靴傷症ノ療法ニ就テ

Table summarizing methods used for assessing primary and secondary outcomes. (DOCX 104 kb

Study flow.

<p>This is the flow of citations and articles that were screened for the systematic review.</p

Patient characteristics and outcomes for ethnic minorities.

<p><b>Notes:</b> *major publication, ‡non-Indigenous and Caucasian are the reference groups unless it was a study conducted in another region (e.g., Chinese considered the reference group in China), Indigenous includes Aboriginals, First Nations, American Indians, Alaskan Natives, Maori, Native Hawaiians, Pacific Islanders, and Torres Strait Islanders, Blacks include African American, African, and Afro-Caribbean, † we obtained unpublished data from the authors of this study in the form of a poster presentation, Π we obtained unpublished data for the state of California from the authors.</p><p><b>Abbreviations:</b> A Asian, A/PI Asian/Pacific Islander, ALL acute lymphoblastic leukemia, B Black, C Caucasian, CHD coronary heart disease, CHF congestive heart failure, CI confidence interval, CLD chronic lung disease, COPD chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, CP cerebral palsy, DM diabetes mellitus, DS down syndrome, F foreigners, unspecified,F/W Fall/Winter, H Hispanic, htn hypertension, I Indigenous, ICU intensive care unit, ID Indian descent, MD muscular dystrophy, MO morbid obesity, ND neurological disease, NI non-Indigenous, NMO non-morbid obesity, NRF non-respiratory failure, RAD reactive airway disease, RF respiratory failure, SD standard deviation, SLE systemic lupus erthematosus, S/S Spring/Summer, U unspecified.</p

Meta-analysis of hospitalizations among ethnic minorities versus non-ethnic minorities in North America.

<p>Favours ethnic minority means that ethnic minorities experienced a lower proportion of H1N1 hospitalizations compared to non-ethnic minorities. Favours non-ethnic minorities means that non-ethnic minorities experienced a lower proportion of H1N1 hospitalizations compared to ethnic minorities.</p

Meta-analysis of mortality among hospitalized ethnic minorities versus hospitalized non-ethnic minorities.

<p>Favours ethnic minority means that ethnic minorities experienced a lower proportion of deaths due to H1N1 among hospitalized patients compared to non-ethnic minorities. Favours non-ethnic minorities means that non-ethnic minorities experienced a lower proportion of deaths due to H1N1 among hospitalized patients compared to ethnic minorities.</p

Meta-analysis of ICU admissions among ethnic minorities versus non-ethnic minorities.

<p>Favours ethnic minority means that ethnic minorities experienced a lower proportion of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions due to H1N1 compared to non-ethnic minorities. Favours non-ethnic minorities means that non-ethnic minorities experienced a lower proportion of ICU admissions due to H1N1 compared to ethnic minorities.</p

Patient characteristics and outcomes for low-income and lower-middle-income economies.

<p><b>Abbreviations:</b> CHD coronary heart disease, CHF congestive heart failure, CLD chronic lung disease, COPD chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, DM diabetes mellitus, htn hypertension, ID Indian descent, NR not reported, SD standard deviation.</p

Methodological quality.

<p><b>Note:</b> Please see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0039437#pone.0039437.s002" target="_blank">Appendix S2</a> for an explanation of each methodological quality component. Briefly, each item was appraised as follows:</p><p>1) Representativeness: a) truly representative, b) somewhat representative, c) selected group of users, d) no description of the derivation of the cohort.</p><p>2) Selection: a) drawn from the same community as exposed cohort, b) drawn from a different source, c) no description.</p><p>3) Ascertainment: a) secure record, b) structured interview, c) written self report, d) no description.</p><p>4) Demonstration: a) yes, b) no.</p><p>5) Comparability: a) study controls for age or gender, b) study controls for any additional factor, c) no control.</p><p>6) Assessment: a) independent blind assessment, b) record linkage, c) self report, d) no description.</p><p>7) Follow-up: a) yes, b) no.</p><p>8) Adequacy: a) complete follow up, b) subjects lost to follow up unlikely to introduce bias, c) large loss to follow-up, d) no statement.</p

Additional file 1: of Utility of social media and crowd-intelligence data for pharmacovigilance: a scoping review

Appendix 1. Description of included and excluded interventions for drug safety surveillance. Appendix 2. Glossary of terms. Appendix 3. Medline search strategy. Appendix 4. Sources for grey literature search. Appendix 5. List of included studies. Appendix 6. Social media data processing pipeline. Appendix 7. Pre-existing social media listening platforms for drug safety surveillance. Appendix 8. Utility of social media data for drug safety surveillance. Appendix 9. Pre-processing methods and results. Appendix 10. De-identification methods and results. Appendix 11. De-duplication methods and results. Appendix 12. Concept identification methods and results. Appendix 13. Drug name normalization methods and results. Appendix 14. Medical event normalization methods and results. Appendix 15. Relation extraction methods and results. Appendix 16. Additional processing methods and results. Appendix 17. Utility and challenges with socila media listening for drug safety surveillance. (DOCX 275 kb

Additional file 1: Appendix A. of A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews

– MEDLINE search strategy: contains the complete search strategy for the MEDLINE database; designed and carried out by an information specialist. Appendix B - References to Included Studies. Appendix C - Word cloud of methodology cited. Appendix D - Components listed in the research objectives: provides a thematic summary of research objectives reported by authors. Appendix E - Components listed in the conceptual definitions: contains the main components listed in the conceptual or working definitions of a “scoping review” from the included scoping reviews, along with frequency (i.e. count/proportion) information. Appendix F - Agreement between the definition of a scoping review and the research objective(s): provides an overall comparison between research objectives reported and the definition of a scoping review based on the thematic analysis. Appendix G - Types of sources searched for grey literature. Appendix H - Joanna Briggs Institute Methodology Assessment: An assessment of the methodology of the 494 included scoping reviews relative to each of the steps recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute guidance on scoping reviews. Appendix I - Description of key components of knowledge translation (KT) activities: contains a brief description of the main components of the knowledge translation activities from the included scoping reviews, by category of KT (i.e. integrated KT, end of grant KT, integrated and end of grant KT). (DOCX 802 kb