AIMS: We aimed to perform a meta-analysis of randomized trials investigating the effect of colchicine in patients with COVID-19.
MATERIALS & METHODS: We systematically searched electronic databases and clinical trial registries (up to October 17, 2021) for eligible studies. The outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality and duration of hospital stay. Meta-analysis with the random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled odds ratio (OR) of mortality and 95% confidence interval (CI). The pooled standardized mean difference of duration of hospital stay with 95% CI between colchicine users and non-colchicine users was estimated using Cohen's d index.
RESULTS: The meta-analyses revealed no significant difference in the odds of mortality (pooled OR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.53-1.07), but a significant reduction in the duration of hospital stay with the use of colchicine (pooled standardized mean difference = -0.59; 95% CI: -1.06 to -0.13).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The ability of colchicine to reduce the length of stay in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is consistent with its potential to prevent clinical deterioration via inhibition of NLRP3 inflammasome. Nevertheless, such beneficial effects of colchicine did not translate into mortality benefits in patients with COVID-19.
SEARCH STRATEGY: Seven electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EBSCO, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Wanfang Data electronic databases) were searched from inception to December 2022. Based on the principle of combining subject words with text words, the search strategy was constructed around search terms for "scraping therapy," "scraping," "Guasha," "Gua sha," "hypertension," and "high blood pressure" during the database searches.
INCLUSION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they recruited patients with stage I and II essential hypertension and included a scraping therapy intervention. The intervention group received antihypertensive drugs and scraping therapy, while the control group only took antihypertensive drugs.
DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: Review Manager 5.4.0 and STATA 15.1 were used to enter all the relevant outcome variables to conduct the meta-analysis. The quality of the selected RCTs was assessed using the PEDro scale. The sensitivity analysis was carried out by iteratively excluding individual studies and repeating the analysis to determine the stability of the findings and identify any studies with greater influence on the outcome. Subgroup analysis was performed to find the source of heterogeneity. Funnel plots were used to evaluate the publication bias of included studies.
RESULTS: Nine RCTs including 765 participants were selected. Meta-analysis showed that scraping therapy combined with medication had an advantage over the use of medication alone in lowering systolic blood pressure (mean difference [MD] = -5.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -6.50 to -3.67, P
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of any type of endoscopic sphincterotomy compared with a placebo drug, sham operation, or any pharmaceutical treatment, administered orally or endoscopically, alone or in combination, or a different type of endoscopic sphincterotomy in adults with biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction.
SEARCH METHODS: We used extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 16 May 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised clinical trials assessing any type of endoscopic sphincterotomy versus placebo drug, sham operation, or any pharmaceutical treatment, alone or in combination, or a different type of endoscopic sphincterotomy in adults diagnosed with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, irrespective of year, language of publication, format, or outcomes reported.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods and Review Manager to prepare the review. Our primary outcomes were: proportion of participants without successful treatment; proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events; and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were: all-cause mortality; proportion of participants with one or more non-serious adverse events; length of hospital stay; and proportion of participants without improvement in liver function tests. We used the outcome data at the longest follow-up and the random-effects model for our primary analyses. We assessed the risk of bias of the included trials using RoB 2 and the certainty of evidence using GRADE. We planned to present the results of time-to-event outcomes as hazard ratios (HR). We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI).
MAIN RESULTS: We included four randomised clinical trials, including 433 participants. Trials were published between 1989 and 2015. The trial participants had sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Two trials were conducted in the USA, one in Australia, and one in Japan. One was a multicentre trial conducted in seven US centres, and the remaining three were single-centre trials. One trial used a two-stage randomisation, resulting in two comparisons. The number of participants in the four trials ranged from 47 to 214 (median 86), with a median age of 45 years, and the mean proportion of males was 49%. The follow-up duration ranged from one year to four years after the end of treatment. All trials assessed one or more outcomes of interest to our review. The trials provided data for the comparisons and outcomes below, in conformity with our review protocol. The certainty of evidence for all the outcomes was very low. Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham may have little to no effect on treatment success (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.66; 3 trials, 340 participants; follow-up range 1 to 4 years); serious adverse events (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.46; 1 trial, 214 participants; follow-up 1 year), health-related quality of life (Physical scale) (MD -1.00, 95% CI -3.84 to 1.84; 1 trial, 214 participants; follow-up 1 year), health-related quality of life (Mental scale) (MD -1.00, 95% CI -4.16 to 2.16; 1 trial, 214 participants; follow-up 1 year), and no improvement in liver function test (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.26; 1 trial, 47 participants; follow-up 1 year), but the evidence is very uncertain. Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus endoscopic papillary balloon dilation Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus endoscopic papillary balloon dilationmay have little to no effect on serious adverse events (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.15; 1 trial, 91 participants; follow-up 1 year), but the evidence is very uncertain. Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus dual endoscopic sphincterotomy Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus dual endoscopic sphincterotomy may have little to no effect on treatment success (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.31; 1 trial, 99 participants; follow-up 1 year), but the evidence is very uncertain. Funding One trial did not provide any information on sponsorship; one trial was funded by a foundation (the National Institutes of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, NIDDK), and two trials seemed to be funded by the local health institutes or universities where the investigators worked. We did not identify any ongoing randomised clinical trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on very low-certainty evidence from the trials included in this review, we do not know if endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham or versus dual endoscopic sphincterotomy increases, reduces, or makes no difference to the number of people with treatment success; if endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham or versus endoscopic papillary balloon dilation increases, reduces, or makes no difference to serious adverse events; or if endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham improves, worsens, or makes no difference to health-related quality of life and liver function tests in adults with biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Evidence on the effect of endoscopic sphincterotomy compared with sham, endoscopic papillary balloon dilation,or dual endoscopic sphincterotomyon all-cause mortality, non-serious adverse events, and length of hospital stay is lacking. We found no trials comparing endoscopic sphincterotomy versus a placebo drug or versus any other pharmaceutical treatment, alone or in combination. All four trials were underpowered and lacked trial data on clinically important outcomes. We lack randomised clinical trials assessing clinically and patient-relevant outcomes to demonstrate the effects of endoscopic sphincterotomy in adults with biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction.
METHODS: All randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies were systematically searched in the databases of CENTRAL, EMBASE and PubMed from their inception until January 2018. Case reports, case series and non-systematic reviews were excluded.
RESULTS: Seventy-three studies (6 RCTs and 67 observational studies) were eligible (n = 169,236) for inclusion in the data synthesis. In comparison with the CLS arm, RAS cohort was associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of conversion to open surgery (ρ
Materials and Methods: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, PubMed and Scopus databases were searched till November 2018 for English publications. RCTs that compared the effect of local doxycycline adjunct to SRP among smokers with periodontitis were selected. Patient characteristics, disease characteristics, and outcome data on clinical attachment level (CAL) and periodontal probing depth at 1, 3- and 6-month follow-up was extracted. Quality of selected studies was assessed by the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Random effects model and trial sequential analysis were performed. GRADE approach was used to assess the quality of evidence. P > 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.
Results: Five trials were included in the review. Local use of doxycycline as an adjunct to SRP was effective in gain of 1.1 mm (0.47-1.74, P = 0.091) in CAL at 6 months calculated from two studies. The evidence was of low quality, and at least a total of 866 patients are required for conclusiveness.
Conclusion: Local doxycycline as an adjunct to SRP significantly improved clinical attachment in smokers with periodontitis and can be recommended. Studies are required with long-term follow-up and patient-related outcome data.
METHODOLOGY: The Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science 'All Databases' was used to search and analyse the 100 most frequently cited randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses having 'randomized', 'randomised', 'randomized controlled', 'randomised controlled', 'randomized controlled trial', 'randomized controlled trials', 'clinical trial', 'systematic', 'systematic review', 'meta-analysis', and 'meta-analyses' in the title section. The 'International Endodontic Journal', 'Journal of Endodontics', 'Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology Oral Radiology and Endodontology', 'Australian Endodontic Journal', 'Endodontics & Dental Traumatology', 'Endo-Endodontic Practice Today' and 'European Endodontic Journal' were included in the publication name section. After ranking the articles in a descending order based on their citation counts, each article was cross-matched with the citation counts in Elsevier's Scopus and Google Scholar. The articles were analysed, and information on citation counts, citation density, year of publication, contributing authors, institutions and countries, journal of publication, study design, topic of the article and keywords was extracted.
RESULTS: The citation counts of the 100 most-cited articles varied from 235 to 20 (Web of Science), 276 to 17 (Scopus) and 696 to 1 (Google Scholar). The year in which the top 100 articles were published was 2010 (n = 13). Among 373 authors, the greatest number of articles was associated with three individuals namely Reader A (n = 5), Beck M (n = 5) and Kvist T (n = 5). Most of the articles originated from the United States (n = 24) with the greatest contribution from Ohio State University (USA) (n = 5). Randomized controlled trials were the most frequent study design (n = 45) followed by systematic reviews (n = 30) with outcome studies of root canal treatment being the major topic (n = 35). The Journal of Endodontics published the largest number of included articles (n = 70) followed by the International Endodontic Journal (n = 27). Among 259 unique keywords, meta-analysis (n = 23) and systematic review (n = 23) were the most frequently used.
CONCLUSION: This study has revealed that year of publication had no obvious impact on citation count. The bibliometric analysis highlighted the quantity and quality of research, and the evolution of scientific advancements made in the field of Endodontology over time. Articles before 1996, that is prior to the CONSORT statement that encouraged authors to include specific terms in the title and keywords, may not have been included in this electronic search.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and PubMed databases up to February 2020 for RCTs that investigated the effect of DHEA supplementation on testosterone levels. The estimated effect of the data was calculated using the weighted mean difference (WMD). Subgroup analysis was performed to identify the source of heterogeneity among studies.
RESULTS: Overall results from 42 publications (comprising 55 arms) demonstrated that testosterone level was significantly increased after DHEA administration (WMD: 28.02 ng/dl, 95% CI: 21.44-34.60, p = 0.00). Subgroup analyses revealed that DHEA increased testosterone level in all subgroups, but the magnitude of increment was higher in females compared to men (WMD: 30.98 ng/dl vs. 21.36 ng/dl); DHEA dosage of ˃50 mg/d compared to ≤50 mg/d (WMD: 57.96 ng/dl vs. 19.43 ng/dl); intervention duration of ≤12 weeks compared to ˃12 weeks (WMD: 44.64 ng/dl vs. 19 ng/dl); healthy participants compared to postmenopausal women, pregnant women, non-healthy participants and androgen-deficient patients (WMD: 52.17 ng/dl vs. 25.04 ng/dl, 16.44 ng/dl and 16.47 ng/dl); and participants below 60 years old compared to above 60 years old (WMD: 31.42 ng/dl vs. 23.93 ng/dl).
CONCLUSION: DHEA supplementation is effective for increasing testosterone levels, although the magnitude varies among different subgroups. More study needed on pregnant women and miscarriage.
METHODS: Electronic databases (Scopus, PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Embase and Google Scholar) were searched for relevant literature published up to February 2020.
RESULTS: Twenty-four qualified trials were included in this meta-analysis. It was found that serum IGF-1 levels were significantly increased in the DHEA group compared to the control (weighted mean differences (WMD): 16.36 ng/ml, 95% CI: 8.99, 23.74; p = .000). Subgroup analysis revealed that a statistically significant increase in serum IGF-1 levels was found only in women (WMD: 23.30 ng/ml, 95% CI: 13.75, 32.87); in participants who supplemented 50 mg/d DHEA (WMD: 15.75 ng/ml, 95% CI: 7.61, 23.89); in participants undergoing DHEA intervention for >12 weeks (WMD: 17.2 ng/ml, 95% CI: 8.02, 26.22); in participants without an underlying comorbidity (WMD: 19.11 ng/ml, 95% CI: 10.69, 27.53); and in participants over the age of 60 years (WMD: 19.79 ng/ml, 95% CI: 9.86, 29.72).
CONCLUSION: DHEA supplementation may increase serum IGF-I levels especially in women and older subjects. However, further studies are warranted before DHEA can be recommended for clinical use.
METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search in Web of Science, PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Embase databases from inception up to January 2020. We included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We used weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) to assess the influence of omega-3 supplementation on serum 25(OH)D levels using the random-effects model.
RESULTS: Our pooled results of 10 RCTs demonstrated an overall significant increase in 25(OH)D levels following omega-3 intake (WMD = 3.77 ng/ml, 95% CI: 1.29, 6.25). In addition, 25(OH)D levels were significantly increased when the intervention duration lasted >8 weeks and when the baseline serum 25(OH)D level was ˂20 ng/ml. Moreover, omega-3 intake ≤1000 mg/day resulted in higher 25(OH)D levels compared to omega-3 intake >1000 mg/day.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, omega-3 supplementation increased 25(OH)D concentrations, particularly with dosages ≤1000 mg/day and intervention durations >8 weeks.
AIM: This review aimed to explore the effects of psychoeducational interventions on improving outcome measures for patients diagnosed with schizophrenia.
METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guideline was used in this systematic review. Two reviewers were involved in screening articles for inclusion and in the data extraction process. The selected studies were assessed for quality using the 'Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trial (CONSORT)' checklist. Out of the 441 records identified, 11 papers were considered for full review (from 2000 to 2018).
RESULTS: The psychoeducational interventions showed a consistent improvement in many outcome measures. Most of the reviewed studies focused on outpatients and the method of delivering the psychoeducational interventions was mostly in lecture format.
CONCLUSION: This systematic review of randomized controlled trial studies emphasizes the positive impact of psychoeducational interventions for patients diagnosed with schizophrenia concerning various outcome measures. The findings of this review have important implications for both nursing practice and research, as the information presented can be used by the administrators and stakeholders of mental health facilities to increase their understanding and awareness of the importance of integrating psychoeducational interventions in the routine care of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia.