scholarly journals Community-based non-pharmacological interventions for improving pain, disability and quality of life in pregnant women with musculoskeletal conditions: protocol for a systematic review with meta-analyses

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e042107
Author(s):  
Chinonso N Igwesi-Chidobe ◽  
Grace Nneoma Emmanuel ◽  
Obinna Chinedu Okezue
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Pharmacological Interventions ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Musculoskeletal Conditions ◽  
Pain Disability ◽  
Meta Analyses

IntroductionTwenty five per cent of pregnant women with musculoskeletal pain have disabling symptoms that negatively influence quality of life. Studies have reported varying effects of non-pharmacological interventions including exercise, manipulation and pelvic belts for pregnant women with musculoskeletal problems. The overall effectiveness and acceptability of these interventions is uncertain due to lack of synthesised evidence. This protocol is for the first systematic review of community-based non-pharmacological interventions for improving pain, disability and quality of life in pregnant women with musculoskeletal conditions from studies published until August 2020.Methods and analysisA detailed search of PubMed, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Global Index Medicus, African Index Medicus, African Journal Online, Western Pacific Region Index Medicus, Latin American and Caribbean Centre on Health Science Information, Index Medicus for South-East Asia Region, IRIS (WHO digital publications), British Library for Development Studies and Google Scholar. Additional studies will be located from the reference list of identified studies and relevant systematic reviews. The databases will be searched from inception to August 2020. Appraisal of study quality will be performed with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Data will be synthesised using a mixed-studies synthesis design—the convergent synthesis. The description of interventions in all study designs will be summarised narratively. Meta-analyses will be used to statistically summarise the effectiveness of interventions in randomised controlled trials and the factors that influence these. Other quantitative studies will be summarised narratively to answer the objectives. Thematic synthesis will be used to summarise results of qualitative studies. The outcomes of interest include pain, disability and quality of life. This paper is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols 2015 guidelines.Ethics and disseminationEthical clearance is not required. Findings will be presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020189535.

scholarly journals Pharmacological interventions for prevention and management of delirium in intensive care patients: a systematic overview of reviews and meta-analyses

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. e024562 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marija Barbateskovic ◽  
Sara Russo Krauss ◽  
Marie Oxenboell Collet ◽  
Laura Krone Larsen ◽  
Janus Christian Jakobsen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Pharmacological Interventions ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Icu Patients ◽  
Pharmacological Prevention ◽  
Meta Analyses

ObjectivesWe assessed the evidence from reviews and meta-analyses of randomised clinical trials on the effects of pharmacological prevention and management of delirium in intensive care unit (ICU) patients.MethodsWe searched for reviews in July 2017 in: Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, BIOSIS Previews, CINAHL and LILACS. We assessed whether reviews were systematic according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and assessed the methodological quality using ROBIS.Outcome measuresPrimary outcomes: all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, prevention of delirium and management of delirium. Secondary outcomes: quality of life; non-serious adverse events and cognitive function.ResultsWe included 378 reviews: 369 narrative reviews, eight semisystematic reviews which failed on a maximum of two arbitrary PRISMA criteria and one systematic review fulfilling all 27 PRISMA criteria. For the prevention of delirium, we identified the one systematic review and eight semisystematic reviews all assessing the effects of alpha-2-agonists. None found evidence of a reduction of mortality (systematic review RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.24). The systematic review and three semisystematic reviews found no evidence of an effect for the prevention of delirium (systematic review RR 0.85, 0.63 to 1.14). Conversely, four semisystematic reviews found a beneficial effect. Serious adverse events, quality of life, non-serious adverse events and cognitive function were not assessed. We did not identify any systematic or semisystematic reviews addressing other pharmacological interventions for the prevention of delirium. For the management of manifest delirium, we did not identify any systematic or semisystematic review assessing any pharmacological agents.ConclusionBased on systematic reviews, the evidence for the use of pharmacological interventions for prevention or management of delirium is poor or sparse. A systematic review with low risk of bias assessing the effects of pharmacological prevention of delirium and management of manifest delirium in ICU patients is urgently needed.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42016046628.

Is Exercise a Useful Intervention in the Treatment of Alcohol Use Disorder? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 520-537
Author(s):  
Fatih Gür ◽  
Ganime Can Gür
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Alcohol Consumption ◽  
Alcohol Use ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Exercise Interventions ◽  
Meta Analyses

Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effects of exercise on individuals with alcohol use disorders (AUDs) across multiple health outcomes. Data Sources: PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, Academic Search complete, Sport Discuss, and ERIC databases. Study Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria: Interventional studies published between 2000 and 2018 focused on evaluating the effectiveness of exercise interventions in adults with AUD. Data Extraction: This protocol was prepared using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses protocols standard and the Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews of Observational Studies guidelines. Data Synthesis: Physical activity levels/fitness [VO2 max (Oxygen Uptake) and HRmax (Maximum Heart Rate)], levels of depression, anxiety, self-efficacy, quality of life, and alcohol consumption (number of standard drinks consumed per day and per week). Results: The findings indicated that exercise significantly improved physical fitness as assessed by VO2 max (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.487, P < .05) and HRmax (SMD: 0.717, P < .05). Similarly, exercise significantly improved mental health as assessed by quality of life (SMD: 0.425, P < .05), but levels of depression, anxiety, self-efficacy, and alcohol consumption did not change significantly. Aerobic exercise alleviated depression and anxiety symptoms more than that of yoga and mixed types. Duration of exercise also had a similar effect on anxiety and depression. Conclusions: Exercise can be an effective and persistent adjunctive treatment for individuals with AUDs.

scholarly journals Tools to assess the measurement properties of quality of life instruments: a meta-review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. e022829 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonia Lorente ◽  
Jaume Vives ◽  
Carme Viladrich ◽  
Josep-Maria Losilla
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Measurement Standards ◽  
Meta Review ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Meta Analyses

IntroductionUsing specific tools to assess the measurement properties of health status instruments is recommended both to standardise the review process and to improve the methodological quality of systematic reviews. However, depending on the measurement standards on which these tools are developed, the approach to appraise the measurement properties of instruments may vary. For this reason, the present meta-review aims to: (1) identify systematic reviews assessing the measurement properties of instruments evaluating health-related quality of life (HRQoL); (2) identify the tools applied to assess the measurement properties of HRQoL instruments; (3) describe the characteristics of the tools applied to assess the measurement properties of HRQoL instruments; (4) identify the measurement standards on which these tools were developed or conform to and (5) compare the similarities and differences among the identified measurement standards.Methods and analysisA systematic review will be conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols Guidelines. Electronic search will be carried out on bibliographic databases, including PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Psychological Information, SCOPUS, Web of Science, COSMIN database and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, being limited by time (2008–2018) and language (English). Descriptive analyses of different aspects of tools applied to evaluate the measurement properties of HRQoL instruments will be presented; the different measurement standards will be described and some recommendations about the methodological and research applications will be made.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not necessary for systematic review protocols. The results will be disseminated by its publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at a relevant conference.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017065232

Psychological and Cognitive Aspects of Borderline Intellectual Functioning

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 159-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bastianina Contena ◽  
Stefano Taddei
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Intellectual Functioning ◽  
Clinical Impact ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Borderline Intellectual Functioning ◽  
General Quality ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Over Time

Abstract. Borderline Intellectual Functioning (BIF) refers to a global IQ ranging from 71 to 84, and it represents a condition of clinical attention for its association with other disorders and its influence on the outcomes of treatments and, in general, quality of life and adaptation. Furthermore, its definition has changed over time causing a relevant clinical impact. For this reason, a systematic review of the literature on this topic can promote an understanding of what has been studied, and can differentiate what is currently attributable to BIF from that which cannot be associated with this kind of intellectual functioning. Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria, we have conducted a review of the literature about BIF. The results suggest that this condition is still associated with mental retardation, and only a few studies have focused specifically on this condition.

scholarly journals Duloxetine versus ‘active’ placebo, placebo or no intervention for major depressive disorder; a protocol for a systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Faiza Siddiqui ◽  
Marija Barbateskovic ◽  
Sophie Juul ◽  
Kiran Kumar Katakam ◽  
Klaus Munkholm ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Sequential Analysis ◽  
Citation Index ◽  
Trial Sequential Analysis ◽  
Random Errors ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background Major depression significantly impairs quality of life, increases the risk of suicide, and poses tremendous economic burden on individuals and societies. Duloxetine, a serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, is a widely prescribed antidepressant. The effects of duloxetine have, however, not been sufficiently assessed in earlier systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Methods/design A systematic review will be performed including randomised clinical trials comparing duloxetine with ‘active’ placebo, placebo or no intervention for adults with major depressive disorder. Bias domains will be assessed, an eight-step procedure will be used to assess if the thresholds for clinical significance are crossed. We will conduct meta-analyses. Trial sequential analysis will be conducted to control random errors, and the certainty of the evidence will be assessed using GRADE. To identify relevant trials, we will search Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica database, PsycINFO, Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index—Science and Conference Proceedings Citation Index—Social Science & Humanities. We will also search Chinese databases and Google Scholar. We will search all databases from their inception to the present. Two review authors will independently extract data and perform risk of bias assessment. Primary outcomes will be the difference in mean depression scores on Hamilton Depression Rating Scale between the intervention and control groups and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes will be suicide, suicide-attempts, suicidal ideation, quality of life and non-serious adverse events. Discussion No former systematic review has systematically assessed the beneficial and harmful effects of duloxetine taking into account both the risks of random errors and the risks of systematic errors. Our review will help clinicians weigh the benefits of prescribing duloxetine against its adverse effects and make informed decisions. Systematic review registration PROSPERO 2016 CRD42016053931

scholarly journals Women in surgery: a systematic review of 25 years

BMJ Leader ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. leader-2019-000199
Author(s):  
Charleen Singh ◽  
Caitlin Loseth ◽  
Noordeen Shoqirat
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Work Life ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Leadership Roles ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Life Balance ◽  
Surgical Residency ◽  
Meta Analyses

The number of women entering medicine significantly increased over the last decades. Currently, over half of the medical students are women but less than half are applying to surgery and even less go on to surgical specialties. Even fewer women are seen in leadership roles throughout the profession of surgery and surgical residency. Our purpose of the literature review is to identify any themes, which would provide insight to the current phenomenon. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analyses method for a systematic review of the literature over a 20-year period (1998–2018). Five broad themes were identified: education and recruitment, career development, impact of/on life around the globe and surgical subspecialties as areas of barriers for women entering or considering surgery. The systematic review suggests there are opportunities to improve and encourage women entering the profession of surgery as well as the quality of life for surgeons. Creating systems for mentorship across programmes, having policies to support work–life balance and recognising surgical training overlaps with childbearing years are key opportunities for improvement. Improving the current status in surgery will require direction from leadership.

scholarly journals Evaluating measures of quality of life in adult scoliosis: a protocol for a systematic review and narrative synthesis

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
James E. Archer ◽  
Charles Baird ◽  
Adrian Gardner ◽  
Alison B. Rushton ◽  
Nicola R. Heneghan
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Adult Scoliosis ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Narrative Synthesis

Abstract Background Adult scoliosis represents a distinct subgroup of scoliosis patients for whom the diagnosis can have a large impact on their health-related quality of life (HR-QOL). Therefore, HR-QOL patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential to assess disease progression and the impact of interventions. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the measurement properties of HR-QOL PROMs in adult scoliosis patients. Methods We will conduct a literature search, from their inception onwards, of multiple electronic databases including AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, PsychINFO and PubMed. The searches will be performed in two stages. For both stages of the search, participants will be aged 18 and over with a diagnosis of scoliosis. The primary outcome of interest in the stage one searches will be studies which use PROMs to investigate HR-QOL as defined by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) taxonomy, the secondary outcome will be to assess the frequency of use of the various PROMs. In stage two, the primary outcome of interest will be studies which assess the measurement properties of the HR-QOL PROMs identified in stage one. No specific measurement property will be given priority. No planned secondary outcomes have been identified but will be reported if discovered. In stage one, the only restriction on study design will be the exclusion of systematic reviews. In Stage two the only restriction on study design will be the exclusion of full-text articles not available in the English language. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations and abstract data. Potential conflicts will be resolved through discussion. The study methodological quality (or risk of bias) will be appraised using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. The overall strength of the body of evidence will then be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. A narrative synthesis will be provided with information presented in the main text and tables to summarise and explain the characteristics and findings of the included studies. The narrative synthesis will explore the evidence for currently used PROMs in adult scoliosis patients and any areas that require further study. Discussion The review will help clinicians and researchers identify a HR-QOL PROM for use in patients with adult scoliosis. Findings from the review will be published and disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal and conference presentations. Systematic review registration This systematic review has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), reference number: CRD42020219437

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document