scholarly journals Effects of respiratory rehabilitation on patients with novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia in the rehabilitation phase: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. e039771 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feilong Zhu ◽  
Ming Zhang ◽  
Min Gao ◽  
Cheng Zeng ◽  
Dan Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Continuous Variables ◽  
China National Knowledge Infrastructure ◽  
Novel Coronavirus ◽  
Respiratory Rehabilitation

IntroductionThe recent viral pneumonia caused by the COVID-19 has gained the attention of the people all over the world. We aim to investigate the effects of respiratory rehabilitation therapy on patients infected with the novel coronavirus by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.Methods and analysisThis systematic review and meta-analysis have been registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and Viper information databases will be searched from inception time to date without restricting research types to find relevant studies. We will also look into reference lists of relevant trials and reviews, and manually search grey literature, such as trial registries. Two reviewers will independently extract data and perform quality assessment of included studies. Review Manager V.5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration) and Stata V.16.0 software will be used to conduct this meta-analysis. The mean difference or standardised mean difference with 95% CIs is used in the computation of continuous variables to synthesise data.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required due to the nature of this meta-analysis, which is based on published papers. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal once we finish this study.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020180214.

scholarly journals Traditional Chinese medicine for treating novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) pneumonia: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuxi Li ◽  
Xiaobo Liu ◽  
Liuxue Guo ◽  
Juan Li ◽  
Dongling Zhong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Chinese Medicine ◽  
Traditional Chinese Medicine ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
World Health ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Academic Degree ◽  
Novel Coronavirus

Abstract Background: A new type of coronavirus, 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), is causing an increasing number of cases of pneumonia and has been declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization on 30 January 2020. The virus first appeared in Wuhan, China in late December 2019 and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is being used for its treatment. This systematic review and meta-analysis will assess studies of the effects of TCM in 2019-nCoV-infected pneumonia (NCIP).Methods: We will search electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP) and Wanfang database using keywords related to NCIP and TCM. Reference lists of relevant trials and reviews will be searched. We will manually search grey literature, such as conference proceedings and academic degree dissertations, and trial registries. Two independent reviewers will screen studies, extract data and evaluate risk of bias. Data analysis will be conducted using Review Manager software (version 5.3.5) and R software (version 3.6.1).Discussion: This study will provide a high-quality synthesis of the effects of TCM for NCIP. The use of TCM for treatment or prevention of these novel viral infections affecting the respiratory tract will be investigated.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020168004

scholarly journals Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of respiratory rehabilitation following intensive care unit discharge for COVID-19 survivors

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e041184
Author(s):  
Dan Wang ◽  
Jin Li ◽  
Feilong Zhu ◽  
Qianqin Hong ◽  
Ming Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Respiratory Rehabilitation

IntroductionBoth physical and mental disorders may be exacerbated in patients with COVID-19 due to the experience of receiving intensive care; undergoing prolonged mechanical ventilation, sedation, proning and paralysis. Pulmonary rehabilitation is aimed to improve dyspnoea, relieve anxiety and depression, reduce the incidence of related complications, as well as prevent and improve dysfunction. However, the impact of respiratory rehabilitation on discharged patients with COVID-19 is currently unclear, especially on patients who have been mechanically ventilated over 24 hours. Therefore, we aim to investigate the efficacy of respiratory rehabilitation programmes, initiated after discharge from the intensive care unit, on the physical and mental health and health-related quality of life in critical patients with COVID-19.Methods and analysisWe have registered the protocol on PROSPERO and in the process of drafting it, we strictly followed the checklist of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Potocols. We will search the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WanFang, VIP information databases and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database. Additionally, ongoing trials in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov and ISRCTN registry will be searched as well. Studies in English or Chinese and from any country will be accepted regardless of study design. Two review authors will independently extract data and assess the quality of included studies. Continuous data are described as standard mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs. Dichotomous data from randomised controlled trials are described as risk ratio(RR) with 95% CIs; otherwise, it is described as odds ratio(OR) with 95% CIs. I2 and the Cochrane’s Q statistic will be used to conduct heterogeneity assessment. The quality of evidence of main outcomes will be evaluated according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation(GRADE) criteria. When included studies are sufficient, we will conduct subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis; the publication bias will be statistically analysed using a funnel plot analysis and Egger’s test.Ethics and disseminationOur review, planning to include published studies, does not need the request to the ethical committee. The final results of this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal after completion.Patient and public involvementNo patient involved.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020186791.

scholarly journals The effect of Pressure- or Volume- controlled ventilation on inflammatory factors of patients undergoing surgery with the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Jiao ◽  
Mingyuan Chen ◽  
Xi Luo ◽  
Chan Chen ◽  
Jin LIU
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Inflammatory Factors ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Inflammatory Factor ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Continuous Variables ◽  
Medical Database ◽  
Novel Coronavirus

Abstract Objective During the COVID-19 pandemic, some patients with novel coronavirus pneumonia may have concurrent disease that must be accepted surgery. However, the extensive inflammatory response existed in this population, especially in the lungs. And various ventilation could affect the inflammation of lungs. Therefore, how to choose the ventilation mode to reduce the effect of mechanical ventilation on inflammation is an important clinical practice. We aim to investigate the effect of different ventilation modes on inflammatory factor levels of patients undergoing surgery with COVID-19 through this systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods and analysis This systematic review and meta-analysis have been registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The PubMed, Embase via Ovid, Chinese Biological Medical Database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) will be searched from inception to date to find relevant studies. In addition, the relevant literature was also hand-searched. Two searchers independently selected the studies, extracted data and assessed the quality of studies included. The Review Manager 5.4 software (The Cochrane library,Oxford,England) will be used for data synthesis and meta-analysis. Continuous variables were embodied by Weight Mean Differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Dichotomous outcomes were embodied by Odds ratio with 95%CI. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval is not required because the data was collected from the published studies. Finally, the results of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021251937

scholarly journals Acupuncture for biliary colic: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e041931
Author(s):  
Ning Sun ◽  
Wenwei Zuo ◽  
Yuanfang Zhou ◽  
Ying Cheng ◽  
Shirui Cheng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Biliary Colic ◽  
Common Symptom ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
China National Knowledge Infrastructure

IntroductionBiliary colic (BC) is a severe pain associated with nausea and vomiting, which is the most common symptom among the gallstone population. This protocol proposes a methodology for conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis that aims to assess the benefits and safety of acupuncture in patients with BC.Methods and analysisClinical trials will be identified through nine databases from inception to December 2020, using Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), CINAHL, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), VIP Database and Wanfang Database. Search words will be used for the BC and acupuncture. The analysis would include randomised, controlled, clinical trials of adults with BC that were published in either Chinese or English. The primary outcome is to measure pain relief. Two or three reviewers should be in charge of study selection, data extraction and evaluating the risk of bias. RevMan software (V.5.4) will be used to perform the assessment of the risk of bias and data synthesis.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval will not be required for this review, as it will only involve the collection of literature previously published. The results of this meta-analysis will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal or relevant conference, through publication.Trial registration numberCRD42020167510.

scholarly journals Traditional Chinese herbal medicine for treating novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuxi Li ◽  
Xiaobo Liu ◽  
Liuxue Guo ◽  
Juan Li ◽  
Dongling Zhong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Herbal Medicine ◽  
Chinese Herbal Medicine ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
World Health ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Traditional Chinese Herbal Medicine ◽  
Chinese Herbal ◽  
Novel Coronavirus

Abstract Background A new type of coronavirus, novel coronavirus (COVID-19), is causing an increasing number of cases of pneumonia and was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization on 30 January 2020. The virus first appeared in Wuhan, China in late December 2019 and traditional Chinese herbal medicine is being used for its treatment. This systematic review and meta-analysis will assess studies of the effects of traditional Chinese herbal medicine in COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods We will search electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP) and Wanfang database using keywords related to COVID-19 and traditional Chinese herbal medicine. Reference lists of relevant trials and reviews will be searched. We will manually search grey literature, such as conference proceedings and academic degree dissertations, and trial registries. Two independent reviewers will screen studies (XL and DZ), extract data (YL and LG) and evaluate risk of bias (YL and DZ). Data analysis will be conducted using Review Manager software (version 5.3.5) and R software (version 3.6.1). Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed using a standard Chi-square test with a significance level of P < 0.10. Biases associated with study size (e.g. publication bias) will be investigated using funnel plots, the Egger 's test and Begg 's test and Trim and Fill analysis. Discussion This study will provide a high-quality synthesis of the effects of traditional Chinese herbal medicine for COVID-19. The use of traditional Chinese herbal medicine for treatment or prevention of these novel viral infections affecting the pneumonia will be investigated. Systematic review registration PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020168004

scholarly journals Association between IL-6 and severe disease and mortality in COVID-19 disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. postgradmedj-2021-139939
Author(s):  
Xiaohui Liu ◽  
Hongwei Wang ◽  
Si Shi ◽  
Jinling Xiao
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Multiple Organ ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
China National Knowledge Infrastructure ◽  
Meta Regression Analysis

BackgroundSo far, SARS-CoV-2 is the seventh coronavirus found to infect humans and cause disease with quite a strong infectivity. Patients diagnosed as severe or critical cases are prone to multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, acute respiratory distress syndrome and even death. Proinflammatory cytokine IL-6 has been reported to be associated with the severity of disease and mortality in patients with COVID-19.ObjectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out to evaluate the association between IL-6 and severe disease and mortality in COVID-19 disease.MethodsA systematic literature search using China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang databases, China Science and Technology Journal Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature, Embase, PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed from inception until 16 January 2021.Results12 studies reported the value of IL-6 for predicting the severe disease in patients with COVID-19. The pooled area under the curve (AUC) was 0.85 (95% CI 0.821 to 0.931). 5 studies elaborated the predictive value of IL-6 on mortality. The pooled sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 0.15 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.17, I2=98.9%), 0.73 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.79, I2=91.8%) and 0.531 (95% CI 0.451 to 0.612), respectively. Meta-regression analysis showed that country, technique used, cut-off, sample, study design and detection time did not contribute to the heterogeneity of mortality.ConclusionIL-6 is an adequate predictor of severe disease in patients infected with the COVID-19. The finding of current study may guide clinicians and healthcare providers in identifying potentially severe or critical patients with COVID-19 at the initial stage of the disease. Moreover, we found that only monitoring IL-6 levels does not seem to predict mortality and was not associated with COVID-19’s mortality.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021233649.

scholarly journals Tolerability of statin-based management of patients with a history of statin-associated muscle symptoms: protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e052341
Author(s):  
Fanny Villoz ◽  
Christina Lyko ◽  
Cinzia Del Giovane ◽  
Nicolas Rodondi ◽  
Manuel R Blum
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Clinical Issue ◽  
Standard Data ◽  
Evaluation Approach ◽  
History Of

IntroductionStatin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMSs) are a major clinical issue in the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. Current guidelines advise various approaches mainly based on expert opinion. We will lead a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the tolerability and acceptability and effectiveness of statin-based therapy management of patients with a history of SAMS. We aim to provide evidence on the tolerability and different strategies of statin-based management of patients with a history of SAMS.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies with a control group. We will search in Data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov and Proquest from inception until April 2021. Two independent reviewers will carry out the study selection based on eligibility criteria. We will extract data following a standard data collection form. The reviewers will use the Cochrane Collaboration’s tools and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to appraise the study risk of bias. Our primary outcome will be tolerability and our secondary outcomes will be acceptability and effectiveness. We will conduct a qualitative analysis of all included studies. In addition, if sufficient and homogeneous data are available, we will conduct quantitative analysis. We will synthesise dichotomous data using OR with 95% CI and continuous outcomes by using mean difference or standardised mean difference (with 95% CI). We will determine heterogeneity visually with forest plots and quantitatively with I2 and Q-test. We will summarise the confidence in the quantitative estimate by using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.Ethics and disseminationAs a systematic review of literature without collection of new clinical data, there will be no requirement for ethical approval. We will disseminate findings through peer-reviewed publications.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020202619.

scholarly journals Does propofol ameliorate occurrence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction after general anaesthesia? A protocol of systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xi Zhao ◽  
Ze-qing Huang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cognitive Dysfunction ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Postoperative Cognitive Dysfunction ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
China National Knowledge Infrastructure

Abstract Background Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a common condition after general anesthesia (GA). Previous studies have reported that propofol can ameliorate the occurrence of such disorder. However, its results are still inconsistent. Therefore, this systematic review will assess the efficacy and safety of propofol on POCD after GA. Methods Literature sources will be sought from inception to the present in Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the administration of propofol on POCD after GA. All searches will be carried out without limitations to language and publication status. Outcomes comprise of cognitive impairments changes, impairments in short-term memory, concentration, language comprehension, social integration, quality of life, and adverse events. Cochrane risk of bias tool will be utilized to assess study quality. We will evaluate the quality of evidence for each outcome using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. A narrative synthesis or a meta-analysis will be undertaken as appropriate. Discussion This study will systematically and comprehensively search literature and integrate evidence on the efficacy and safety of propofol on POCD after GA. Our findings will be of interest to clinicians and health-related policy makers. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020164096

scholarly journals Protocol for a systematic review of research on HPV and cervical cancer in Ghana, up until the year 2017: informing research and policy direction on cervical cancer prevention in Ghana

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. e020183
Author(s):  
Adolf Kofi Awua ◽  
Edna Dzifa Doe
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Cervical Cancer Prevention ◽  
Specific Information ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Digital Collections ◽  
The Status

IntroductionFor a country that lacks a national cervical cancer screening/prevention programme, there is the need to assess the volume of country-specific information, and the status of research on HPV and cervical cancer, in order to provide evidence that will inform policy and further research. The aim of this protocol is to plan an intended systematic review, which is to identify research gaps, prevent unnecessary duplication of work and enable collaboration.Methods and analysisThis protocol, developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols statement and registered by PROSPERO (CRD42017075583), will apply a 13-point eligibility criteria to screening and selecting peer-reviewed research articles and grey literature. These will be obtained from searches in databases, including, among others, those of the National Centre for Biotechnology Information, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar and the digital collections database of research publications of Universities in Ghana. Collected data will be aggregated and summarised according to emerging themes and simple descriptive statistics.Ethics and disseminationThe study will use publicly available data and will not identify authors of the publication by name. In light of these and as has been indicted, research ethics clearance is not required for evidence syntheses in such reviews. The review will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at local and internal conferences as the opportunity becomes available.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017075583.

The effects of non-clinician guidance on effectiveness and process outcomes of digital mental health interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Calista Leung ◽  
Julia Pei ◽  
Kristen Hudec ◽  
Farhud Shams ◽  
Richard Munthali ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychosocial Support ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Process Outcomes ◽  
Mental Health Interventions

BACKGROUND Digital mental health interventions are increasingly prevalent in the current context of rapidly evolving technology, and research indicates that they yield effectiveness outcomes comparable to in-person treatment. Integrating professionals (i.e. psychologists, physicians) into digital mental health interventions has been common, and the inclusion of guidance within programs can increase adherence to interventions. However, employing professionals to enhance mental health programs may undermine the scalability of digital interventions. Therefore, delegating guidance tasks to paraprofessionals (peer supporters, technicians, lay counsellors, or other non-clinicians) can help reduce costs and increase accessibility. OBJECTIVE This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the effectiveness, adherence, and other process outcomes of non-clinician guided digital mental health interventions. METHODS Four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PSYCInfo) were searched for randomized controlled trials published between 2010 and 2020 examining digital mental health interventions. Three journals focused on digital intervention were also hand searched and grey literature was searched using ProQuest and the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL). Two researchers independently assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2. Data were collected on effectiveness, adherence, and other process outcomes, and meta-analyses were conducted for effectiveness and adherence outcomes. Non-clinician guided interventions were compared with treatment as usual, clinician-guided interventions, and unguided interventions. RESULTS Thirteen studies qualified for inclusion. Results indicate that non-clinician guided interventions yielded higher post-treatment effectiveness outcomes when compared to conditions involving control programs (e.g. online psychoeducation, monitored attention control) or waitlist controls (k=7, Hedges g=-0.73 (95% CI -1.08 to -0.38)). There are significant differences between non-clinician guided interventions and unguided interventions as well (k=6, Hedges g=-0.17 (95% CI -0.23 to -0.11)). In addition, non-clinician guided interventions did not differ in effectiveness from clinician-guided interventions (k=3, Hedges g=0.08 (95% CI -0.01 to 0.17)). These results suggest that guided digital mental health interventions are helpful to improve mental health outcomes regardless of the qualification, and that the presence of a non-clinician guide improves effectiveness outcomes more than no guidance. Non-clinician guided interventions did not yield significantly different effects on adherence outcomes when compared with unguided interventions (k=3, OR 1.58 (95% CI 0.51 to 4.92)), although a general trend of improved adherence was observed within non-clinician guided interventions. CONCLUSIONS Integrating paraprofessionals and non-clinicians appear to improve outcomes of digital mental health interventions, and may also enhance adherence outcomes (though the trend was nonsignificant). Further research should focus on the specific types of tasks these paraprofessionals can successfully provide (i.e. psychosocial support, therapeutic alliance, technical augmentation) and their associated outcomes. CLINICALTRIAL The protocol is preregistered on PROSPERO (CRD42020191226).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document