scholarly journals The Numbers Needed to Treat for Neurological Disorders

2005 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 440-449 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel Bussière ◽  
Samuel Wiebe
Keyword(s):  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Therapeutic Interventions ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Number Needed To Treat ◽  
Therapeutic Effects ◽  
Surgical Interventions ◽  
Blood Patch ◽  
Numbers Needed To Treat ◽  
Meta Analyses

ABSTRACT:Background:Numerous therapeutic interventions have been developed in the neurosciences. Clinicians need summary measures about efficacy of therapies that derive from the best available evidence, and that can be readily extrapolated to clinical practice. The number needed to treat (NNT) is intuitive and clinically applicable. We provide clinicians with a single source that summarizes important therapies in the main neurological and neurosurgical areas.Methods:Critically appraised evidence about therapies in the neurosciences was obtained from meta-analyses in all neurosciences groups in the Cochrane library, and from critically appraised topics at the University of Western Ontario. Therapies were included if they were deemed relevant and if outcomes were dichotomous. For each therapy, we obtained absolute risk differences and their 95% confidence intervals (CI), the corresponding NNTs, control and experimental event rates, and the time-frame of the outcome assessment.Results:We assembled a table of NNTs for 87 interventions in ten disease categories, deriving from meta-analyses (70%) or randomized controlled trials (30%), and assessing surgical interventions (7%), procedures (9%) or pharmacological treatments (84%). The NNTs varied widely, ranging from 1 in the use of epidural blood patch for post-dural puncture headache to 4608 for meningococcal vaccination. Preventative interventions had substantially larger NNTs. Time-frames were inappropriately short for many chronic conditions.Conclusions:Large collections of NNTs provide useful, updateable summaries of therapeutic effects in the neurosciences, an increasingly interventional clinical field.

scholarly journals Effect of Using a Safety Checklist on Patient Complications after Surgery

2014 ◽  
Vol 120 (6) ◽  
pp. 1380-1389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brigid M. Gillespie ◽  
Wendy Chaboyer ◽  
Lukman Thalib ◽  
Melinda John ◽  
Nicole Fairweather ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Absolute Risk Reduction ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Number Needed To Treat ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Random Effects Models ◽  
Fixed And Random Effects ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
The Cochrane Library

Abstract Background: Previous before-and-after studies indicate that the use of safety checklists in surgery reduces complication rates in patients. Methods: A systematic review of studies was undertaken using MEDLINE, CINAHL, Proquest, and the Cochrane Library to identify studies that evaluated the effects of checklist use in surgery on complication rates. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies. The pooled risk ratio (RR) was estimated using both fixed and random effects models. For each outcome, the number needed to treat (NNT) and the absolute risk reduction (ARR) were also computed. Results: Of the 207 intervention studies identified, 7 representing 37,339 patients were included in meta-analyses, and all were cohort studies. Results indicated that the use of checklists in surgery compared with standard practice led to a reduction in any complication (RR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.72; P < 0.0001; ARR, 3.7%; NNT, 27) and wound infection (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.72; P = 0.0001; ARR, 2.9%; NNT, 34) and also reduction in blood loss (RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.70; P = 0.0001; ARR, 3.8%; NNT, 33). There were no significant reductions in mortality (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.11; P = 0.191; ARR, 0.44%; NNT, 229), pneumonia (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.4; P = 0.857; ARR, 0.04%; NNT, 2,512), or unplanned return to operating room (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.02; P = 0.068; ARR, 0.52%; NNT, 192). Conclusion: Notwithstanding the lack of randomized controlled trials, synthesis of the existing body of evidence suggests a relationship between checklist use in surgery and fewer postoperative complications.

USING THE AMSTAR CHECKLIST FOR RAPID REVIEWS: IS IT FEASIBLE?

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 276-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Tajana Mattivi ◽  
Barbara Buchberger
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Overview Of Reviews ◽  
Surgical Interventions ◽  
Rapid Reviews ◽  
Study Characteristics ◽  
The Cochrane Library

Objectives: Rapid reviews can be conducted in a narrower time frame, as compared to systematic reviews, by featuring restrictions. To estimate the validity of the results, assessment of methodological quality is required. Our aim was to analyze the methodological restrictions of rapid reviews compared with systematic reviews using the AMSTAR checklist and assess its feasibility for rapid reviews.Methods: A systematic search for literature on rapid reviews of surgical interventions was conducted in three databases: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane library. Additionally, health technology assessment (HTA) databases were searched. We analyzed reviews using AMSTAR and additionally compared the results with those of an overview of reviews on the same topic.Results: Items found more frequently in rapid reviews were search for gray literature (65 percent versus 33 percent), listing of excluded studies (59 percent versus 37 percent), and provision of study characteristics (77 percent versus 44 percent), whereas consideration of study quality in formulating conclusions, conduct of meta-analysis, and statement of conflicts of interest were less frequent. Median time between search and publication was 8 months, with a range between 1 and 27.Conclusions: With some adjustments, AMSTAR can be used as a checklist for rapid reviews to describe methodological restrictions in comparison to systematic reviews and to roughly estimate the validity of the results. Strikingly, only 14.3 percent of rapid reviews were published within 3 months.

The Use of Erythropoietic Agents in Patients with Non-Myeloid Hematological Malignancies.

Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 3338-3338
Author(s):  
Nadine Shehata ◽  
Irwin Walker ◽  
Ralph Meyer ◽  
Adam Haynes ◽  
Kevin Imrie
Keyword(s):  
Practice Guideline ◽  
Hematological Malignancies ◽  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Hemoglobin Concentration ◽  
Absolute Risk Reduction ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Number Needed To Treat ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Access To Treatment ◽  
Transfusion Requirements

Abstract Practice guidelines for use of an erythropoietic agent (EpA) have been previously developed for patients with all cancers, but these have not specifically addressed non-myeloid hematological malignancies. Given issues of benefit, cost, access to treatment and practice variation for these patients, the Cancer Care Ontario Program in Evidence - Based Care (CCO PEBC) conducted a systematic review and has developed a practice guideline. Entries to MEDLINE, CANCERLIT, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library databases, and abstracts of the American Societies of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and Hematology (ASH) were searched. A hierarchy of outcomes was developed that included survival, quality of life (QoL), transfusion requirements and improvements in hemoglobin concentration/hematocrit. To validate conclusions and recommendations, the practice guideline was sent to Ontario practitioners in July 2006; responses are now being collated. Eighteen reports (14 articles, 4 abstracts) of randomized trials met eligibility criteria. None of the 3 trials reporting survival outcomes detected a benefit with use of an EpA. Of 7 trials evaluating QoL, 6 reported superior outcomes in patients receiving an EpA. None of those trials sufficiently reported methodologic parameters required by proposed guidelines for analyzing, interpreting and reporting QoL measures. Use of an EpA significantly reduced the proportion of patients transfused in 5 trials evaluating this outcome; reductions ranged from 15% to 40%. The absolute risk reduction ranged from 15% to 24%; the number needed to treat to prevent a transfusion ranged from 4 to 6. Use of an EpA was not associated with a reduction in the mean/median number of units transfused. In 10 studies, either a statistically significant increase in the hemoglobin concentration/hematocrit or in the proportion of patients with an increase in the hemoglobin concentration/hematocrit was seen. For this practice guideline, we interpreted the evidence as providing insufficient data to justify use of an EpA in order to improve survival or QoL. However, there are compelling data showing that use of an EpA reduces the risk of requiring a transfusion. Initiatives such as the Commission of Inquiry on the Blood System in Canada (“the Krever Commission”), state that alternatives to transfusion be offered to patients because of associated known and potentially unknown adverse consequences of blood products. Thus, the use of an EpA is recommended as an alternative to transfusion. However, the decision to use an EpA to reduce transfusion requirements should primarily consider individual patient values and the likelihood that a patient will require a transfusion so that patients are not exposed to unnecessary treatment and the health care system to additional costs.

scholarly journals The effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on empathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (5) ◽  
pp. 737-750 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.-C. Yang ◽  
N. Khalifa ◽  
B. Völlm
Keyword(s):  
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Therapeutic Interventions ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Clinical Populations

Empathy is a multi-dimensional concept with affective and cognitive components, the latter often referred to as Theory of Mind (ToM). Impaired empathy is prevalent in people with neuropsychiatric disorders, such as personality disorder, psychopathy, and schizophrenia, highlighting the need to develop therapeutic interventions to address this. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), a non-invasive therapeutic technique that has been effective in treating various neuropsychiatric conditions, can be potentially used to modulate empathy. To our knowledge, no systematic reviews or meta-analyses in this field have been conducted. The aim of the current study was to review the literature on the use of rTMS to modulate empathy in adults. Seven electronic databases (AMED, Cochrane library, EMBASE, Medline, Pubmed, PsycInfo, and Web of Science) were searched using appropriate search terms. Twenty-two studies were identified, all bar one study involved interventions in healthy rather than clinical populations, and 18 of them, providing results for 24 trials, were included in the meta-analyses. Results showed an overall small, but statistically significant, effect in favour of active rTMS in healthy individuals. Differential effects across cognitive and affective ToM were evident. Subgroup analyses for cognitive ToM revealed significant effect sizes on excitatory rTMS, offline paradigms, and non-randomised design trials. Subgroup analyses for affective ToM revealed significant effect sizes on excitatory rTMS, offline paradigms, and non-randomised design trials. Meta-regression revealed no significant sources of heterogeneity. In conclusion, rTMS may have discernible effects on different components of empathy. Further research is required to examine the effects of rTMS on empathy in clinical and non-clinical populations, using appropriate empathy tasks and rTMS protocols.

scholarly journals The Psychological and Physical Effects of Forests on Human Health: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 1770
Author(s):  
Marita Stier-Jarmer ◽  
Veronika Throner ◽  
Michaela Kirschneck ◽  
Gisela Immich ◽  
Dieter Frisch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Primary School Children ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Therapeutic Effects ◽  
Physical Effects ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses

Background: The aim of this systematic review of systematic reviews was to identify, summarise, and synthesise the available evidence of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) on the preventative and therapeutic psychological and physical effects of forest-based interventions. Methods: Both bibliographic databases and grey literature sources were searched for SRs and MAs published until May 2020. Eight databases were searched for relevant articles: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PsycInfo, CiNii, EBSCO, and Scopus. Grey literature was sourced from Google Scholar and other web-based search tools. SRs and MAs that included randomised controlled (RCT), non-randomised controlled (NRCT), and non-controlled trials (NCT) on health-related effects of forest-based interventions were eligible if they had searched at least two databases. The methodological quality of eligible reviews was assessed by AMSTAR-2. Results: We evaluated 11 systematic reviews covering 131 different primary intervention studies, mostly from Asian countries, three of which included supplementary meta-analyses. The quality assessment resulted in moderate confidence in the results of two reviews, low confidence in six, and critically low confidence in three. The results of the eight moderate and low-rated reviews indicated that forest-based interventions are beneficial to the cardiovascular system, immune system, and mental health (in the areas of stress, depression, anxiety, and negative emotions). Evidence for the effectiveness of forest-based interventions on metabolic parameters in adults, the severity of atopic dermatitis in children and adolescents, and social skills and sociality in healthy primary school children was weak. Discussion/Conclusions: Evidence suggests beneficial therapeutic effects of forest-based interventions on hypertension, stress, and mental-health disorders, such as depression and anxiety. Changes in immunological and inflammatory parameters after forest therapy should be verified in bio-geographically native forests. In the future, more attention should be paid to careful planning, implementation, and reporting of primary studies and to systematic reviews on the effects of forest-based interventions.

The place of corticosteroids in migraine attack management: A 65-year systematic review with pooled analysis and critical appraisal

Cephalalgia ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (11) ◽  
pp. 996-1024 ◽  
Author(s):  
YW Woldeamanuel ◽  
AM Rapoport ◽  
RP Cowan
Keyword(s):  
Single Dose ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Previous History ◽  
Absolute Risk Reduction ◽  
Corticosteroid Treatment ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Headache Recurrence

Background and objectives Headaches recur in up to 87% of migraine patients visiting the emergency department (ED), making ED recidivism a management challenge. We aimed herein to determine the role of corticosteroids in the acute management of migraine in the ED and outpatient care. Methods Advanced search strategies employing PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases inclusive of a relevant gray literature search was employed for Clinical Studies and Systematic Reviews by combining the terms “migraine” and “corticosteroids” spanning all previous years since the production of synthetic corticosteroids ca. 1950 until August 30, 2014. Methods were in accordance with MOOSE guidelines. Results Twenty-five studies ( n = 3989, median age 37.5 years, interquartile range or IQR 35–41 years; median male:female ratio 1:4.23, IQR 1:2.1–6.14; 52% ED-based, 56% randomized-controlled) and four systematic reviews were included. International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria were applied in 64%. Nineteen studies (76%) indicated observed outcome differences favoring benefits of corticosteroids, while six (24%) studies indicated non-inferior outcomes for corticosteroids. Median absolute risk reduction was 30% (range 6%–48.2%), and 11% (6%–48.6%) for 24-, and 72-hour headache recurrence, respectively. Parenteral dexamethasone was the most commonly (56%) administered steroid, at a median single dose of 10 mg (range 4–24 mg). All meta-analyses revealed efficacy of adjuvant corticosteroids to various abortive medications—indicating generalizability. Adverse effects were tolerable. Higher disability, status migrainosus, incomplete pain relief, and previous history of headache recurrence predicted outcome favorability. Conclusions Our literature review suggests that with corticosteroid treatment, recurrent headaches become milder than pretreated headaches and later respond to nonsteroidal therapy. Single-dose intravenous dexamethasone is a reasonable option for managing resistant, severe, or prolonged migraine attacks.

Does Nurse-Led Pre-operative Assessment Reduce the Cancellation Rate of Elective Surgical In-Patient Procedures?: A Systematic Review of the Research Literature

2005 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 41-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah E. Craig
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Number Needed To Treat ◽  
Junior Doctors ◽  
Cancellation Rate ◽  
Randomised Control Trials ◽  
Operative Assessment

Pre-operative assessment (POA) has been advocated for use to achieve a number of goals including reducing cancelled operations on the day of surgery, and therefore waiting lists. POA has historically been provided by junior doctors, but the change in focus of their role in addition to the new roles being taken on by nurses has led to nurse-led POA. The aim of this review was to determine whether nurse-led POA reduces the cancellation rate of elective surgical in-patient procedures. The Cochrane Library, Medline, Cinahl and Embase databases were searched for systematic reviews, randomised control trials and cohort studies examining nurse-led POA. After applying inclusion criteria only four cohort studies were deemed to be suitable to be critically appraised. One study had no cancellations in either the doctor or nurse-led POA groups. Another study had low cancellation rates in the nurse-led POA group, but the control group was not suitably defined for adequate verification as to whether the cancellation rates were lower because they had been pre-assessed. The final two studies revealed similar absolute risk reductions, number needed to treat and odds ratios. In summary nurse-led POA appears to reduce cancellation rates on admission, but the evidence for this is relatively weak, primarily because study samples have been small. Further trials are needed which have samples that are sufficient to detect a true difference between the intervention and control group if one exists.

Abatacept for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Cochrane Systematic Review

2010 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 234-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
LARA J. MAXWELL ◽  
JASVINDER A. SINGH
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Journal Club ◽  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Group Versus ◽  
Risk Difference ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Number Needed To Treat ◽  
American College Of Rheumatology

Objective.To perform a systematic review of efficacy and safety of abatacept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Methods.We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, ACP Journal Club, and Biosis Previews for randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing abatacept alone or in combination with disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD)/biologics to placebo or other DMARD/biologics in patients with RA. Two reviewers independently assessed search results, risk of bias, and extracted data.Results.Seven trials with 2908 patients were included. Compared with placebo, patients with RA treated with abatacept were 2.2 times more likely to achieve an American College of Rheumatology 50% response (ACR50) at one year (relative risk 2.21, 95% CI 1.73, 2.82) with a 21% (95% CI 16%, 27%) absolute risk difference between groups. The number needed to treat to achieve an ACR50 response was 5 (95% CI 4, 7). Significantly greater improvements in physical function, disease activity, pain, and radiographic progression were noted in abatacept-treated patients compared to placebo. Total adverse events (AE) were greater in the abatacept group (RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01, 1.08). Other harm outcomes were not significant, with the exception of serious infections at 12 months, which were more common in the abatacept group versus control group (Peto odds ratio 1.91, 95% CI 1.07, 3.42). Serious AE were more numerous in the abatacept + etanercept group versus the placebo + etanercept group (RR 2.30, 95% CI 1.15, 4.62).Conclusion.Abatacept seems to be efficacious and safe in the treatment of RA. Abatacept should not be used in combination with other biologics to treat RA. Further longterm studies and postmarketing surveillance are required to assess for longer-term harms and sustained efficacy.

Laser Influence on Dental Sensitivity Compared to Other Light Sources Used During In-office Dental Bleaching: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 589-597
Author(s):  
BGS Casado ◽  
EP Pellizzer ◽  
JR Souto Maior ◽  
CAA Lemos ◽  
BCE Vasconcelos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Color Change ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Present Review ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Light Sources ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Tooth Color ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Meta Analyses

Clinical Relevance The use of laser light during bleaching will not reduce the incidence or severity of sensitivity and will not increase the degree of color change compared with nonlaser light sources. SUMMARY Objective: To evaluate whether the use of laser during in-office bleaching promotes a reduction in dental sensitivity after bleaching compared with other light sources. Methods: The present review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and is registered with PROSPERO (CDR42018096591). Searches were conducted in the PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases for relevant articles published up to August 2018. Only randomized clinical trials among adults that compared the use of laser during in-office whitening and other light sources were considered eligible. Results: After analysis of the texts retrieved during the database search, six articles met the eligibility criteria and were selected for the present review. For the outcome dental sensitivity, no significant difference was found favoring any type of light either for intensity (mean difference [MD]: −1.60; confidence interval [CI]: −3.42 to 0.22; p=0.09) or incidence (MD: 1.00; CI: 0.755 to 1.33; p=1.00). Regarding change in tooth color, no significant differences were found between the use of the laser and other light sources (MD: −2.22; CI: −6.36 to 1.93; p=0.29). Conclusions: Within the limitations of the present study, laser exerts no influence on tooth sensitivity compared with other light sources when used during in-office bleaching. The included studies demonstrated that laser use during in-office bleaching may have no influence on tooth color change.

Is it Worth CANVASing for CREDENCE? A Benefit-risk Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 509-514
Author(s):  
Binayak Sinha ◽  
Samit Ghosal
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Fungal Infections ◽  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Number Needed To Treat ◽  
Pooled Data ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Fracture Risks ◽  
Number Needed To Harm

Background and Aims: A number of significant positive and negative signals emerged from the CANVAS Program and CREDENCE trial with the use of canagliflozin. These signals are confusing. A Likelihood of being Helped of Harmed (LHH) analysis was conducted to determine the risk, benefit ratio associated with canagliflozin use and address the signals as a continuum. Materials &Methods: LHH was calculated from the number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH) available from the absolute risk reductions reported with the outcomes of interest, in these two trials. Results: In the CANVAS Program, LHH for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) points at a significant benefit with canagliflozin use in comparison to amputation (1.65), fractures (1.65) and euglycaemic diabetic ketoacidosis (euDKA) (16.67) risks. Only genital fungal infections were significant more in both sexes (0.21-M and 0.1-F) when LHH was matched against the positive outcomes. In contrast, the hHF benefits were outweighed by amputation (0.95) and fracture risks (0.95). : In CREDENCE trial, the LHH for Primary composite, Renal composite and MACE, all supported the benefits in comparison to any adverse events encountered in the trial. : The LHH from pooled data (CANVAS Program and CREDENCE trial) was in favour of all the benefits (hHF and renal composites) except for MACE matched against amputation (0.66). Conclusion: The outcome benefits were in favour of canagliflozin in comparison to all reported adverse events, when hHF and renal composite were under consideration, in both the individual and pooled LHH analysis. However, the MACE benefits were overwhelmed by amputation risk in the pooled analysis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document