Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews in leading orthodontic journals: a quality paradigm?

The aims of this study were to assess and compare the methodological quality of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews (SRs) published in leading orthodontic journals and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) using AMSTAR and to compare the prevalence of meta-analysis in both review types. A literature search was undertaken to identify SRs that consisted of hand-searching five major orthodontic journals [American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Angle Orthodontist, European Journal of Orthodontics, Journal of Orthodontics and Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research (February 2002 to July 2011)] and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from January 2000 to July 2011. Methodological quality of the included reviews was gauged using the AMSTAR tool involving 11 key methodological criteria with a score of 0 or 1 given for each criterion. A cumulative grade was given for the paper overall (0-11); an overall score of 4 or less represented poor methodological quality, 5-8 was considered fair and 9 or greater was deemed to be good. In total, 109 SRs were identified in the five major journals and on the CDSR. Of these, 26 (23.9%) were in the CDSR. The mean overall AMSTAR score was 6.2 with 21.1% of reviews satisfying 9 or more of the 11 criteria; a similar prevalence of poor reviews (22%) was also noted. Multiple linear regression indicated that reviews published in the CDSR (P < 0.01); and involving meta-analysis (β = 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.72, 2.07, P < 0.001) showed greater concordance with AMSTA

Vitamin K supplementation for cystic fibrosis (Review)

Background: Cystic fibrosis is a genetic disorder which can lead to multiorgan dysfunction. Malabsorption of fat and fat-soluble vitamins (A, D, E, K) may occur and can cause subclinical deficiencies of some of these vitamins. Vitamin K is known to play an important role in both blood coagulation and bone formation. Supplementation with vitamin K appears to be one way of addressing the deficiency, but there is very limited agreement on the appropriate dose and frequency of use of these supplements. Objectives: To assess the effects of vitamin K supplementation in people with cystic fibrosis and to determine the optimal dose and route of administration of vitamin K for both routine and therapeutic use. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. Most recent search: 11 October 2012. Selection criteria: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of all preparations of vitamin K used as a supplement compared to either no supplementation (or placebo) at any dose or route and for any duration, in children or adults diagnosed with cystic fibrosis (by sweat test or genetic testing). Data collection and analysis: Two authors independently screened papers, extracted trial details and assessed their risk of bias. Main results: Two trials (total of 32 participants) were included in the review and were assessed as having a moderate risk of bias. One was a dose-ranging parallel group trial; and the other had a cross-over design, but no separate data were reported for the first intervention period. Neither of the trials addressed any of the primary outcomes (coagulation, bone formation and quality of life). Both trials reported the restoration of serum vitamin K and undercarboxylated osteocalcin levels to the normal range after one month of daily supplementation with 1 mg of vitamin K. Authors' conclusions: Evidence from randomised controlled trials on the benefits of routine vitamin K supplementation for people with CF is currently weak and limited to two small trials of short duration. However, no harm was found and until further evidence is available, the present recommendations should be adhered to

Beta2-adrenoceptor agonists for dysmenorrhoea

Background:Dysmenorrhoea is a common gynaecological complaint that can affect as many as 50% of premenopausal women, 10% of whom suffer severely enough to be rendered incapacitated for one to three days during each menstrual cycle. Primary dysmenorrhoea is where women suffer from menstrual pain but lack any pathology in their pelvic anatomy. Beta2-adrenoceptor agonists have been used in the treatment of women with primary dysmenorrhoea but their effects are unclear.Objectives:To determine the effectiveness and safety of beta2-adrenoceptor agonists in the treatment of primary dysmenorrhoea. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 8), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and the EBM Reviews databases. The last search was on 22 August 2011.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials comparing beta2-adrenoceptor agonists with placebo or no treatment, each other or any other conventional treatment in women of reproductive age with primary dysmenorrhoea. Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted the data.Main results:Five trials involving 187 women with an age range of 15 to 40 years were included. Oral isoxsuprine was compared with placebo in two trials, terbutaline oral spray, ritodrine chloride and oral hydroxyphenyl-orciprenalin were compared with placebo in a further three trials. Clinical diversity in the studies in terms of the interventions being evaluated, assessments at different time points and the use of different assessment tools mitigated against pooling of outcome data across studies in order to provide a summary estimate of effect for any of the comparisons. Only one study, with unclear risk of bias, reported pain relief with a combination of isoxsuprine, acetaminophen and caffeine. None of the other studies reported any significant clinical difference in effectiveness between the intervention and placebo. Adverse effects were reported with all of these medications in up to a quarter of the total number of participants. They included nausea, vomiting, dizziness, quivering, tremor and palpitations.Authors\u27 conclusions:The evidence presented in this review was based on a few relatively small-sized studies that were categorised to have unclear to high risk of bias, which does not allow confident decision-making at present about the use of beta2-adrenoceptor agonists for dysmenorrhoea. The benefits as reported in one study should be balanced against the wide array of unacceptable side effects documented with this class of medication. We have emphasised the lack of precision and limitations in the reported data where appropriate

The future is now: the Global Atopic Dermatitis Atlas (GADA)

Dermatology-oncolog