Classifying atopic dermatitis: protocol for a systematic review of subtypes (phenotypes) and associated characteristics

IntroductionAtopic dermatitis is a complex disease with differing clinical presentations. Many attempts have been made to identify uniform subtypes, or phenotypes, of atopic dermatitis in order to identify different aetiologies, improve diagnosis, estimate more accurate clinical prognoses, inform treatment andmanagement or predict treatment efficacy andeffectiveness. However, no consensus yet exists on exactly what defines these phenotypes or how many there are and whether they are genuine or statistical artefacts. This review aims to identify previously reported phenotypes of atopic dermatitis, the features used to define them and any characteristics or clinical outcomes significantly associated with them.Methods and analysisWe will search Ovid Embase, Ovid MEDLINE and Web of Science from inception to the latest available date at the time of the search for studies attempting to classify atopic dermatitis in humans using any cross-sectional or longitudinal epidemiological or interventional design. Primary outcomes are atopic dermatitis phenotypes, features used to define them and characteristics associated with them in subsequent analyses. A secondary outcome is the methodological approach used to derive them. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts for inclusion, extract data and assess study quality. We will present the results of this review descriptively and with frequencies where possible.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this study as it is a systematic review. We will report results from this systematic review in a peer-reviewed journal. The main value of this study will be to inform further research.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018087500

Download Full-text

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on utilisation of healthcare services: a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045343 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (3) ◽

pp. e045343

Author(s):

Ray Moynihan ◽

Sharon Sanders ◽

Zoe A Michaleff ◽

Anna Mae Scott ◽

Justin Clark ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Primary Outcome ◽

Unmet Need ◽

Healthcare Utilisation ◽

Healthcare Services ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Secondary Outcome ◽

Severe Illness ◽

Service Utilisation ◽

Registration Number

ObjectivesTo determine the extent and nature of changes in utilisation of healthcare services during COVID-19 pandemic.DesignSystematic review.EligibilityEligible studies compared utilisation of services during COVID-19 pandemic to at least one comparable period in prior years. Services included visits, admissions, diagnostics and therapeutics. Studies were excluded if from single centres or studied only patients with COVID-19.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and preprints were searched, without language restrictions, until 10 August, using detailed searches with key concepts including COVID-19, health services and impact.Data analysisRisk of bias was assessed by adapting the Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Interventions tool, and a Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care tool. Results were analysed using descriptive statistics, graphical figures and narrative synthesis.Outcome measuresPrimary outcome was change in service utilisation between prepandemic and pandemic periods. Secondary outcome was the change in proportions of users of healthcare services with milder or more severe illness (eg, triage scores).Results3097 unique references were identified, and 81 studies across 20 countries included, reporting on >11 million services prepandemic and 6.9 million during pandemic. For the primary outcome, there were 143 estimates of changes, with a median 37% reduction in services overall (IQR −51% to −20%), comprising median reductions for visits of 42% (−53% to −32%), admissions 28% (−40% to −17%), diagnostics 31% (−53% to −24%) and for therapeutics 30% (−57% to −19%). Among 35 studies reporting secondary outcomes, there were 60 estimates, with 27 (45%) reporting larger reductions in utilisation among people with a milder spectrum of illness, and 33 (55%) reporting no difference.ConclusionsHealthcare utilisation decreased by about a third during the pandemic, with considerable variation, and with greater reductions among people with less severe illness. While addressing unmet need remains a priority, studies of health impacts of reductions may help health systems reduce unnecessary care in the postpandemic recovery.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020203729.

Download Full-text

What does my neighbourhood have to do with my weight? A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of the association between neighbourhood socioeconomic status and body weight

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017567 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 7 (9) ◽

pp. e017567

Author(s):

Shimels Hussien Mohammed ◽

Mulugeta Molla Birhanu ◽

Tesfamichael Awoke Sissay ◽

Tesfa Dejenie Habtewold ◽

Balewgizie Sileshi Tegegn ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Socioeconomic Status ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Registration Number ◽

Newcastle Ottawa Scale ◽

Neighbourhood Socioeconomic Status ◽

Using Data

IntroductionIndividuals living in poor neighbourhoods are at a higher risk of overweight/obesity. There is no systematic review and meta-analysis study on the association of neighbourhood socioeconomic status (NSES) with overweight/obesity. We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse the existing evidence on the association of NSES with overweight/obesity.Methods and analysisCross-sectional, case–control and cohort studies published in English from inception to 15 May 2017 will be systematically searched using the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Sciences and Google Scholar. Selection, screening, reviewing and data extraction will be done by two reviewers, independently and in duplicate. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) will be used to assess the quality of evidence. Publication bias will be checked by visual inspection of funnel plots and Egger’s regression test. Heterogeneity will be checked by Higgins’s method (I2statistics). Meta-analysis will be done to estimate the pooled OR. Narrative synthesis will be performed if meta-analysis is not feasible due to high heterogeneity of studies.Ethics and disseminationEthical clearance is not required as we will be using data from published articles. Findings will be communicated through a publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentations at professional conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017063889.

Download Full-text

Prevalence of atopic dermatitis, asthma and rhinitis from infancy through adulthood in rural Bangladesh: a population-based, cross-sectional survey

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042380 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (11) ◽

pp. e042380

Author(s):

Courtney J Pedersen ◽

Mohammad J Uddin ◽

Samir K Saha ◽

Gary L Darmstadt

Keyword(s):

Atopic Dermatitis ◽

Medical Diagnosis ◽

Severe Disease ◽

Age Groups ◽

Working Party ◽

Atopic Disease ◽

Secondary Outcome ◽

Cross Sectional Survey ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

History Of

ObjectiveDescribe the pattern of atopic disease prevalence from infancy to adulthood.DesignCross-sectional household survey.SettingCommunity-based demographic surveillance site, Mirzapur, Bangladesh.Participants7275 individuals in randomly selected clusters within 156 villages.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe 12-month prevalence of atopic dermatitis (by UK Working Party Criteria (UK criteria) and International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC)), asthma and rhinitis (by ISAAC); disease severity (by ISAAC); history of ever receiving a medical diagnosis.ResultsChildren aged 2 years had the highest prevalence of atopic dermatitis—18.8% (95% CI 15.2% to 22.4%) by UK criteria and 14.9% (95% CI 11.6% to 18.1%) by ISAAC— and asthma (20.1%, 95% CI 16.4% to 23.8%). Prevalence of rhinitis was highest among 25–29 year olds (6.0%, (95% CI% 4.5 to 7.4%). History of a medical diagnosis was lowest for atopic dermatitis (4.0%) and highest for rhinitis (27.3%) and was significantly associated with severe disease compared with those without severe disease for all three conditions (atopic dermatitis: 30.0% vs 11.7%, p=0.015; asthma; 85.0% vs 60.4%, p<0.001; rhinitis: 34.2% vs 7.3%, p<0.001) and having a higher asset-based wealth score for asthma (29.7% (highest quintile) vs 7.5% (lowest quintile), p<0.001) and rhinitis (39.8% vs 12.5%, p=0.003). Prevalence of having >1 condition was highest (36.2%) at 2 years and decreased with age. Having atopic dermatitis (ISAAC) was associated with significantly increased odds ratios (OR) for comorbid asthma (OR 5.56 (95% CI 4.26 to 7.26)] and rhinitis (3.68 (95% CI 2.73 to 4.96)). Asthma and rhinitis were also strongly associated with each other (OR 8.39 (95% CI 6.48 to 10.86)).ConclusionsAtopic disease burden was high in this rural Bangladeshi population. Having one atopic condition was significantly associated with the presence of another. Low incidence of ever obtaining a medical diagnosis highlights an important opportunity to increase availability of affordable diagnosis and treatment options for all age groups.

Download Full-text

Prevalence of Mycoplasma genitalium by anatomical site in men who have sex with men: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Sexually Transmitted Infections ◽

10.1136/sextrans-2019-054310 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 96 (8) ◽

pp. 563-570

Author(s):

Rosie L Latimer ◽

Hannah S Shilling ◽

Lenka A Vodstrcil ◽

Dorothy A Machalek ◽

Christopher K Fairley ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Mycoplasma Genitalium ◽

Nucleic Acid Amplification ◽

Hiv Positive ◽

Published Data ◽

Anatomical Site ◽

Ovid Medline ◽

Registration Number ◽

Sex With Men

ObjectiveTo systematically review and appraise published data, to determine the prevalence of Mycoplasma genitalium (MG) in men who have sex with men (MSM) tested at each anatomical site, that is, at the urethra, rectum and/or pharynx.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesOvid Medline, PubMed, Embase were searched for articles from 1st January 1981 (the year MG was first identified) to 1st June 2018.Review methodsStudies were eligible for inclusion if they reported MG prevalence in MSM tested at the urethra, rectum and/or pharynx, in at least 50 MSM, using nucleic acid amplification testing. Data were extracted by anatomical site, symptom and HIV status. Summary estimates (95% CIs) were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were performed to assess heterogeneity between studies.ResultsForty-six studies met inclusion criteria, with 34 reporting estimates of MG prevalence at the urethra (13 753 samples), 25 at the rectum (8629 samples) and 7 at the pharynx (1871 samples). MG prevalence was 5.0% (95% CI 3.5 to 6.8; I2=94.0) at the urethra; 6.2% (95% CI 4.6 to 8.1; I2=88.1) at the rectum and 1.0% (95% CI 0.0 to 5.1; I2=96.0) at the pharynx. The prevalence of MG was significantly higher at urethral and rectal sites in symptomatic versus asymptomatic MSM (7.1% vs 2.2%, p<0.001; and 16.1% vs 7.5%, p=0.039, respectively). MG prevalence at the urethra was significantly higher in HIV-positive compared with HIV-negative MSM (7.0% vs 3.4%, p=0.006).ConclusionMG was common in MSM, particularly at urethral and rectal sites (5% to 6%). MG was more commonly detected in symptomatic men at both sites, and more common in HIV-positive men at the urethra. MG was uncommonly detected in the pharynx. Site-specific estimates are similar to those for chlamydia and will be helpful in informing testing practices in MSM.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017058326.

Download Full-text

Assessment of the use of Unna boot in the treatment of chronic venous leg ulcers in adults: systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032091 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (12) ◽

pp. e032091

Author(s):

Thalita Paranhos ◽

Caroline S B Paiva ◽

Fernanda C I Cardoso ◽

Priscila P Apolinário ◽

Flavia Figueiredo Azevedo ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

New York ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Leg Ulcers ◽

Venous Flow ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Venous Leg Ulcers ◽

The Us ◽

Registration Number ◽

Review Protocol

IntroductionChronic venous insufficiency (CVI) is an anomaly of the normal functioning of the venous system caused by valvular incompetence with or without the obstruction of venous flow. This condition can affect either or both of the superficial and the deep venous systems. Venous dysfunction can even result in congenital or acquired disorders, and its complications include venous leg ulcers (VLUs). The objective of this systematic review is to determine the effectiveness of Unna boot in the treatment of wound healing of VLU by assessing the quality of the available evidence.Methods and analysisA literature search in PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, BVS/BIREME, Embase, ProQuest, BDTD, Thesis and Dissertation Catalog, Sao Paulo Research Foundation/Thesis and dissertation, OPEN THESIS, A service of the US National Institute of Health, Center for Reviews and Dissemination-University of New York and SciElo published in the last 10 years, the period from January 1999 to March 2019. The review will include primary studies (original), and Controlled Trials or Observational studies (cross-sectional, case–control or longitudinal studies) with VLU. The exclusion will include leg ulceration due to different causes, such as pressure, arterial, diabetic or mixed-aetiology leg ulcers. Data synthesis will be performed using a narrative summary and quantitative analysis.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review does not require approval by the ethics committee, as individual patient data will not be collected. Dissemination of findings will be through publications in peer-reviewed journals and/or via conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019127947

Download Full-text

The effect of removable orthodontic appliances on oral microbiota: systematic review

10.21203/rs.2.19718/v1 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Alessandra Lucchese ◽

Marianna Pellegrino ◽

Eugenio Montini ◽

Alessandra Liguori ◽

Maurizio Manuelli

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Orthodontic Appliances ◽

Oral Microbiota ◽

Periodontal Tissues ◽

Ovid Medline ◽

Registration Number ◽

Pre Treatment ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Removable Appliances ◽

Removable Orthodontic Appliances

Abstract Background Removable orthodontic appliances due to plaque accumulation and oral microbe colonization, might be associated with intraoral adverse effects on enamel or periodontal tissues. The present systematic review was carried out to evaluate both qualitatively and quantitatively the microbiological changes occurring during orthodontic therapy with removable orthodontic appliances. Methods PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, Ovid Medline, Dentistry & Oral Sciences Source and Vita-Salute San Raffaele University databases were searched. The research included every article published up to December 2018. The Preferred Reporting Items for Reporting Systematic reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA) protocol and the ‘Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care Criteria for Grading Assessed Studies’ (SBU) method were adopted to conduct this systematic review. Results The current study has moderate/high evidence, according with SBU method. It demonstrates that removable appliances do influence the oral microbiota, with significant alterations just 15 days after the beginning of therapy, independently from the type of appliance. Furthermore, the levels of oral pathogens decrease significantly or even returned to pre-treatment levels several months later the therapy end. Conclusions This review suggests that orthodontic treatment with removable appliances might not induce permanent changes to oral microflora. Protocol: PROSPERO database registration number CRD42019121762.

Download Full-text

Effect of treatments on skin microbiota in patients with atopic dermatitis: a protocol for systematic review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053488 ◽

2022 ◽

Vol 12 (1) ◽

pp. e053488

Author(s):

Yang Guo ◽

Xia Dou ◽

Xing-ling Jian ◽

Kao-yuan Zhang ◽

Ying-jie Zheng ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Atopic Dermatitis ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Microbial Interactions ◽

Skin Microbiota ◽

Clinical Trial Registry ◽

Bias Assessment ◽

Study Selection ◽

Registration Number

IntroductionAtopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease and skin microbiota dysbiosis shows an important role in the pathogenesis of AD. Effects of treatment on skin microbiota for patients with AD have been evaluated in recent years; however, the results remained controversial across studies. This systematic review will summarise studies evaluating the effect of treatments on skin microbiota among patients with AD.Methods and analysisWe will search PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry in November 2021; other data sources will also be considered, including searching specific authors and screening references cited in the enrolled articles. Interventional studies, which enrolled patients with AD receiving treatments and reported treatment-related skin microbiota changes, will be included. Our primary outcomes include skin microbiota diversity and treatment-related differential microbes; the secondary outcomes include microbiota functions and microbial interactions. Risk of bias assessment will be performed using Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials, risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions and methodological index for non-randomised studies. Two researchers will independently perform study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment, with disagreements resolved by group discussions. Subgroup analyses will be performed according to different types of treatment for AD.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this systematic review. Findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication or conference proceedings.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021246566.

Download Full-text

Comprehensive geriatric assessment in perioperative care: a protocol for a systematic review and qualitative synthesis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049875 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (12) ◽

pp. e049875

Author(s):

Rachael Lucia Miller ◽

Jonathan David Barnes ◽

Ronelle Mouton ◽

Philip Braude ◽

Robert Hinchliffe

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Geriatric Assessment ◽

Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment ◽

Older Patients ◽

Care Facility ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Qualitative Synthesis ◽

Ethical Approval ◽

Registration Number ◽

Randomised Controlled

IntroductionComprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is an intervention that has been deployed in the perioperative setting with the aim to improve outcomes for older patients admitted to hospital. Older patients undergoing surgery are more likely to have postoperative complications, a longer hospital stay and be discharged to a care facility. Despite the increasing application of this intervention within surgical services, the evidence for CGA remains limited in this group. The aim of this systematic review is to describe CGA as in intervention applied to surgical populations in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) as well as the outcomes assessed.Methods and analysisA systematic search of RCTs of CGA in surgery will be run in Embase, Medline, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and Cochrane library. Further articles will be identified from reference lists in relevant studies found in the search. A narrative synthesis will be undertaken outlining specialties included, detailed descriptions of the intervention and outcomes.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval is required. The results of this review will be published and used as the basis of work to optimise this intervention for future trials in surgical populations.PROSPERO registration numberThis review is registered with PROSPERO CRD42020221797.

Download Full-text

Hematologic Neoplasms As Risk Factor For Severe COVID-19: A Systematic Review Protocol

10.21203/rs.3.rs-1053230/v1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Paula de Oliveira Montandon Hokama ◽

Newton Key Hokama ◽

Adriana Lúcia Mendes ◽

Vania dos Santos Nunes-Nogueira

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Elevated Risk ◽

Hematologic Neoplasms ◽

Main Hypothesis ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Hematologic Neoplasm ◽

Registration Number ◽

Review Protocol ◽

Hematological Tumors

Abstract Background: Patients with hematologic neoplasm may have compromised immunity due to their malignancy and/or treatment, and may be at elevated risk of severe COVID-19. However, the studies bring together patients with hematologic neoplasms and solid tumors into a single group, making no distinction about the types of hematological tumors and their treatments. This systematic review is designed to explore the risk of severe COVID-19 in patients with hematologic neoplasm. Studies about patients, adult or children, with hematologic neoplasm and COVID-19 will be included. Methods: A systematic review according to Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for systematic reviews of etiology and risk will be performed. The review will consider as participants adults or children with COVID-19 infection detected by RT-PCR or serology (SARS-CoV-2 antibody). We will be included studies without routine labs confirmation of COVID-19 if the patients presented clinical/physical exam and computed tomography suggesting COVID-19. The exposure of interest will be hematologic neoplasm, which include lymphomas, acute and chronic leukemias, myeloma, myelodysplastic syndrome, and myeloproliferative diseases. We will consider cohort, case-control, analytical cross-sectional studies. Outcomes among patients with COVID-19 are critical symptoms, hospitalizations, intensive care unit admissions, mechanical ventilation and deaths. We will exclude studies with other neoplasms than hematologic neoplasms. Search strategies have been created for the Embase, Medline and LILACS. Two reviewers independently will assess the studies for their eligibility, will extract data and will evaluate their risk of bias. Similar outcomes measured in at least two studies will be plotted in the meta-analysis using the Joanna Briggs Institute System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information. Discussion: This systematic review aims to evaluate if patients with hematologic neoplasm may be at elevated risk of severe COVID-19. This review will differ from the previous ones because we will include controlled studies and groups with only hematologic neoplasm, excluding other cancers. The main hypothesis of our research is that not all hematological cancer patients have high risk of severe COVID-19. Trial registration number: PROSPERO CRD42020199318.

Download Full-text

Comparison of FORTA, PRISCUS and EU(7)-PIM lists on identifying potentially inappropriate medication and its impact on cognitive function in multimorbid elderly German people in primary care: a multicentre observational study

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050344 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (9) ◽

pp. e050344

Author(s):

Caroline Krüger ◽

Ingmar Schäfer ◽

Hendrik van den Bussche ◽

Horst Bickel ◽

Tobias Dreischulte ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cognitive Function ◽

Negative Impact ◽

Inappropriate Medication ◽

Potentially Inappropriate Medication ◽

Secondary Outcome ◽

German Population ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Mixed Effect ◽

Registration Number ◽

German People

ObjectivesOur study aimed to assess the frequency of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use (according to three PIM lists) and to examine the association between PIM use and cognitive function among participants in the MultiCare cohort.DesignMultiCare is conducted as a longitudinal, multicentre, observational cohort study.SettingThe MultiCare study is located in eight different study centres in Germany.Participants3189 patients (59.3% female).Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe study had a cross-sectional design using baseline data from the German MultiCare study. Prescribed and over-the-counter drugs were classified using FORTA (Fit fOR The Aged), PRISCUS (Latin for ‘time-honoured’) and EU(7)-PIM lists. A mixed-effect multivariate linear regression was performed to calculate the association between PIM use patients’ cognitive function (measured with (LDST)).ResultsPatients (3189) used 2152 FORTA PIM (mean 0.9±1.03 per patient), 936 PRISCUS PIM (0.3±0.58) and 4311 EU(7)-PIM (1.4±1.29). The most common FORTA PIM was phenprocoumon (13.8%); the most prevalent PRISCUS PIM was amitriptyline (2.8%); the most common EU(7)-PIM was omeprazole (14.0%). The lists rate PIM differently, with an overall overlap of 6.6%. Increasing use of PIM is significantly associated with reduced cognitive function that was detected with a correlation coefficient of −0.60 for FORTA PIM (p=0.002), −0.72 for PRISCUS PIM (p=0.025) and −0.44 for EU(7)-PIM (p=0.005).ConclusionWe identified PIM using FORTA, PRISCUS and EU(7)-PIM lists differently and found that PIM use is associated with cognitive impairment according to LDST, whereby the FORTA list best explained cognitive decline for the German population. These findings are consistent with a negative impact of PIM use on multimorbid elderly patient outcomes.Trial registration numberISRCTN89818205.

Download Full-text