Efficacy and safety of mesenchymal stem cells for the treatment of patients infected with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

IntroductionTo date, no specific antivirus drugs or vaccines have been available to prevent or treat the COVID-19 pandemic. Mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) therapy may be a promising therapeutic approach that reduces the high mortality in critical cases. This protocol is proposed for a systematic review and meta-analysis that aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of MSC therapy on patients with COVID-19.Methods and analysisTen databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Scientific Journals Database (VIP), Wanfang database, China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) and Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System (SinoMed) will be searched from inception to 1 December 2020. All published randomised controlled trials, clinical controlled trials and case series that meet the prespecified eligibility criteria will be included. The primary outcomes include mortality, incidence and severity of adverse events, respiratory improvement, days from ventilator, duration of fever, progression rate from mild or moderate to severe, improvement of such serious symptoms as difficulty breathing or shortness of breath, chest pain or pressure, and loss of speech or movement, biomarkers of laboratory examination and changes in CT. The secondary outcomes include dexamethasone doses and quality of life. Two reviewers will independently perform study selection, data extraction and assessment of bias risk. Data synthesis will be conducted using RevMan software (V.5.3.5). If necessary, subgroup and sensitivity analysis will be performed. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system will be used to assess the strength of evidence.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not necessary since no individual patient or privacy data have been collected. The results of this review will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal or an academic conference presentation.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020190079.

Download Full-text

The Efficacy and Safety of Simple-Needling Therapy for Treating Ankylosing Spondylitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine ◽

10.1155/2020/4276380 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 2020 ◽

pp. 1-10 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Yichen Xuan ◽

Hui Huang ◽

Yiyong Huang ◽

Duanyong Liu ◽

Xiuwu Hu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Ankylosing Spondylitis ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Chinese Literature ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Biomedical Literature ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Randomized Controlled

Background. Clinical investigators have found that the use of needling in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) has a good clinical application prospect in recent years. However, these studies were insufficient to provide evidence for the efficacy and safety of simple-needling for AS. So, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of simple-needling for treating AS. Methods. We searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), Wangfang database (Wanfang), Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP), and any other gray literature sources for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used simple-needling to treat AS before June 2019 with the language restriction of Chinese and English. Researchers evaluated the retrieved literature studies and extracted valid data according to relevant requirements and used RevMan5.3 software for meta-analysis. Results. A total of 10 studies were included, all of which were Chinese literature studies, involving 729 patients. Compared with the control groups, simple-needling groups had a better effect on the clinical effective rate (RR = 1.20, 95% CI (1.11, 1.29), P<0.00001), TCM syndrome score (MD = −5.26, 95% CI (−5.99, −4.53), P<0.00001), symptom score (MD = −8.08, 95% CI (−10.18, −5.97), P<0.00001), and Schober test outcome (MD = 0.39, 95% CI (0.15, 0.64), P=0.002). Sensibility analysis was based on the leave-one-out cross-validation procedure, and the results showed no significant changes. Most studies did not describe adverse reactions. The funnel plot suggested publication bias on clinical effectiveness. Conclusions. This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that simple-needling was effective as an intervention for AS. However, due to the low quality of the methodology of included studies, the designs of clinical trials were not rigorously standardized. Therefore, it is necessary to carry out multiquality RCTs for verification.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and Safety of Extracorporeal shock wave therapy in Treatment of Hypertrophic Scars and Keloids: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

10.37766/inplasy2021.11.0023 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Yanhui Yang ◽

◽

Yun Luo ◽

Jingwen Kang ◽

Zhanbo Zhao ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Biomedical Literature ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Hypertrophic Scars ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Comprehensive Treatments

Review question / Objective: The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials is to evaluate quantitatively the efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shockwave therapies (ESWT) combined comprehensive treatments on hypertrophic scars and keloids compared with comprehensive treatments alone and provide clinicians with an evidence base for their clinical decision making. Information sources: We will search all English and Chinese language articles indexed in PubMed, Medline, the Excerpta Medica database (Embase), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Library, Physiotherapy Evidence Database(PEDro), Chinese biomedical literature service system(sinomed) before October 2021. In addition to these databases, Google Scholar and the lists of references will be used to carry out citation tracking of the selected studies for identifying any other eligible studies that could have been missed.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal footbaths for the treatment of dysmenorrhea: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

PLoS ONE ◽

10.1371/journal.pone.0250685 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 (5) ◽

pp. e0250685

Author(s):

Min Xiao ◽

Lizhou Liu ◽

Steve Tumilty ◽

Dan Liu ◽

Yanyan You ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Evaluation System ◽

Rating Scale ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Biomedical Literature ◽

Current Evidence ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Chinese Herbal

Background Chinese herbal footbaths are an external therapy of traditional Chinese medicine that has been widely used to treat dysmenorrhea. This review aims to systematically evaluate its efficacy and safety for the treatment of dysmenorrhea. Methods Databases of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CIHAHL, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI), Chinese Scientific Journals Database (VIP), Wanfang Database, China Biomedical Literature Database(CBM), and Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System (SinoMed) will be searched from the inception to September 30, 2020. The eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be identified and included. The primary outcomes include pain intensity measured by validated scales of visual analog scale, numeric rating scale, and response rate of symptom reduction. The secondary outcomes are scores on validated pain questionnaires, quality of life measured by SF-36 or other validated scales, and adverse events. Study selection, data extraction, and assessment of bias risk will be conducted by two reviewers independently. RevMan software (V.5.3.5) will be utilized to perform data synthesis. Subgroup and sensitivity analysis will be performed when necessary. The strength of the evidence will be evaluated with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation System. Results A high-quality synthesis of current evidence of Chinese herbal footbaths for patients with dysmenorrhea will be provided in this study. Conclusion This systematic review will provide evidence of whether Chinese herbal footbaths are an effective and safe intervention for the treatment of dysmenorrhea. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020188256.

Download Full-text

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

Systematic Reviews ◽

10.1186/s13643-021-01610-y ◽

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

Download Full-text

Efficacy and safety of omalizumab in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047344 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (9) ◽

pp. e047344

Author(s):

Qingwu Wu ◽

Lianxiong Yuan ◽

Huijun Qiu ◽

Xinyue Wang ◽

Xuekun Huang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Chronic Rhinosinusitis ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Nasal Polyps ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Randomised Controlled

ObjectivesTo assess the efficacy and safety of omalizumab for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and to identify evidence gaps that will guide future research on omalizumab for CRSwNP.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesA comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library on 13 October 2020.Eligibility criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing omalizumab with placebo, given for at least 16 weeks in adult patients with CRSwNP.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent authors screened search results, extracted data and assessed studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data were pooled using the inverse-variance method and expressed as mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was assessed by the χ2 test and the I2 statistic.ResultsA total of four RCTs involving 303 participants were identified. When comparing omalizumab to placebo, there was a significant difference in Nasal Polyps Score (MD=−1.20; 95% CI −1.48 to −0.92), Nasal Congestion Score (MD=−0.67; 95% CI −0.86 to −0.48), Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (MD=−15.62; 95% CI −19.79 to −11.45), Total Nasal Symptom Score (MD=−1.84; 95% CI −2.43 to −1.25) and reduced need for surgery (risk ratio (RR)=5.61; 95% CI 1.99 to 15.81). Furthermore, there was no difference in the risk of serious adverse events ((RR=1.40; 95% CI 0.29 to 6.80), adverse events (RR=0.83; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.15) and rescue systemic corticosteroid (RR=0.52; 95% CI 0.17 to 1.61).ConclusionsThis was the first meta-analysis that identified omalizumab significantly improved endoscopic, clinical and patient-reported outcomes in adults with moderate to severe CRSwNP and it was safe and well tolerated.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020207639.

Download Full-text

Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis: Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Biosimilars, Biologics and JAK1 Inhibitors for Active Crohn Disease

Frontiers in Pharmacology ◽

10.3389/fphar.2021.655865 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 ◽

Author(s):

Guozhi Wu ◽

Yuan Yang ◽

Min Liu ◽

Yuping Wang ◽

Qinghong Guo

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Crohn Disease ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Certolizumab Pegol ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Maintenance Of Remission

Background: Crohn disease (CD) is a chronic inflammatory disease that affects quality of life. There are several drugs available for the treatment of CD, but their relative efficacy is unknown due to a lack of high-quality head-to-head randomized controlled trials.Aim: To perform a mixed comparison of the efficacy and safety of biosimilars, biologics and JAK1 inhibitors for CD.Methods: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, embase and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to Dec. 28, 2020. Only RCTs that compared the efficacy or safety of biosimilars, biologics and JAK1 inhibitors with placebo or another active agent for CD were included in the comparative analysis. Efficacy outcomes were the induction of remission, maintenance of remission and steroid-free remission, and safety outcomes were serious adverse events (AEs) and infections. The Bayesian method was utilized to compare the treatments. The registration number is CRD42020187807.Results: Twenty-eight studies and 29 RCTs were identified in our systematic review. The network meta-analysis demonstrated that infliximab and adalimumab were superior to certolizumab pegol (OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.35–4.97; OR 2.96, 95% CI 1.57–5.40, respectively) and tofacitinib (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.27–5.97; OR 3.10, 95% CI 1.47–6.52, respectively) and revealed the superiority of CT-P13 compared with placebo (OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.31–7.59) for the induction of remission. Infliximab (OR 7.49, 95% CI 1.85–34.77), adalimumab (OR 10.76, 95% CI 2.61–52.35), certolizumab pegol (OR 4.41, 95% CI 1.10–21.08), vedolizumab (OR 4.99, 95% CI 1.19–25.54) and CT-P13 (OR 10.93, 95% CI 2.10–64.37) were superior to filgotinib for the maintenance of remission. Moreover, infliximab (OR 3.80, 95% CI 1.49–10.23), adalimumab (OR 4.86, 95% CI 1.43–16.95), vedolizumab (OR 2.48, 95% CI 1.21–6.52) and CT-P13 (OR 5.15, 95% CI 1.05–27.58) were superior to placebo for steroid-free remission. Among all treatments, adalimumab ranked highest for the induction of remission, and CT-P13 ranked highest for the maintenance of remission and steroid-free remission.Conclusion: CT-P13 was more efficacious than numerous biological agents and JAK1 inhibitors and should be recommended for the treatment of CD. Further head-to-head RCTs are warranted to compare these drugs.

Download Full-text

Tuina for spasticity of poststroke: protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038705 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (12) ◽

pp. e038705

Author(s):

Qiongshuai Zhang ◽

Guangcheng Ji ◽

Fang Cao ◽

Yihan Sun ◽

Guanyu Hu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Short Form ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Biomedical Literature ◽

Primary Data ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Quality Of Life Scale

IntroductionSpasticity is a common complication of poststroke, tuina is a widely used rehabilitation treatment, although there is a lack of supportive evidence on efficacy and safety for patients with poststroke spasticity. The aim of this systematic review is to assess and synthesis evidence of efficacy and safety of tuina for spasticity of poststroke.Methods and analysisA comprehensive electronic search of EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Wiley, Springer, PEDro, Chinese Science Citation Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Chinese Scientific and Journal Database (VIP), Wanfang Database (Wanfang), Japanese medical database (CiNii), Korean Robotics Institute Summer Scholars and Thailand Thai-Journal Citation Index Centre will be conducted to search literatures of randomised controlled trials of tuina for spasticity of poststroke survivors range from the establishment to 1 January 2020.There is no time of publication limitations. The primary outcome will be measured with the Modified Ashworth Scale, and the second outcome will include Fugl-Meyer Assessment Scale, surface electromyogram RMS value, the Modified Barthel Index, Stroke Specific Quality of Life Scale, quality of life 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey and Visual Analogue Scale. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions will be used to assess the risk of bias, and GRADE will be used to access the confidence in cumulative evidence. The protocol will be conducted according to approach and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols 2015.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval will not be required, for no primary data of individual patients were collected. We will publish the findings in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020163384.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and Safety of Keluoxin Capsule in the Treatment of Diabetic Kidney Disease

10.21203/rs.3.rs-1111126/v1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Jingxin Zhou ◽

Wenhua Zhang ◽

Jie Yang ◽

Qiaoqiao Liu ◽

Yizhen Lu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Kidney Disease ◽

Diabetic Kidney Disease ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Biomedical Literature ◽

Health Concern ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Diabetic Kidney

Abstract Background: Diabetic kidney disease (DKD), which is a serious complication of diabetes and the leading cause of end-stage renal disease, becomes a major health concern worldwide. Keluoxin capsule, a Chinese patent medicine used for DKD, has been widely used in diabetic kidney disease, but its efficacy and safety have not yet been clarified. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarize the efficacy and safety of Keluoxin capsule in the treatment of DKD. Methods: A systematic literature search will be conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WANFANG database, VIP, SinoMED, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) to ensure all possible randomized controlled trials (RCT) studies on K eluoxin capsule to November 1, 2021. The primary outcome to be assessed will include the change in albuminuria and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), while secondary outcomes will be serum creatinine, blood urea nitrogen, glycated hemoglobin, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides, etc and adverse events. The quality of the included studies and the risk of bias will be independently assessed by two reviewers using the risk of bias assessment tool from Cochrane Handbook. We will conduct random-effects model meta-analysis using Review Manager software (Revman5.3). Discussion: This systematic review and meta-analysis will objectively evaluate the effect of Keluoxin capsule for DKD, and provide evidence for Keluoxin capsule in the treatment of DKD. Ethics and dissemination : Ethics approval is not required for this study. We aim to publish the results of this systematic review in a peer-reviewed journal. INPLASY registration number: INPLASY 2021110067.

Download Full-text

The efficacy and safety of compound glycyrrhizin combined with desloratadine in the treatment of chronic urticaria: protocol for a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

10.21203/rs.3.rs-29774/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Qiuyue Wang ◽

Xingxin Hu ◽

Mao Li ◽

Qian Luo ◽

Pingsheng Hao

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Chronic Urticaria ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Effective Rate ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Biomedical Literature ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Randomized Controlled

Abstract Background: Chronic urticaria (CU) is a common skin disease characterized by a short-term (<24 hours) spontaneous skin rash (urticaria) with or without angioedema that lasts longer than 6 weeks. CU is not life-threatening but has been shown to have a significant impact on the physical and mental health of patients. Because of chronic itching or physical discomfort in patients with CU, symptoms such as the repeated occurrence of red, swollen, itchy, anxiety, insomnia, and psychological stress are prone to occur. Whereas, there is no related systematic review and meta-analysis. Thus, this systematic review protocol aims to describe a systematic review and meta-analysis to testify the efficacy and safety of compound glycyrrhizin (CG) combined with desloratadine in the treatment of CU.Methods: Our systematic review will search all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for CG combined with desloratadine in the treatment of CU, electronically and manually, regardless of publication status and language, until January 14, 2020. Databases include PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), Chinese Science Journal Database (VIP Database) and Wanfang database. Other sources, including reference lists of identified publications and meeting minutes, will also be searched. Manually search for grey literature, including unpublished conference articles. The main outcomes contain the total effective rate, the urticaria activity score (UAS), Itching score, the chronic urticaria quality of life questionnaire (CU-Q2oL), or other validated symptom scores and the effective rate and adverse events from baseline to the end of studies. This study will provide a comprehensive review of the available evidence for the treatment of CU with this therapy. We will assess the risk of bias with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, narratively synthesize the extracted data and conduct a meta-analysis of studies with similar characteristics. Two independent raters will screen articles and assess the risk of bias.Discussion: This study will provide a high-quality synthesis of the effects of compound glycyrrhizin (CG) combined with desloratadine in the treatment of CU. We hope that this review will give more convincing proof to assist clinicians during the decision-making process when dealing with CU.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42020165478

Download Full-text

Acupuncture for breathlessness in advanced cancer: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054917 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (11) ◽

pp. e054917

Author(s):

Zihan Yin ◽

Tao Xu ◽

Mingsheng Sun ◽

Ling Zhao ◽

Fanrong Liang

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Advanced Cancer ◽

Sequential Analysis ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Biomedical Literature ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Trial Sequential Analysis ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register

IntroductionBreathlessness in advanced cancer, a frequent multicomponent and debilitating disorder, severely reduces function and quality of patients’ life. Multiple studies have shown that non-pharmacological therapies can effectively palliate breathlessness in advanced cancer. However, no systematic review has investigated the application of acupuncture, as a non-pharmacological treatment, for breathlessness in advanced cancer. A systematic review will be conducted to summarise evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of acupuncture as a therapeutic option for breathlessness in advanced cancer based on existing randomised controlled trials (RCTs).MethodsRCTs will be retrieved from nine scientific databases, including the MEDLINE via PubMed, Web of Science via the Web of Knowledge, Embase via Ovid, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials via the Cochrane Library, and Allied and Complementary Medicine Database via EBSCO, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, VIP Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database; three clinical registry platforms, including the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, NIH Clinical trials.gov and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, as well as from other sources. Studies published since inception of these databases to 1 August 2021 will be retrieved. Search terms will include breathlessness, cancer, acupuncture and RCT. Two investigators will independently select and extract data from RCTs and assess the risk of bias. The primary outcome, which is alleviation of breathlessness, will be assessed. Meta-analysis will be performed using RevMan V.5.4 and STATA V.15.0. The TSA 0.9.5.10 β software will be used to conduct trial sequential analysis. Finally, the quality of evidence from RCTs will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation System tool.Ethics and disseminationResults will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals or conference reports. Since this study involves acquisition of secondary data, ethical approval requirements will be waived.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021240085.

Download Full-text