This will be the first study to assess whether the reduced sensitivity of abbreviated searches has an impact on conclusions across multiple bodies of evidence, not only on effect estimates

Cost-Effectiveness of Pharmacological Treatments of Acute Episodic Migraine Attacks: A Rapid Review

In the context of the Pharmacologic Treatment of Acute Episodic Migraine Attacks: Comparative Effectiveness Review project, we will conduct a rapid review on the cost-effectiveness of pharmacological treatments of acute episodic migraine attack