Electroconvulsive therapy in the continuation and maintenance treatment of depression: Systematic review and meta-analyses

Objective: Acute course of electroconvulsive therapy is effective in inducing remission from depression, but recurrence rate is unacceptably high following termination of electroconvulsive therapy despite continued pharmacotherapy. Continuation electroconvulsive therapy and maintenance electroconvulsive therapy have been studied for their efficacy in preventing relapse and recurrence of depression. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy of continuation electroconvulsive therapy and maintenance electroconvulsive therapy in preventing relapse and recurrence of depression in comparison to antidepressant pharmacotherapy alone. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, clinicaltrials.gov and Cochrane register of controlled trials from the database inception to December 2016 without restriction on language or publication status for randomized trials of continuation electroconvulsive therapy and maintenance electroconvulsive therapy. Two independent Cochrane reviewers extracted the data in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The risk of bias was assessed using four domains of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. Outcomes were pooled using random effect model. The primary outcome was relapse or recurrence of depression. Results: Five studies involving 436 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Analysis of the pooled data showed that continuation electroconvulsive therapy and maintenance electroconvulsive therapy, both with pharmacotherapy, were associated with significantly fewer relapses and recurrences than pharmacotherapy alone at 6 months and 1 year after a successful acute course of electroconvulsive therapy (risk ratio = 0.64, 95% confidence interval = [0.41, 0.98], p = 0.04, risk ratio = 0.46, 95% confidence interval = [0.21, 0.98], p = 0.05, respectively). There was insufficient data to perform a meta-analysis of stand-alone continuation electroconvulsive therapy or maintenance electroconvulsive therapy beyond 1 year. Conclusion: There are only a few randomized trials of continuation electroconvulsive therapy and maintenance electroconvulsive therapy. The preliminary and limited evidence suggests the modest efficacy of continuation electroconvulsive therapy and maintenance electroconvulsive therapy with concomitant pharmacotherapy in preventing relapse and recurrence of depressive episodes for 1 year after the remission of index episode with the acute course of electroconvulsive therapy.

Download Full-text

The development of a new generic risk-of-bias measure for systematic reviews of surveys

Methodology ◽

10.5964/meth.4329 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 16 (4) ◽

pp. 278-298

Author(s):

Gabriel Nudelman ◽

Kathleen Otto

Keyword(s):

Pilot Study ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Convergent Validity ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Weighted Kappa ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Interrater Agreement ◽

Bias Measure ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Initial List

It is important to evaluate risk of bias of the primary studies included in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Since tools pertinent to surveys are scarce, the goal of the current research was to develop a measure to address this need. In Study 1, an initial list of 10 relevant topics was compiled from previous measures. In Study 2, the list was refined into an eight-item risk-of-bias measure via discussion and a pilot study. In Study 3, experienced researchers used the measure to asses 70 studies, demonstrating high interrater agreement (weighted Kappa = .82). Inexperienced raters also utilized the measure to code 26 different studies included in a prior meta-analysis, which resulted in adequate interrater agreement (weighted Kappa = .64) and excellent convergent validity (r = .66). Thus, the new measure, designed to be accessible and flexible, can increase standardization of risk-of-bias evaluations and contribute to the interpretation of systematic reviews and meta-analytic findings.

Download Full-text

Flunarizine as prophylaxis for episodic migraine: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Ból ◽

10.5604/01.3001.0013.4615 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

pp. 25-38

Author(s):

Anker Stubberud ◽

Nikolai Melseth Flaaen ◽

Douglas C. McCrory ◽

Sindre Andre Pedersen ◽

Mattias Linde

Keyword(s):

Confidence Interval ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Episodic Migraine ◽

Pooled Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Current Guideline ◽

Data Synthesis ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

The Mean ◽

Meta Analyses

Based on few clinical trials, flunarizine is considered a first-line prophylactic treatment for migraine in several guidelines. In this meta-analysis, we examined the pooled evidence for its effectiveness, tolerability, and safety. Prospective randomized controlled trials of flunarizine as a prophylaxis against migraine were identified from a systematic literature search, and risk of bias was assessed for all included studies. Reduction in mean attack frequency was estimated by calculating the mean difference (MD), and a series of secondary outcomes –including adverse events (AEs) – were also analyzed. The database search yielded 879 unique records. Twentyfive studies were included in data synthesis. We scored 31/175 risk of bias items as “high”, with attrition as the most frequent bias. A pooled analysis estimated that flunarizine reduces the headache frequency by 0.4 attacks per 4 weeks compared with placebo (5 trials, 249 participants: MD 20.44; 95% confidence interval 20.61 to 2 0.26). Analysis also revealed that the effectiveness of flunarizine prophylaxis is comparable with that of propranolol (7 trials, 1151 participants, MD 20.08; 95% confidence interval 20.34 to 0.18). Flunarizine also seems to be effective in children. The most frequent AEs were sedation and weight increase. Meta-analyses were robust and homogenous, although several of the included trials potentially suffered from high risk of bias. Unfortunately, reporting of AEs was inconsistent and limited. In conclusion, pooled analysis of data from partially outdated trials shows that 10- mg flunarizine per day is effective and well tolerated in treating episodic migraine – supporting current guideline recommendations.

Download Full-text

Management of haemorrhoids: protocol of an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035287 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (3) ◽

pp. e035287

Author(s):

Min Chen ◽

Tai-Chun Tang ◽

Tao-Hong He ◽

Yong-Jun Du ◽

Di Qin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Reviews ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Random Effect Model ◽

Current Evidence ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Final Report ◽

Umbrella Review ◽

Effect Model ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

The Impact

IntroductionThe prevalence of haemorrhoidal diseases was high in general population, and many treatments are proposed for the management of haemorrhoids. The treatments include conservative and surgical interventions; the credibility and strength of current evidence of their effectiveness are not comprehensively evaluated. We aim to evaluate the credibility of systematic reviews and meta-analyses that assess the effectiveness of the treatments for haemorrhoidal diseases through an umbrella review.Methods and analysisWe will search Ovid Medline, Embase, Cochrane library and Web of Science from inception to March 2020 without any language restriction. We will include meta-analyses that examine the effectiveness of treatments in the management of haemorrhoids. Two reviewers will independently screen the titles and abstracts of retrieved articles, and they will extract data from the included meta-analyses. For each meta-analysis, we will estimate the effect size of a treatment through the random-effect model and the fixed-effect model, and we will evaluate between-study heterogeneity (Cochrane’s Q and I2statistics) and small-study effect (Egger’s test); we will also estimate the evidence of excess significance bias. Evidence of each treatment will be graded according to prespecified criteria. Methodological quality of each meta-analysis will be evaluated by using Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2. The corrected cover area method will be used to assess the impact of overlap in reviews on the findings of the umbrella review.Ethics and disseminationWe will present the results of the umbrella review at conferences and publish the final report in a peer-reviewed journal. The umbrella review does not require ethical approval.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019140702.

Download Full-text

Is grey literature essential for a better control of publication bias in psychiatry? An example from three meta-analyses of schizophrenia

European Psychiatry ◽

10.1016/j.eurpsy.2005.03.011 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 20 (8) ◽

pp. 550-553 ◽

Cited By ~ 31

Author(s):

José Luis R. Martin ◽

Víctor Pérez ◽

Montse Sacristán ◽

Enric Álvarez

Keyword(s):

Publication Bias ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Medical Databases ◽

Study Results ◽

Heterogeneous Nature ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Literature Material

AbstractSystematic reviews in mental health have become useful tools for health professionals in view of the massive amount and heterogeneous nature of biomedical information available today. In order to determine the risk of bias in the studies evaluated and to avoid bias in generalizing conclusions from the reviews it is therefore important to use a very strict methodology in systematic reviews. One bias which may affect the generalization of results is publication bias, which is determined by the nature and direction of the study results. To control or minimize this type of bias, the authors of systematic reviews undertake comprehensive searches of medical databases and expand on the findings, often undertaking searches of grey literature (material which is not formally published). This paper attempts to show the consequences (and risk) of generalizing the implications of grey literature in the control of publication bias, as was proposed in a recent systematic work. By repeating the analyses for the same outcome from three different systematic reviews that included both published and grey literature our results showed that confusion between grey literature and publication bias may affect the results of a concrete meta-analysis.

Download Full-text

Malleability of Meta-Analysis

10.1093/oso/9780198747048.003.0006 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Jacob Stegenga

Keyword(s):

Systematic Reviews ◽

Gold Standard ◽

Randomized Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Medical Science ◽

Ongoing Debate ◽

Medical Interventions ◽

Reliable Source ◽

To Come ◽

Meta Analyses

An astonishing volume and diversity of evidence is available for many hypotheses in medicine. Some of this evidence—usually from randomized trials—is amalgamated by meta-analysis. Despite the ongoing debate regarding whether or not randomized trials are the gold standard of evidence, the most reliable source of evidence in medical science is usually thought to come from systematic reviews and meta-analyses. This chapter argues that meta-analyses are malleable. Different meta-analyses of the same evidence can reach contradictory conclusions. Meta-analysis fails to provide objective grounds for assessing the effectiveness and harms of medical interventions because numerous decisions must be made when performing a meta-analysis, which allow wide latitude for subjective idiosyncrasies to influence its outcome.

Download Full-text

P14.71 An assessment of the reporting and methodological quality of meningioma systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Neuro-Oncology ◽

10.1093/neuonc/noab180.178 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 23 (Supplement_2) ◽

pp. ii51-ii52

Author(s):

A M George ◽

S Gupta ◽

S M Keshwara ◽

M A Mustafa ◽

C S Gillespie ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Methodological Quality ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Neurofibromatosis Type ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Measurement Tool ◽

High Quality ◽

Meta Analyses

Abstract BACKGROUND Systematic reviews and meta-analyses constitute the highest level of research evidence and for a disease with limited clinical trial activity, are often relied upon to help inform clinical practice. This review of reviews evaluates both the reporting & methodological quality of meningioma evidence syntheses. MATERIAL AND METHODS Potentially eligible meningioma reviews published between 1st January 1990 and 31st December 2020 were identified from eight electronic databases. Inclusion required the study to meet the Cochrane guideline definition of a systematic review or meta-analysis. Reviews concerning neurofibromatosis type 2, spinal and pediatric meningiomas were excluded. The reporting and methodological quality of articles were assessed against the following modified guidelines: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA), A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR2) and the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) guidelines. RESULTS 117 systematic reviews were identified, 57 of which included meta-analysis (48.7%). The number of meningioma systematic reviews published each year has increased with 63 studies (53.9%) published between 01/2018 and 12/2020. A median of 17 studies (IQR 9–29) were included per review. Impact factor of journals publishing a systematic review with or without a meta-analysis was similar (median 2.3 vs 1.8, P=0.397). The mean PRISMA scores for systematic reviews with a meta-analysis was 21.11 (SD 4.1, 78% adherence) and without was 13.89 (SD 3.4, 63% adherence). Twenty-nine systematic reviews with meta-analysis (51%) and 11 without meta-analysis (18%) achieved greater than 80% adherence to PRISMA recommendations. Methodological quality assessment using AMSTAR2 revealed one study (0.9%) as high quality whilst 111 (94.8%) studies were graded as critically low. One hundred and two articles (87.2%) did not utilize a comprehensive search strategy as defined by the AMSTAR2 tool. Ninety-nine studies (84.6%) obtained a high level of concern for potential bias as per the ROBIS assessment. One hundred and eight articles (92.3%) failed to present information that a protocol had been established prior to study commencement and 76 articles (65.0%) did not conduct a risk of bias assessment. Across the three tools, domains relating to the establishment of a protocol prior to review commencement and conducting appropriate risk of bias assessments were frequently low scoring. CONCLUSION Overall reporting and methodological quality of meningioma systematic reviews was sub-optimal. Established critical appraisal tools and reporting guidelines should be utilized a priori to assist in producing high-quality systematic reviews.

Download Full-text

Parent–Infant Interventions to Promote Parental Sensitivity During NICU Hospitalization: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Journal of Early Intervention ◽

10.1177/1053815121991928 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 105381512199192

Author(s):

Andréane Lavallée ◽

Gwenaëlle De Clifford-Faugère ◽

Ariane Ballard ◽

Marilyn Aita

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Standard Care ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Parental Sensitivity ◽

Assessment Development ◽

Implementation Failure ◽

Meta Analyses

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effectiveness of parent–infant interventions for parents of preterm infants on parental sensitivity compared to standard care or active comparators. This review follows the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and was prospectively registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; registration ID: CRD42016047083). Database searches were performed from inception to 2020 to identify eligible randomized controlled trials. Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool and quality of evidence using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines. A total of 19 studies ( n = 2,111 participants) were included and 14 were suitable to be pooled in our primary outcome meta-analysis. Results show no significant effect of parent–infant interventions over standard care or basic educational programs, on parental sensitivity. Results may not necessarily be due to the ineffectiveness of the interventions but rather due to implementation failure or high risk of bias of included studies.

Download Full-text

Acupuncture for the Relief of Chronic Pain: A Synthesis of Systematic Reviews

Medicina ◽

10.3390/medicina56010006 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 56 (1) ◽

pp. 6

Author(s):

Carole A. Paley ◽

Mark I. Johnson

Keyword(s):

Chronic Pain ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Statistical Power ◽

English Language ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Supporting Evidence ◽

Pharmacological Interventions ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Meta Analyses

Background and Objectives: It is estimated that 28 million people in the UK live with chronic pain. A biopsychosocial approach to chronic pain is recommended which combines pharmacological interventions with behavioural and non-pharmacological treatments. Acupuncture represents one of a number of non-pharmacological interventions for pain. In the current climate of difficult commissioning decisions and constantly changing national guidance, the quest for strong supporting evidence has never been more important. Although hundreds of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses have been conducted, most have been inconclusive, and this has created uncertainty in clinical policy and practice. There is a need to bring all the evidence together for different pain conditions. The aim of this review is to synthesise SRs of RCTs evaluating the clinical efficacy of acupuncture to alleviate chronic pain and to consider the quality and adequacy of the evidence, including RCT design. Materials and Methods: Electronic databases were searched for English language SRs and meta-analyses on acupuncture for chronic pain. The SRs were scrutinised for methodology, risk of bias and judgement of efficacy. Results: A total of 177 reviews of acupuncture from 1989 to 2019 met our eligibility criteria. The majority of SRs found that RCTs of acupuncture had methodological shortcomings, including inadequate statistical power with a high risk of bias. Heterogeneity between RCTs was such that meta-analysis was often inappropriate. Conclusions: The large quantity of RCTs on acupuncture for chronic pain contained within systematic reviews provide evidence that is conflicting and inconclusive, due in part to recurring methodological shortcomings of RCTs. We suggest that an enriched enrolment with randomised withdrawal design may overcome some of these methodological shortcomings. It is essential that the quality of evidence is improved so that healthcare providers and commissioners can make informed choices on the interventions which can legitimately be provided to patients living with chronic pain.

Download Full-text

Exercise as a Useful Intervention to Reduce Alcohol Consumption and Improve Physical Fitness in Individuals With Alcohol Use Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Frontiers in Psychology ◽

10.3389/fpsyg.2021.675285 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 ◽

Author(s):

David T. Lardier ◽

Kathryn E. Coakley ◽

Kelley R. Holladay ◽

Fabiano T. Amorim ◽

Micah N. Zuhl

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Alcohol Consumption ◽

Alcohol Use ◽

Physical Fitness ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Alcohol Use Disorder ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Exercise Interventions ◽

Meta Analyses

Objective: This meta-analysis and systematic review examined the effects of exercise interventions on alcohol consumption and binge drinking in individuals with alcohol use disorder (AUD).Data sources: PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, SPORTDiscus, and ERIC databases.Study Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria: Peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials published in English between 1970 and 2021. All studies compared exercise (Ex) and treatment as usual (TAU) to TAU in adults with an alcohol-related diagnosis. All forms of exercise interventions were included (e.g., aerobic exercise, yoga, resistance exercise, etc.).Data Extraction: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols standard and the Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews of Observational Studies guidelines were followed. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool as described by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews and Interventions.Results: The literature searches retrieved a combined 2527 studies, with 1,034 studies screened after removal of duplicates and 973 (94%) rejected after reviewing titles and abstracts. Full-text review was performed on 61 studies, with seven studies meeting inclusion criteria for qualitative and meta-analysis. Across seven studies (n = 492 participants), a significant effect (Z-value = −3.37; g = −0.30; 95% CI [−0.50—−0.09]; p = 0.001) was found for Ex+TAU on drinking volume. There was no effect of Ex+TAU on binge drinking. The effect of Ex+TAU on physical fitness (VO2max, ml•kg−1•min−1) was significant (Z-score = 3.70; g = 0.64; 95% CI [0.19–1.08]; p < 0.001).Conclusions: Exercise interventions may decrease alcohol consumption and improve fitness and can be an effective adjunctive treatment for individuals with alcohol-related diagnoses including AUD.

Download Full-text