scholarly journals Clinical Trials Registries For Systematic Reviews – An Alternative Source For Unpublished Data

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. A12 ◽  
Author(s):  
N.J. Halfpenny ◽  
J.C. Thompson ◽  
J.M. Quigley ◽  
D.A. Scott
2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (15) ◽  
pp. 1783-1790 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosario Pastor ◽  
Josep A. Tur

Background: Several drugs have been currently approved for the treatment of obesity. The pharmacokinetic of liraglutide, as well as the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, have been widely described. Objective: To analyze the published systematic reviews on the use of liraglutide for the treatment of obesity. Methods: Systematic reviews were found out through MEDLINE searches, through EBSCO host and the Cochrane Library based on the following terms: "liraglutide" as major term and using the following Medical Subject Headings (MesH) terms: "obesity", "overweight", "weight loss". A total of 3 systematic reviews were finally included to be analyzed. Results: From the three systematic reviews selected, only two included the randomized clinical trials, while the third study reviewed both randomized and non-randomized clinical trials. Only one review performed statistical tests of heterogeneity and a meta-analysis, combining the results of individual studies. Another review showed the results of individual studies with odds ratio and confidence interval, but a second one just showed the means and confidence intervals. In all studies, weight loss was registered in persons treated with liraglutide in a dose dependent form, reaching a plateau at 3.0 mg dose, which was reached just in men. Most usual adverse events were gastrointestinal. Conclusion: More powerful and prospective studies are needed to assess all aspects related to liraglutide in the overweight and obesity treatment.


2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 124-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mi-Ok Kim ◽  
Xia Wang ◽  
Chunyan Liu ◽  
Kathleen Dorris ◽  
Maryam Fouladi ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Lara dos Santos Silva

A ansiedade está entre os transtornos mentais de maior prevalência na população mundial, sendo a segunda causa de incapacidade mental no mundo. Dentre a população suscetível à ansiedade, destacam-se os estudantes universitários, em decorrência das situações vivenciadas no âmbito acadêmico. Os tratamentos da ansiedade podem estar pautados em recursos medicamentosos e não medicamentosos. Dentre os não medicamentosos, destacam-se as Práticas Integrativas e Complementares em Saúde e, dentre estas, a auriculoterapia. O objetivo geral deste estudo foi s intetizar as evidências disponíveis na literatura científica sobre o uso da auriculoterapia no tratamento da ansiedade em estudantes universitários. Trata-se de uma revisão sistemática da literatura, realizada em 16 bases de dados, com início em 20 de janeiro e revisão até 27 de março de 2021. Todo o processo de busca e seleção dos artigos foi feito de modo independente e pareado, e, quando necessário, um terceiro pesquisador com experiência na temática auxiliava como ad hoc na resolução dos conflitos. O relato da revisão pautou-se na diretriz Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, e o protocolo da revisão foi cadastrado na plataforma International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (registro No CRD42020205968). Utilizou-se as diretrizes Standards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture, Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool, e escala de JADAD para avaliação dos artigos. A amostra final foi composta por cinco artigos. A análise dos mesmos mostrou que a auriculoterapia contribuiu para tratar a ansiedade de estudantes universitários. O uso desta intervenção deve ser considerado pelas instituições formadoras para promoção da saúde mental nesta população, e pode contribuir para a melhora do desempenho acadêmico, redução das taxas de evasão, e melhora da qualidade de vida aos universitários. O estudo também possibilitou a elaboração de uma tecnologia educativa no formato de cartilha, com o objetivo de esclarecer aos estudantes universitários sobre a ansiedade como um problema de saúde relevante na população, bem como apresentar a auriculoterapia como uma possibilidade terapêutica. Pretende-se que, em momento oportuno, a mesma seja divulgada em formato eletrônico para toda a comunidade acadêmica. Palavras-chave: Auriculoterapia. Terapia auricular. Ansiedade. Estudantes.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pandora Pound ◽  
Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga

AbstractSystematic reviews are powerful tools with the potential to generate high quality evidence. Their application to animal studies has been instrumental in exposing the poor quality of these studies, as well as a catalyst for improvements in study design, conduct and reporting. It has been suggested that prospective systematic reviews of animal studies (i.e. systematic reviews conducted prior to clinical trials) would allow scrutiny of the preclinical evidence, providing valuable information on safety and efficacy, and helping to determine whether clinical trials should proceed. However, while prospective systematic reviews allow valuable scrutiny of the preclinical animal data, they are not necessarily able to reliably predict the safety and efficacy of an intervention when trialled in humans. Consequently, they may not reliably safeguard humans participating in clinical trials and might potentially result in lost opportunities for beneficial clinical treatments. Furthermore, animal and human studies are often conducted concurrently, which not only makes prospective systematic reviews of animal studies impossible, but suggests that animal studies do not inform human studies in the manner presumed. We suggest that this points to a confused attitude regarding animal studies, whereby tradition demands that they precede human studies but practice indicates that their findings are often ignored. We argue that it is time to assess the relative contributions of animal and human research in order to better understand how clinical knowledge is actually produced.


2020 ◽  
pp. jrheum.200593
Author(s):  
Michael S. Putman ◽  
Alexander Chaitoff ◽  
Joshua D. Niforatos

The growth of systematic reviews and metaanalyses (SRMA) has outpaced the growth of randomized clinical trials (RCT) in many medicine subspecialties1. This may reflect technological advances in SRMA production, fewer barriers to publish, or academic pressure to produce citations2.


2011 ◽  
Vol 64 (4) ◽  
pp. 452-452
Author(s):  
Ralf Bender ◽  
Armin Koch ◽  
Guido Skipka ◽  
Thomas Kaiser ◽  
Stefan Lange

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document