Methods: For this study PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase electronic databases were used to search for eligible studies on the interface between novel coronavirus and vaccine design until December 31, 2020.
Results: We have included fourteen non-randomized and randomized controlled phase I-III trials. Implementation of a universal vaccination program with proven safety and efficacy through robust clinical evaluation is the long-term goal for preventing COVID-19. The immunization program must be cost-effective for mass production and accessibility. Despite pioneering techniques for the fast-track development of the vaccine in the current global emergency, mass production and availability of an effective COVID-19 vaccine could take some more time.
Conclusion: Our findings suggest a revisiting of the reported solicited and unsolicited systemic adverse events for COVID-19 candidate vaccines. Hence, it is alarming to judiciously expose thousands of participants to COVID-19 candidate vaccines at Phase-3 trials that have adverse events and insufficient evidence on safety and effectiveness that necessitates further justification.
METHODS: A one-year survey was conducted in three states of the east coast region of Peninsular Malaysia involving 204 CBR workers selected through universal sampling method where all CBR staff who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were selected as participants. Self-completed questionnaires consisted of 20 association factors on six-point Likert scale responses were distributed. Total mean satisfaction level and mean associated factors were reported in this study.
RESULTS: The results showed that the majority of the participants were between 20 and 40 years old (72%), female (96%), Malay (99%) and had 1-5 years of working experience. The mean total satisfaction score was 79.8 ± SD = 7.85. The highest mean satisfaction level for the associated factor was 4.6 ± SD = 0.59 with about 95% of the participants were satisfied that "CBR programme is a challenging work", while the lowest satisfaction level for associated factor was on "salary of community-based rehabilitation staff is acceptable", with mean score of 2.3 ± SD = 0.97 with about 59% of the participants felt dissatisfied. The results of this study determined that the highest dissatisfied factors among CBR workers were on salary.
CONCLUSION: These findings provided useful information for policymakers to evaluate this issue for a sustainable CBR programme in the future.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study has been registered for trial as 'retrospective registered' in the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) (registration no.: ACTRN 12618001101279 ) on 5th October 2018.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The systematic review, will be conducted by extensively searching different databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Wiley and ProQuest to identify randomised controlled trials (with no time frame) which relate to the administration of probiotics to patients with colorectal cancer. The search strategy will include words like colorectal cancer, probiotics, Bifidobacterium, clinical trials etc. A systematic search of databases was performed between 17 and 20 January 2020. Two reviewers will independently review the studies and also search the reference lists of the eligible studies to obtain more references. Data will be extracted from the eligible studies using standardised data extraction form. After assessing the risk of bias, qualitative analysis will be used to synthesise the systematic review.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This is a protocol for a systematic review; therefore, it doesn't require any ethics approval. We intend to disseminate the protocol in a peer reviewed journal.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to review and analyse literature related to the detection and classification of acute leukaemia. The factors that were considered to improve understanding on the field's various contextual aspects in published studies and characteristics were motivation, open challenges that confronted researchers and recommendations presented to researchers to enhance this vital research area.
METHODS: We systematically searched all articles about the classification and detection of acute leukaemia, as well as their evaluation and benchmarking, in three main databases: ScienceDirect, Web of Science and IEEE Xplore from 2007 to 2017. These indices were considered to be sufficiently extensive to encompass our field of literature.
RESULTS: Based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria, 89 articles were selected. Most studies (58/89) focused on the methods or algorithms of acute leukaemia classification, a number of papers (22/89) covered the developed systems for the detection or diagnosis of acute leukaemia and few papers (5/89) presented evaluation and comparative studies. The smallest portion (4/89) of articles comprised reviews and surveys.
DISCUSSION: Acute leukaemia diagnosis, which is a field requiring automated solutions, tools and methods, entails the ability to facilitate early detection or even prediction. Many studies have been performed on the automatic detection and classification of acute leukaemia and their subtypes to promote accurate diagnosis.
CONCLUSIONS: Research areas on medical-image classification vary, but they are all equally vital. We expect this systematic review to help emphasise current research opportunities and thus extend and create additional research fields.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of restricted versus unrestricted pacifier use in healthy full-term newborns whose mothers have initiated breastfeeding and intend to exclusively breastfeed, on the duration of breastfeeding, other breastfeeding outcomes and infant health.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 June 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing restricted versus unrestricted pacifier use in healthy full-term newborns who have initiated breastfeeding.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS: We found three trials (involving 1915 babies) for inclusion in the review, but have included only two trials (involving 1302 healthy full-term breastfeeding infants) in the analysis. Meta-analysis of the two combined studies showed that pacifier use in healthy breastfeeding infants had no significant effect on the proportion of infants exclusively breastfed at three months (risk ratio (RR) 1.01; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96 to 1.07, two studies, 1228 infants), and at four months of age (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.09, one study, 970 infants, moderate-quality evidence), and also had no effect on the proportion of infants partially breastfed at three months (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.02, two studies, 1228 infants), and at four months of age (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.02, one study, 970 infants). None of the included trials reported data on the other primary outcomes, i.e. duration of partial or exclusive breastfeeding, or secondary outcomes: breastfeeding difficulties (mastitis, cracked nipples, breast engorgement); infant's health (dental malocclusion, otitis media, oral candidiasis; sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS)); maternal satisfaction and level of confidence in parenting. One study reported that avoidance of pacifiers had no effect on cry/fuss behavior at ages four, six, or nine weeks and also reported no effect on the risk of weaning before age three months, however the data were incomplete and so could not be included for analysis.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Pacifier use in healthy term breastfeeding infants, started from birth or after lactation is established, did not significantly affect the prevalence or duration of exclusive and partial breastfeeding up to four months of age. Evidence to assess the short-term breastfeeding difficulties faced by mothers and long-term effect of pacifiers on infants' health is lacking.
Materials and Methods: This is a single-center quasi-experimental study involving 100 patients seen in the outpatient department with knee osteoarthritis. They were randomly (computer generated) allocated into two arms (high frequency [H-F] or low frequency [L-F]). H-F is set at 100 Hz and L-F is set at 4 Hz. A baseline assessment is taken with the visual analog score (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Oxford Knee Score, and Lequesne index. They were instructed to self-administer the TENS therapy as per protocol and followed up at the 4th and 12th week to be reevaluated on the above scores.
Results: The final results show that both H-F and L-F groups showed improvement in all parameters of the VAS, WOMAC index, Oxford Knee Score, and Lequesne index (73%). Only the pain component of Lequesne index, activities of daily living component of Lequesne index, total Lequesne index, and pain component of WOMAC index shows a statistically significant difference, favoring the H-F group. The H-F group yields a faster result; however, with time the overall effect remains the same in both groups.
Conclusion: Both H-F and L-F groups show improvement in all the component of Lequesne index, Oxford Knee Score, WOMAC index, and VAS with no statistical difference between the two groups. Although H-F yields a faster result, not everyone is able to tolerate the intensity. Therefore, the selection of H-F or L-F should be done on case basis depending on the severity of symptoms, patient's expectation, and patient's ability to withstand the treatment therapy. Based on this 12th week follow-up, both groups will continue to improve with time. A longer study should be conducted to see it this improvement will eventually plateau off or continue to improve until the patient is symptom free.