The prevalence of and factors associated with inclusion of non-English language studies in Campbell systematic reviews:a survey and meta-epidemiological study

BACKGROUND: Studies published in languages other than English are often neglected when research teams conduct systematic reviews. Literature on how to deal with non-English studies when conducting reviews have focused on the importance of including such studies, while less attention has been paid to the practical challenges of locating and assessing relevant non-English studies. We investigated the factors which might predict the inclusion of non-English studies in systematic reviews in the social sciences, to better understand how, when and why these are included/excluded.METHODS: We appraised all Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews (n = 123) published to July 2016, categorising each by its language inclusiveness. We sought additional information from review authors via a questionnaire and received responses concerning 47 reviews. Data were obtained for 17 factors and we explored correlations with the number of non-English studies in the reviews via statistical regression models. Additionally, we asked authors to identify factors that support or hinder the inclusion of non-English studies.RESULTS: Of 123 reviews, 108 did not explicitly exclude, and of these, 17 included non-English language studies. One factor correlated with the number of included non-English studies across all models: the number of countries in which the members of the review team work (B-value = 0.56; SE B = 0.24; 95% CI = 0.07-1.03; p = 0.02). This indicates that reviews which included non-English studies were more likely to be produced by international review teams. Our survey showed a dominance of researchers from English-speaking countries (52.9%) and review teams consisting only of team members from these countries (65.9%). The most frequently mentioned challenge to including non-English studies was a lack of resources (funding and time) followed by a lack of language resources (e.g. professional translators).CONCLUSION: Our findings may indicate a connection between the limited inclusion of non-English studies and a lack of resources, which forces review teams to rely on their limited language skills rather than the support of professional translators. If unaddressed, review teams risk ignoring key data and introduce bias in otherwise high-quality reviews. However, the validity and interpretation of our findings should be further assessed if we are to tackle the challenges of dealing with non-English studies.</p

Overexpression of Prothymosin Alpha Predicts Poor Disease Outcome in Head and Neck Cancer

In our recent study, tissue proteomic analysis of oral pre-malignant lesions (OPLs) and normal oral mucosa led to the identification of a panel of biomarkers, including prothymosin alpha (PTMA), to distinguish OPLs from histologically normal oral tissues. This study aimed to determine the clinical significance of PTMA overexpression in oral squamous cell hyperplasia, dysplasia and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).Immunohistochemistry of PTMA protein was performed in HNSCCs (n = 100), squamous cell hyperplasia (n = 116), dysplasia (n = 50) and histologically normal oral tissues (n = 100). Statistical analysis was carried out to determine the association of PTMA overexpression with clinicopathological parameters and disease prognosis over 7 years for HNSCC patients.<0.001). Chi-square analysis showed significant association of nuclear PTMA with advanced tumor stages (III+IV). Kaplan Meier survival analysis indicated reduced disease free survival (DFS) in HNSCC patients (p<0.001; median survival 11 months). Notably, Cox-multivariate analysis revealed nuclear PTMA as an independent predictor of poor prognosis of HNSCC patients (p<0.001, Hazard's ratio, HR = 5.2, 95% CI = 2.3–11.8) in comparison with the histological grade, T-stage, nodal status and tumor stage.Nuclear PTMA may serve as prognostic marker in HNSCC to determine the subset of patients that are likely to show recurrence of the disease

Investigação dos métodos avaliativos utilizados por fisioterapeutas na especificidade da neurologia funcional

A avaliação fisioterapêutica neurofuncional representa uma das ações mais importantes do profissional. Contudo, divergências nos métodos utilizados para elaboração diagnóstica fazem com que haja discrepâncias na prescrição e no prognóstico fisioterapêutico. Assim, o objetivo deste trabalho foi analisar e discutir métodos e técnicas de avaliação utilizados por fisioterapeutas vinculados à atenção à saúde da população, na especificidade da neurologia funcional. Para a concretização desta pesquisa, foi realizado um estudo quali-quantitativo de delineamento transversal. A amostra foi composta por fisioterapeutas registrados no Conselho Regional de Fisioterapia e Terapia Ocupacional da comarca de Mato Grosso do Sul (CREFITO-13), especialistas na área da reabilitação neurofuncional, e atuantes em hospitais, universidades e clínicas da cidade de Campo Grande (MS). Os dados foram analisados por meio da estatística descritiva e inferencial (teste do χ²), sob um nível de significância de 5% (p<0,05). Sobre os resultados, todos os fisioterapeutas analisados concluíram a graduação havia mais de cinco anos. As respostas referentes ao exame físico foram semelhantes entre fisioterapeutas docentes e clínicos (p=0,81), não ocorrendo o mesmo com a anamnese (p=0,02). Itens como funções cognitivas e determinantes sociais de saúde foram respondidas por menos de 15% dos entrevistados, e aproximadamente 70% dos entrevistados disseram realizar, mas não registrar, a avaliação do paciente. em conclusão, ainda não há uma padronização da avaliação fisioterapêutica neurofuncional, tornando difícil unificar a análise prescritiva e prognóstica dos casos clínicos. As respostas apontam para uma dependência da visão profissional nos aspectos da doença, com pouca valorização das questões sociais de saúde.La evaluación fisioterapéutica neuro-funcional representa una de las acciones más importantes del profesional. Sin embargo, los desacuerdos en los métodos utilizados para la elaboración diagnóstica hacen que haya discrepancias en la prescripción y pronóstico fisioterapéutico. Así, el objetivo de este trabajo fue analizar y discutir los métodos y técnicas de evaluación utilizados por fisioterapeutas vinculados a la atención de salud de la población, en la especificidad de la neurología funcional. Para la concretización de esta investigación fue realizado un estudio cuali-cuantitativo de delineamiento transversal. La muestra fue compuesta por fisioterapeutas, especialistas en el área de rehabilitación neuro-funcional, registrados en el Consejo Regional de Fisioterapia y Terapia Ocupacional del estado Mato Grosso do Sul (CREFITO-13). La investigación involucra profesionales presentes en hospitales, universidades y clínicas de la ciudad de Campo Grande/MS. Los datos fueron analizados por medio de estadística descriptiva e inferencial (test χ²), sobre un nivel de significancia de 5% (p<0,05). Sobre los resultados, todos los fisioterapeutas analizados eran formados hace más de 5 años. Las respuestas referentes al examen físico fueron semejantes entre fisioterapeutas docentes y clínicos (p=0,81), no ocurriendo lo mismo en la anamnesis (p=0,02). Ítems como funciones cognitivas y determinantes sociales de salud fueron respondidas por menos del 15% de los entrevistados, y aproximadamente 70% realiza, pero no registra la evaluación del paciente. En conclusión, todavía no hay una normalización de la evaluación fisioterapéutica neuro-funcional, tornando difícil unificar un análisis prescriptivo y pronóstico de los casos clínicos. Las respuestas apuntan para una dependencia de la visión profesional en los aspectos de la enfermedad, con poca valoración de las preguntas sociales de la salud.Neurofunctional clinical evaluation represents one of the most important activities of physical therapists. However, differences in diagnostic methods cause discrepancies between physical therapy prescription and prognosis. Thus, the aim of this study was to analyze and discuss the evaluation methods and techniques used by physical therapists bound to popular healthcare assistance, in the specificity of the neurofunctional area. To accomplish this research, a cross-sectional design study was conducted. The sample consisted of physical therapists specialized in neurofunctional rehabilitation registered in the Regional Council for Physical Therapy and Occupational Therapy of Mato Grosso do Sul (Conselho Regional de Fisioterapia e Terapia Ocupacional, CREFITO - 13), who work in hospitals, universities and clinics of the city of Campo Grande, Brazil. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential (χ²) statistics, under a 5% level of significance (p<0.05). Regarding the results, all physical therapists had concluded graduation five years before. Responses regarding the physical examination were similar between professors and clinical physical therapists (p=0.81), which did not happen on the anamnesis (p=0.02). Items such as cognitive functions and social determinants of health were answered by less than 15% of subjects, and about 70% of respondents said they do, but do not register, the patients' evaluation. In conclusion, there is not a standardization of the physiotherapeutic neurofunctional evaluation, making it difficult to unify the prescriptive and prognostic analysis of clinical cases. The responses indicate a dependence of professional vision in the disease aspect, with little appreciation of health social issues