Predictors of in-hospital mortality among patients with pulmonary tuberculosis : a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: There is uncertainty regarding which factors are associated with in-hospital mortality among patients with pulmonary TB (PTB). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to identify predictors of in-hospital mortality among patients with PTB. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Global Health, for cohort and case-control studies that reported risk factors for inhospital mortality in PTB. We pooled all factors that were assessed for an association, and presented relative associations as pooled odds ratios (ORs). Results: We identified 2,969 records, of which we retrieved 51 in full text; 11 cohort studies that evaluated 5,468 patients proved eligible. Moderate quality evidence suggested an association with co-morbid malignancy and in-hospital mortality (OR 1.85; 95% CI 1.01–3.40). Low quality evidence showed no association with positive sputum smear (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.40–2.48), or male sex (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.84–1.41), and very low quality evidence showed no association with diabetes mellitus (OR 1.31, 95% IC 0.38–4.46), and previous TB infection (OR 2.66, 95% CI 0.48–14.87). Conclusion: Co-morbid malignancy was associated with increased risk of in-hospital death among pulmonary TB patients. There is insufficient evidence to confirm positive sputum smear, male sex, diabetes mellitus, and previous TB infection as predictors of in-hospital mortality in TB patients

Comparative efficacy and safety of alternative glucocorticoids regimens in patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of alternative glucocorticoids (GCs) regimens as induction therapy for patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies (ANCA)-associated vasculitis. DESIGN: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, Clinicaltrials.gov and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to 10 April 2020. STUDY SELECTION AND REVIEW METHODS: RCTs comparing two (or more) different dose regimens of GC in ANCA-associated vasculitis during induction of remission, regardless of other therapies. Pairs of reviewers independently screened records, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Two reviewers rated certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: Of 3912 records identified, the full texts of two records met the eligibility criteria. Due to the heterogeneity of population and dose regimen of GCs between the two trials, we descriptively presented the two trials and did not combine the results using meta-analysis. Compared with the standard-dose regimen, the reduced-dose regimen of GC may reduce death risk difference (RD): from -1.7% to -2.1%, low certainty), while not increasing end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) (RD: from -1.5% to 0.4%, moderate certainty). The reduced-dose regimen probably has an important reduction in serious infections at 1 year (RD: from -12.8% to -5.9%, moderate certainty). Reduced-dose regimen of GCs probably has trivial or no effect in disease remission, relapse or health-related quality of life (moderate to high certainty). CONCLUSIONS: The reduced-dose regimen of GC may reduce death at the follow-up of 6 months to longer than 1 year and serious infections while not increasing ESKD. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020179087

Decision Aids for Prostate Cancer Screening Choice: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Key PointsQuestionWhat is the association of decision aids vs usual care with shared decision-making in men deciding whether to undergo prostate cancer screening? FindingsThis systematic review and meta-analysis of 19 randomized clinical trials comparing decision aids for prostate cancer screening (12781 men) found that decision aids are probably associated with a small reduction in decisional conflict and are possibly associated with an increase in knowledge. Decision aids are possibly not associated with whether physicians and patients discuss prostate cancer screening and are possibly not associated with actual screening decisions. MeaningRandomized clinical trials have failed to provide compelling evidence for the use of decision aids for men contemplating prostate cancer screening that have, up to now, undergone rigorous testing to determine their outcome. ImportanceUS guidelines recommend that physicians engage in shared decision-making with men considering prostate cancer screening. ObjectiveTo estimate the association of decision aids with decisional outcomes in prostate cancer screening. Data SourcesMEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception through June 19, 2018. Study SelectionRandomized trials comparing decision aids for prostate cancer screening with usual care. Data Extraction and SynthesisIndependent duplicate assessment of eligibility and risk of bias, rating of quality of the decision aids, random-effects meta-analysis, and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations rating of the quality of evidence. Main Outcomes and MeasuresKnowledge, decisional conflict, screening discussion, and screening choice. ResultsOf 19 eligible trials (12781 men), 9 adequately concealed allocation and 8 blinded outcome assessment. Of 12 decision aids with available information, only 4 reported the likelihood of a true-negative test result, and 3 presented the likelihood of false-negative test results or the next step if the screening test result was negative. Decision aids are possibly associated with improvement in knowledge (risk ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.09-1.73; I-2=67%; risk difference, 12.1; low quality), are probably associated with a small decrease in decisional conflict (mean difference on a 100-point scale, -4.19; 95% CI, -7.06 to -1.33; I-2=75%; moderate quality), and are possibly not associated with whether physicians and patients discuss prostate cancer screening (risk ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.90-1.39; I-2=60%; low quality) or with men's decision to undergo prostate cancer screening (risk ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.88-1.03; I-2=36%; low quality). Conclusions and RelevanceThe results of this study provide moderate-quality evidence that decision aids compared with usual care are associated with a small decrease in decisional conflict and low-quality evidence that they are associated with an increase in knowledge but not with whether physicians and patients discussed prostate cancer screening or with screening choice. Results suggest that further progress in facilitating effective shared decision-making may require decision aids that not only provide education to patients but are specifically targeted to promote shared decision-making in the patient-physician encounter. This systematic review and meta-analysis of 19 randomized clinical trials estimates the association of decision aids with decisional outcomes in prostate cancer screening.Peer reviewe

Systematic reviews of observational studies of Risk of Thrombosis and Bleeding in General and Gynecologic Surgery (ROTBIGGS) : introduction and methodology

Funding Information: The Risk of Thrombosis and Bleeding in General and Gynecologic Surgery (ROTBIGGS) project was conducted by the Clinical Urology and Epidemiology (CLUE) Working Group and supported by the Academy of Finland (309387, 340957), Sigrid Jusélius Foundation and Competitive Research Funding of the Helsinki University Hospital (TYH2019321; TYH2020248). The sponsors had no role in the analysis and interpretation of the data or the manuscript preparation, review, or approval. Funding Information: KMA received a research grant from Astra Zeneca, and is consultant for Gedeon Richter, and received reimbursement for attending a scientific meeting from GSK (Tesaro Bio). RMT received reimbursement for attending a scientific meeting from Olympus. LIL, GHG, YL, RC, ALL, VJS, IEJK, PJK, RJC, RLA, KA, KMA, IB-L, MHB, JLC, SC, PJG, HAG-P, FZG, HAG, LH, MLI-K, KMJ, PKK, NK, TPK, AJK, TK, HL, AKM, BTN, TPN, CN, SMO, SP, NP, CBBR, ARR, TS, RMT, RWMV, YW, YX, LY, JH, and KAOT have no financial conflicts of interest. GHG and RC were panel members of the European Association of Urology (EAU) ad hoc Guideline on Thromboprophylaxis in Urological Surgery. KAOT was chair of the European Association of Urology (EAU) ad hoc Guideline on Thromboprophylaxis in Urological Surgery and panel member of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) Guideline Panel on Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) in Surgical Hospitalized Patients. Publisher Copyright: © 2021, The Author(s).Background Venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding are serious and potentially fatal complications of surgical procedures. Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis decreases the risk of VTE but increases the risk of major post-operative bleeding. The decision to use pharmacologic prophylaxis therefore represents a trade-off that critically depends on the incidence of VTE and bleeding in the absence of prophylaxis. These baseline risks vary widely between procedures, but their magnitude is uncertain. Systematic reviews addressing baseline risks are scarce, needed, and require innovations in methodology. Indeed, systematic summaries of these baseline risk estimates exist neither in general nor gynecologic surgery. We will fill this knowledge gap by performing a series of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the procedure-specific and patient risk factor stratified risk estimates in general and gynecologic surgeries. Methods We will perform comprehensive literature searches for observational studies in general and gynecologic surgery reporting symptomatic VTE or bleeding estimates. Pairs of methodologically trained reviewers will independently assess the studies for eligibility, evaluate the risk of bias by using an instrument developed for this review, and extract data. We will perform meta-analyses and modeling studies to adjust the reported risk estimates for the use of thromboprophylaxis and length of follow up. We will derive the estimates of risk from the median estimates of studies rated at the lowest risk of bias. The primary outcomes are the risk estimates of symptomatic VTE and major bleeding at 4 weeks post-operatively for each procedure stratified by patient risk factors. We will apply the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to rate evidence certainty. Discussion This series of systematic reviews, modeling studies, and meta-analyses will inform clinicians and patients regarding the trade-off between VTE prevention and bleeding in general and gynecologic surgeries. Our work advances the standards in systematic reviews of surgical complications, including assessment of risk of bias, criteria for arriving at the best estimates of risk (including modeling of the timing of events and dealing with suboptimal data reporting), dealing with subgroups at higher and lower risk of bias, and use of the GRADE approach. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42021234119Peer reviewe

Systematic reviews of observational studies of Risk of Thrombosis and Bleeding in General and Gynecologic Surgery (ROTBIGGS): introduction and methodology

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding are serious and potentially fatal complications of surgical procedures. Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis decreases the risk of VTE but increases the risk of major post-operative bleeding. The decision to use pharmacologic prophylaxis therefore represents a trade-off that critically depends on the incidence of VTE and bleeding in the absence of prophylaxis. These baseline risks vary widely between procedures, but their magnitude is uncertain. Systematic reviews addressing baseline risks are scarce, needed, and require innovations in methodology. Indeed, systematic summaries of these baseline risk estimates exist neither in general nor gynecologic surgery. We will fill this knowledge gap by performing a series of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the procedure-specific and patient risk factor stratified risk estimates in general and gynecologic surgeries.Methods: We will perform comprehensive literature searches for observational studies in general and gynecologic surgery reporting symptomatic VTE or bleeding estimates. Pairs of methodologically trained reviewers will independently assess the studies for eligibility, evaluate the risk of bias by using an instrument developed for this review, and extract data. We will perform meta-analyses and modeling studies to adjust the reported risk estimates for the use of thromboprophylaxis and length of follow up. We will derive the estimates of risk from the median estimates of studies rated at the lowest risk of bias. The primary outcomes are the risk estimates of symptomatic VTE and major bleeding at 4 weeks post-operatively for each procedure stratified by patient risk factors. We will apply the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to rate evidence certainty.Discussion: This series of systematic reviews, modeling studies, and meta-analyses will inform clinicians and patients regarding the trade-off between VTE prevention and bleeding in general and gynecologic surgeries. Our work advances the standards in systematic reviews of surgical complications, including assessment of risk of bias, criteria for arriving at the best estimates of risk (including modeling of the timing of events and dealing with suboptimal data reporting), dealing with subgroups at higher and lower risk of bias, and use of the GRADE approach.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42021234119</p

test project

materials for learning about open science framewor

Covidence and Rayyan

Two new software products are making a splash in the world of systematic reviews, Covidence and Rayyan. Both have ben developed from within the SR community, by and for users, on a not-for-profit basis. Rayyan is free for anyone, and Covidence is free for Cochrane Reviews. Both are user-friendly and work well for title and abstract screening

Role of midazolam on cancer progression/survival - An updated systematic review

Background and Aims: Cancer is a leading cause of mortality worldwide. Despite advancements in cancer management, cancer progression remains a challenge, requiring the development of novel therapies. Midazolam is a commonly used adjunct to anaesthesia care for various surgeries, including cancer. Recently, there has been a growing interest in exploring the potential role of midazolam as an anticancer agent; however, the exact mechanism of this linkage is yet to be investigated thoroughly. Methods: Based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline, this systematic review presented aggregated evidence (till November 2022) of the effects of midazolam on cancer progression and survival. All primary research article types where midazolam was administered in vivo or in vitro on subjects with cancers were included. No restrictions were applied on routes of administration or the type of cancer under investigation. Narrative synthesis depicted qualitative findings, whereas frequencies and percentages presented numerical data. Results: Of 1720 citations, 19 studies were included in this review. All articles were preclinical studies conducted either in vitro (58%, 11/19) or both in vivo and in vitro (42%, 8/19). The most studied cancer was lung carcinoma (21%, 4/19). There are two main findings in this review. First, midazolam delays cancer progression (89%, 17/19). Second, midazolam reduces cancer cell survival (63%, 12/19). The two major mechanisms of these properties can be explained via inducing apoptosis (63%, 12/19) and inhibiting cancer cell proliferation (53%, 10/19). In addition, midazolam demonstrated antimetastatic properties via inhibition of cancer invasion (21%, 4/19), migration (26%, 5/19), or epithelial-mesenchymal transition (5%, 1/19). These anticancer properties of midazolam were demonstrated through different pathways when midazolam was used alone or in combination with traditional cancer chemotherapeutic agents. Conclusion: This systematic review highlights that midazolam has the potential to impede cancer progression and decrease cancer cell survival. Extrapolation of these results into human cancer necessitates further investigation

Acupuncture for the Management of Chronic Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials: Research poster abstract

Introduction/Aim: Peripheral neuropathy is a common cause of chronic pain among patients with diabetes, and acupuncture has been suggested as a therapeutic option. To determine the effectiveness of acupuncture for chronic diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, AMED, CINAHL, PsychINFO, trial registries, and reference lists of relevant articles up to February 2017. Pairs of reviewers, independently and in duplicate, screened articles for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We conducted meta-analyses when possible and used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of evidence. Results: Among 4443 potentially eligible studies 4 with 244 patients proved eligible to be included for review.1 Overall all four studies were at high risk of bias. Compared to sham acupuncture, we found very low quality evidence that acupuncture reduces pain (weighted mean difference [WMD] −1.95cm on a 10cm visual analogue scale, 95% CI −3.27 to −0.64; minimally important difference [MID] 1cm; risk difference (RD) for achieving the MID 52%; 95% CI 19% to 63%) and improves physical functioning (WMD 3.68 points on the short form-36 [SF-36] physical component summary score; 95% CI 1.66 to 5.70; MID is 5-points; RD for achieving the MID 8%, 95% CI 3% to 18%), but does not affect emotional functioning (WMD 1.26 points on the SF-36 mental component summary score, 95% CI: −1.13 to 3.66). Conclusions: Very low-quality evidence suggests that acupuncture reduces pain and improves physical functioning in patients with chronic DPN but does not affect emotional functioning