scholarly journals Values and other decisional factors regarding treatment of hypercalcaemia of malignancy: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. e051141
Author(s):  
Aya Bassatne ◽  
Maya Rahme ◽  
Thomas Piggott ◽  
M. Hassan Murad ◽  
Layal Hneiny ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Drug Class ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Pharmacological Therapy ◽  
Drug Selection ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Review Protocol

IntroductionHypercalcaemia of malignancy (HCM) is the second most common cause of hypercalcaemia and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Several treatment options are available including pharmacological therapy with bisphosphonates, denosumab, glucocorticoids and calcimimetics, as well as conventional therapy with hydration and possibly calcitonin. While guidelines have previously considered treatment effects, no guideline has yet considered a range of contextual factors impacting recommendations for the management. The aim of this study was to summarise the available evidence on important decisional factors for the development of guidelines for the treatment of HCM. These include patient’s values and preferences, cost, acceptability, feasibility and equity.Methods and analysisThis protocol is registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42021264371). This is a systematic review of observational studies, case series, trials, reviews and qualitative studies involving treatment of adult patients with HCM. We will develop and execute two independent search strategies using five databases: PubMed, Medline (OVID), Embase.com, CINAHL (EBSCO) and Cochrane, and review their combined output. Two reviewers will screen titles and abstracts and full texts and will implement data abstraction from relevant studies independently and in duplicate. The outcomes of interest are the decisional factors that influence drug selection, with possible subgroup summaries by drug class or aetiology of HCM. We will present the data collected in a narrative and thematic approach.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not applicable for our study, since we will only collect data from available literature. This systematic review will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal when completed.

scholarly journals Patients’ values and other decisional factors regarding treatment of hypercalcemia of malignancy: A Systematic Review Protocol

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aya Bassatne ◽  
Maya Rahme ◽  
Thomas Piggott ◽  
Mohammad H Murad ◽  
Layal Hneiny ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Drug Class ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Pharmacological Therapy ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Drug Selection ◽  
Hypercalcemia Of Malignancy ◽  
Review Protocol

Abstract Background: Hypercalcemia of malignancy is the second most common cause of hypercalcemia and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Several treatment options are available including pharmacological therapy with bisphosphonates, denosumab, glucocorticoids, and calcimimetics, as well as conventional therapy with hydration and possibly calcitonin. While guidelines have previously considered treatment effects, no guideline has yet considered a range of contextual factors impacting recommendations for the management. Objective: The aim of this study is to summarize the available evidence on important decisional factors for the development of guidelines for the treatment of hypercalcemia of malignancy. These include patient’s values and preferences, cost, acceptability, feasibility, and equity. Methods/Design: This is a systematic review of observational studies, case series, trials, reviews and qualitative studies involving treatment of adult patients with hypercalcemia of malignancy. We developed and executed two independent search strategies using five databases: Pubmed, Medline (OVID), Embase.com, CINAHL (EBSCO) and Cochrane, and reviewed their combined output. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts and full texts and will implement data abstraction from relevant studies independently and in duplicate. The outcomes of interest are the decisional factors that influence drug selection, with possible subgroup analyses by drug class or etiology of hypercalcemia of malignancy. We will present the data collected in a narrative and thematic approach. Discussion: This systematic review will identify important treatment decisional factors, and will assist guidelines panels, physicians and patients to decide on therapeutic options based on the current evidence.

scholarly journals Patients’ values and other decisional factors regarding treatment of hypercalcemia of malignancy: A Systematic Review Protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aya Bassatne ◽  
Maya Rahme ◽  
Thomas Piggott ◽  
Mohammad H Murad ◽  
Layal Hneiny ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Drug Class ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Pharmacological Therapy ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Drug Selection ◽  
Hypercalcemia Of Malignancy ◽  
Review Protocol

Abstract Background Hypercalcemia of malignancy is the second most common cause of hypercalcemia and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Several treatment options are available including pharmacological therapy with bisphosphonates, denosumab, glucocorticoids, and calcimimetics, as well as conventional therapy with hydration and possibly calcitonin. While guidelines have previously considered treatment effects, no guideline has yet considered a range of contextual factors impacting recommendations for the management. Objective The aim of this study is to summarize the available evidence on important decisional factors for the development of guidelines for the treatment of hypercalcemia of malignancy. These include patient’s values and preferences, cost, acceptability, feasibility, and equity. Methods/Design: This is a systematic review of observational studies, case series, trials, reviews and qualitative studies involving treatment of adult patients with hypercalcemia of malignancy. We developed and executed two independent search strategies using five databases: Pubmed, Medline (OVID), Embase.com, CINAHL (EBSCO) and Cochrane, and reviewed their combined output. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts and full texts and will implement data abstraction from relevant studies independently and in duplicate. The outcomes of interest are the decisional factors that influence drug selection, with possible subgroup analyses by drug class or etiology of hypercalcemia of malignancy. We will present the data collected in a narrative and thematic approach. Discussion This systematic review will identify important treatment decisional factors, and will assist guidelines panels, physicians and patients to decide on therapeutic options based on the current evidence.

scholarly journals Use of metabolomics for predicting spontaneous preterm birth in asymptomatic pregnant women: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. e026033 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renato T Souza ◽  
Rafael Bessa Galvão ◽  
Debora Farias Batista Leite ◽  
Renato Passini Jr ◽  
Philip Baker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Preterm Birth ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Spontaneous Preterm Birth ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Review Protocol

IntroductionPreterm birth (PTB) is the leading cause of neonatal mortality and short- and long-term morbidity. The aetiology and pathophysiology of spontaneous PTB (sPTB) are still unclear, which makes the identification of reliable and accurate predictor markers more difficult, particularly for unscreened or asymptomatic women. Metabolomics biomarkers have been demonstrated to be potentially accurate biomarkers for many disorders with complex mechanisms such as PTB. Therefore, we aim to perform a systematic review of metabolomics markers associated with sPTB. Our research question is ‘What is the performance of metabolomics for predicting spontaneous preterm birth in asymptomatic pregnant women?’Methods and analysisWe will focus on studies assessing metabolomics techniques for predicting sPTB in asymptomatic pregnant women. We will conduct a comprehensive systematic review of the literature from the last 10 years. Only observational cohort and case-control studies will be included. Our search strategy will be carried out by two independent reviewers, who will scan title and abstract before carrying out a full review of the article. The scientific databases to be explored include PubMed, MedLine, ScieLo, EMBASE, LILACS, Web of Science, Scopus and others.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review protocol does not require ethical approval. We intend to disseminate our findings in scientific peer-reviewed journal, the Preterm SAMBA study open access website, specialists’ conferences and to our funding agencies.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018100172.

scholarly journals Changes in gastric mucosal microbiota in gastric carcinogenesis: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. e045810
Author(s):  
Ruoyu Ji ◽  
Xinyu Zhao ◽  
Xinyuan Cao ◽  
Yizhen Zhang ◽  
Yingyun Yang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Conference Proceedings ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Alpha Diversity ◽  
Gastric Carcinogenesis ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Newcastle Ottawa Scale ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
Quantitative Analyses

IntroductionThe human stomach is a complex and diverse microbial ecosystem. Consecutive alternations of gastric microbiota occur in gastric carcinogenesis, while the changing pattern during this process remains controversial across studies. We aim to identify the changes in the diversity and composition of gastric mucosal microbiota in gastric tumorigenesis.Methods and analysisWe will search through PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases, as well as conference proceedings and references of review articles for observational articles reporting either the relative abundance of bacteria at the phylum or genus level or at least one of the alpha diversity indexes respectively and clearly in both gastric cancer and non-cancer groups. Selection of studies and data extraction will be performed independently by two researchers. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion. Risk of bias will be assessed using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Quantitative analyses will be performed using a random effects model, where the effect measurement will be expressed as the MD.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval for this systematic review is not required, as the study is based exclusively on published documents and will not include any individual data. Findings of this study are expected to be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals or conference proceedings.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020206973.

scholarly journals Therapeutic Management of COVID-19 Patients: A systematic review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mansour Tobaiqy ◽  
Mohammed Qashqary ◽  
Shrooq Al-Dahery ◽  
Alaa Mujallad ◽  
Almonther Abdullah Hershan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Treatment Guidelines ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Systematic Review Protocol ◽  
Search Terms ◽  
Global Pandemic ◽  
Prisma Statement ◽  
Review Protocol

AbstractBackgroundSARS-CoV-2 is the cause of the COVID-19 that has been declared a global pandemic by the WHO in 2020. The COVID-19 treatment guidelines vary in each country, and yet there is no approved therapeutic for COVID-19.Aims of the studythis review aimed to report any evidence of therapeutics used for the management of COVID-19 patients in clinical practice since the emergence of the virus.MethodsA systematic review protocol was developed based on PRISMA Statement. Articles for review were selected from electronic databases (Embase, Medline and Google Scholar). Readily accessible peer-reviewed full articles in English published from December 1 st, 2019 to March 26 th, 2020 were included. The search terms included combinations of: COVID, SARS-COV-2, glucocorticoids, convalescent plasma, antiviral, antibacterial. There were no restrictions on the type of study design eligible for inclusion.ResultsAs of March 26, 2020, of the initial manuscripts identified (n=449) articles. Forty-one studies were included, of which clinical trials (n=3), (case reports n=7), case series (n=10), retrospective (n=11) and prospective (n=10) observational studies. Thirty-six studies were conducted in China (88%).The most common mentioned and reported medicine in this systematic review was corticosteroids (n=25), followed by Lopinavir (n=21) and oseltamivir (n=16).ConclusionsThis is the first systematic review up to date related to the therapeutics used in COVID-19 patients. Only forty-one research articles on COVID-19 and therapeutics were found eligible to be included, most conducted in China, corticosteroid therapy was found to be the most used medicine in these studies.

scholarly journals Psychological resilience during COVID-19: a meta-review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e051417
Author(s):  
Katie Seaborn ◽  
Mark Chignell ◽  
Jacek Gwizdka
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Measurement Tool ◽  
Psychological Resilience ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Meta Review ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Review Protocol

IntroductionThe global COVID-19 pandemic continues to have wide-ranging implications for health, including psychological well-being. A growing corpus of research reviews has emerged on the topic of psychological resilience in the context of the pandemic. However, this body of work has not been systematically reviewed for its quality, nor with respect to findings on the effectiveness of tools and strategies for psychological resilience. To this end, a meta-review protocol is proposed with the following objectives: (1) identify review work on the topic of psychological resilience during COVID-19; (2) assess the quality of this review work using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews; (3) assess the risk of bias in this work; (4) generate a narrative summary of the key points, strengths and weaknesses; (5) identify the psychological resilience strategies that have been reviewed; (6) identify how these strategies have been evaluated for their effectiveness; (7) identify what outcomes were measured and (8) summarise the findings on strategies for psychological resilience so far, providing recommendations, if possible.Methods and analysisA systematic meta-review will be conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews for Protocols and Joanna Briggs Institute umbrella review guidelines. Electronic searches of general databases, especially Web of Science, Scopus and PubMed, will be conducted. Only results from January 2020 onwards will be considered, coinciding with the COVID-19 pandemic. Only results in English will be included. Descriptive statistics, thematic analysis and narrative summaries describing the nature of the reviewed work and evaluation of psychological resilience strategies will be carried out.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not needed for systematic review protocols. The results of the meta-review will be published in an international peer-reviewed journal. The raw and summarised data will be shared in the journal or other open venues.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021235288.

scholarly journals Percutaneous Versus Surgical Interventions for Hepatic Cystic Echinococcosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. L. E. Mönnink ◽  
C. Stijnis ◽  
O. M. van Delden ◽  
R. Spijker ◽  
M. P. Grobusch
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Percutaneous Treatment ◽  
Invasive Treatment ◽  
Surgical Interventions ◽  
Percutaneous Therapy ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Hepatic Echinococcosis

Abstract Purpose This systematic review and meta-analysis summarises the current literature on invasive treatment options of cystic hepatic echinococcosis (CE), comparing percutaneous radiological interventions to surgery, still the cornerstone of treatment in many countries. Methods A literature search was conducted in Medline and EMBASE databases (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019126150). The primary outcome was recurrence of cysts after treatment. Secondary outcomes were complications, duration of hospitalisation, mortality and treatment conversion. Results The number of eligible prospective studies, in particular RCTs, was limited. In the four included studies, only conventional surgery is compared directly to percutaneous techniques. From the available data, in terms of recurrence, percutaneous treatment of hydatid cysts is non-inferior to open surgery. With regard to complications and length of hospital stay, outcomes favour percutaneous therapy. Conclusion Although evidence from prospective research is small, percutaneous treatment in CE is an effective, safe and less invasive alternative to surgery.

scholarly journals Pharmacogenetics of Type 2 diabetes mellitus: A Systematic Review Protocol (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamid Reza Aghaei Meybodi ◽  
Negar Sarhangi ◽  
Anoosh Naghavi ◽  
Marzieh Rahbaran ◽  
Maryam Hassani Doabsari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Cochrane Database ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Newcastle Ottawa Scale ◽  
Review Protocol

UNSTRUCTURED The objective of this systematic review is to determine the effect of genetic variants that associate with antidiabetic medications and their efficacy and toxicity in T2DM patients. The understanding may allow interventions for improving management of T2DM and later systematically evaluated in more in-depth studies. We will have performed a comprehensive search using PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Sciences and Cochrane database from 1990 to 2018. Relevant journals and references of all included studies will be hand searched to find the additional studied. Eligible studies such as pharmacogenetics studies in terms of drug response and toxicity in the type 2 diabetes patients and performed just on human will be included. Data extraction and quality assessment will be carried out by two independent reviewers and disagreements will be resolved through third expert reviewer. Risk of bias will be assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized studies and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for observational Studies. Narrative synthesis will be conducted by the combination of key findings. The results of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication and also presented at PROSPERO. We expect this review will provide highly relevant information for clinicians, pharmaceutical industry that will benefit from the summary of the best available data regarding the efficacy of antidiabetic medication in the aspect of pharmacogenetics. PROSPERO Registration number (CRD42018104843)

scholarly journals Polysulfonate Resins in Hyperkalemia: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 205435812096583
Author(s):  
Sheung Wing Sherwin Wong ◽  
Grace Zhang ◽  
Patrick Norman ◽  
Hasitha Welihinda ◽  
Don Thiwanka Wijeratne
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Serum Potassium ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Sodium Polystyrene Sulfonate ◽  
Polystyrene Sulfonate ◽  
High Quality ◽  
High Quality Evidence ◽  
Quality Evidence

Background: Hyperkalemia is a potentially life-threatening electrolyte abnormality defined as a serum potassium above the lab reference range (usually >5.0-5.5 mEq/L). Polystyrene resins, including sodium polystyrene sulfonate (SPS) and calcium polystyrene sulfonate (CPS), have long been used to treat hyperkalemia. Sodium polystyrene sulfonate/calcium polystyrene sulfonate act by exchanging a cation for potassium within the intestinal lumen. While SPS and CPS have been available since the 1960s, there are rising concerns about the validity of the data supporting its use and about serious adverse gastrointestinal effects. Objective: The objective of this systematic review was to quantify the efficacy and safety of polystyrene sulfonate resins (SPS/CPS) in the treatment of adults with hyperkalemia. This review focuses on the randomized control trial (RCT), interventional non-RCT, and observational data available on SPS/CPS use. Design: Systematic review. Setting: Any country of origin. Both inpatient and outpatient settings. Patients: Adults with hyperkalemia treated with polystyrene sulfonate resins. Measurements: The primary outcome was change in serum potassium. The secondary outcomes included adverse effects of SPS/CPS and prevention of recurrent hyperkalemia. Methods: We conducted a systematic review using Cochrane Library, EMBASE (1947-2019), and Medline (1946-2019) databases. Literature reviews, systematic reviews, case studies, case series, and editorial pieces were excluded. Included studies were assessed for risk of bias. Results: Four RCTs, 21 observational studies, and 5 quasi-experimental trials were included. A total of 212 351 patients were included. Two thousand and fifty-eight patients were studied for the primary outcome and 210 293 patients were studied for the secondary outcomes. Study designs were heterogeneous and not amenable to meta-analysis. Most studies included nonhemodialysis outpatients older than 65 years. Of the included studies, 22/25 (88%) demonstrated a reduction of serum potassium >0.5 mEq/L over the study period. The magnitude of reduction in serum potassium of potassium resin compared with placebo or matched controls in the 3 low-risk studies identified was 0.14 to 1.04 mEq/L. However, each study used different dosing regimens. Ten of 22 studies reported the effects of polystyrene resins on serum potassium within 24 hours. A few high-quality observational studies suggest an increased risk of serious adverse gastrointestinal events with a relative risk of 2.10 and a hazard ratio of 1.25 to 1.94; however, the absolute risk remains low. The incidence of adverse gastrointestinal events is 16 to 23 events per 1000 person-years. Limitations: We acknowledge several limitations in this study. Case studies and case series were excluded from the search results. Large case series may have been excluded despite having comparable sample sizes to studies included due to lack of a comparator and calculated estimates. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, the data were unable to be meta-analyzed and as such the potassium-lowering effect of polystyrene sulfonate resins remains founded on small studies with potential confounders. Conclusions: This systematic review demonstrates a continued lack of high-quality evidence for the use of SPS/CPS in hyperkalemia. Studies investigated highly variable timelines and the most robust evidence for SPS/CPS use is in chronic hyperkalemia. While the absence of high-quality evidence does not exclude the possibility of benefit, prescribers must understand that the use of SPS/CPS in acute hyperkalemia is not supported by high-quality evidence. Trial registration: The protocol for this systematic review was not registered.

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

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. e023097 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy R Mulick ◽  
Victoria Allen ◽  
Hywel C Williams ◽  
Douglas J C Grindlay ◽  
Neil Pearce ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Atopic Dermatitis ◽  
Complex Disease ◽  
Methodological Approach ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Ovid Medline ◽  
Clinical Presentations ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Registration Number

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

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document