METHOD: We undertook a search of bibliographic databases for peer-reviewed research literature and also summarized our published results in this field.
RESULTS: The present review focuses on novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies in details which can provide access to management and treatment of Acanthamoeba keratitis. This coupled with the recently available genome sequence information together with high throughput genomics technology and innovative approaches should stimulate interest in the rational design of preventative and therapeutic measures. Current treatment of Acanthamoeba keratitis is problematic and often leads to infection recurrence. Better understanding of diagnosis, pathogenesis, pathophysiology and therapeutic regimens, would lead to novel strategies in treatment and prophylaxis.
METHODS: Systematic review of literature on GDM in SEA countries was performed using the Ovid MEDLINE®, Scopus, and WPRIM databases between 1975 and 2020. All published studies on GDM conducted in or published by authors from any SEA country were included in our analysis. Bibliometric information was obtained from Scopus and bibliometrics diagrams were created using VOSviewer software.
RESULTS: A total of 322 articles were obtained in this study. The number of publications showed an upward trend starting 2011. The country with the greatest number of publications was Malaysia while The National University of Singapore was the most productive institution in GDM research in SEA. The focus of GDM research in SEA were on the prevalence, prevention, diagnosis, and pregnancy outcomes. GDP, research expenditure, and researchers per million people were positively correlated with research productivity and impact in GDM research in SEA.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first bibliometric analysis on GDM in SEA countries. GDM research in SEA continued to increase in the past years but still lagged behind that of other regions. The SEA countries should consider increasing support for research to produce substantial research that can serve as basis for evidence-based and locally applicable GDM interventions.
METHOD: A literature survey of published kratom studies among humans was conducted. Forty published studies relevant to the objective were reviewed.
RESULTS: Apart from the differences in the sources of supply, patterns of use and social acceptability of kratom within these two regions, the most interesting finding is its evolution to a recreational drug in both settings and the severity of the adverse effects of kratom use reported in the West. While several cases of toxicity and death have emerged in the West, such reports have been non-existent in South East Asia where kratom has had a longer history of use. We highlight the possible reasons for this as discussed in the literature. More importantly, it should be borne in mind that the individual clinical case-reports emerging from the West that link kratom use to adverse reactions or fatalities frequently pertained to kratom used together with other substances. Therefore, there is a danger of these reports being used to strengthen the case for legal sanction against kratom. This would be unfortunate since the experiences from South East Asia suggest considerable potential for therapeutic use among people who use drugs.
CONCLUSION: Despite its addictive properties, reported side-effects and its tendency to be used a recreational drug, more scientific clinical human studies are necessary to determine its potential therapeutic value.
AIMS: Our study aimed to develop a search strategy to answer clinical queries among physicians in a primary care setting.
METHODS: Six clinical questions of different medical conditions seen in primary care were formulated. A series of experimental searches to answer each question was conducted on 3 commonly advocated medical databases. We compared search results from a PICO (patients, intervention, comparison, outcome) framework for questions using different combinations of PICO elements. We also compared outcomes from doing searches using text words, Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), or a combination of both. All searches were documented using screenshots and saved search strategies.
RESULTS: Answers to all 6 questions using the PICO framework were found. A higher number of systematic reviews were obtained using a 2 PICO element search compared to a 4 element search. A more optimal choice of search is a combination of both text words and MeSH terms. Despite searching using the Systematic Review filter, many non-systematic reviews or narrative reviews were found in PubMed. There was poor overlap between outcomes of searches using different databases. The duration of search and screening for the 6 questions ranged from 1 to 4 hours.
CONCLUSION: This strategy has been shown to be feasible and can provide evidence to doctors' clinical questions. It has the potential to be incorporated into an interventional study to determine the impact of an online evidence retrieval system.
METHODS: A literature search was performed in 3 electronic databases for articles published before August 2018. Randomized clinical trials published in English that compared PP between machine-assisted agitation and syringe irrigation with needles as part of nonsurgical root canal treatment were included. Two authors were independently involved in the article selection process, data extraction, and assessment of the quality of included studies using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool. The pooled effect estimates of the standardized mean difference (SMD) between machine-assisted agitation and syringe irrigation with needle was calculated by a random effects-modeled meta-analysis. A subgroup meta-analysis was performed. The quality of evidence was evaluated by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach.
RESULTS: Six studies were included for systematic review. Meta-analysis was performed using 3 studies and showed that machine-assisted agitation resulted in less PP compared with syringe irrigation with needle at 24 hours (SMD = -0.73; 95% confidence interval, -1.04 to -0.42; I2 = 30.6%) and 48 hours (SMD = -0.60; 95% CI, -0.85 to -0.35; I2 = 0%). The quality of evidence by Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations for the PP outcomes (24 hours and 48 hours) was graded as "moderate" quality.
CONCLUSIONS: Machine-assisted agitation reduced PP compared with syringe irrigation with needles in nonsurgical root canal treatment. Future clinical trials are needed to support the result of this review.