scholarly journals The Empirical Status of Mindfulness-Based Interventions: A Systematic Review of 44 Meta-Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
pp. 174569162096877
Author(s):  
Simon B. Goldberg ◽  
Kevin M. Riordan ◽  
Shufang Sun ◽  
Richard J. Davidson
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Statistical Power ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Active Controls

In response to questions regarding the scientific basis for mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs), we evaluated their empirical status by systematically reviewing meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We searched six databases for effect sizes based on four or more trials that did not combine passive and active controls. Heterogeneity, moderators, tests of publication bias, risk of bias, and adverse effects were also extracted. Representative effect sizes based on the largest number of studies were identified across a wide range of populations, problems, interventions, comparisons, and outcomes (PICOS). A total of 160 effect sizes were reported in 44 meta-analyses ( k = 336 RCTs, N = 30,483 participants). MBIs showed superiority to passive controls across most PICOS ( ds = 0.10–0.89). Effects were typically smaller and less often statistically significant compared with active controls. MBIs were similar or superior to specific active controls and evidence-based treatments. Heterogeneity was typically moderate. Few consistent moderators were found. Results were generally robust to publication bias, although other important sources of bias were identified. Reporting of adverse effects was inconsistent. Statistical power may be lacking in meta-analyses, particularly for comparisons with active controls. Because MBIs show promise across some PICOS, future RCTs and meta-analyses should build on identified strengths and limitations of this literature.

scholarly journals Mobile phone-based interventions for mental health-A systematic meta-review of 14 meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Goldberg ◽  
Sin U Lam ◽  
Otto Simonsson ◽  
John Torous ◽  
Shufang Sun
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Mobile Phone ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Convincing Evidence ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Suggestive Evidence ◽  
Meta Review ◽  
Meta Analyses

Mobile phone-based interventions have been proposed as a means for reducing the burden of disease associated with mental illness. While numerous randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses have investigated this possibility, evidence remains unclear. We conducted a systematic meta-review of meta-analyses examining mobile phone-based interventions tested in randomized controlled trials. We synthesized results from 14 meta-analyses representing 145 randomized controlled trials and 47,940 participants. We identified 34 effect sizes representing unique pairings of participants, intervention, comparisons, and outcome (PICO) and graded the strength of the evidence as using umbrella review methodology. We failed to find convincing evidence of efficacy (i.e., n > 1000, p < 10-6, I2 < 50%, absence of publication bias); publication bias was rarely assessed for the representative effect sizes. Eight effect sizes provided highly suggestive evidence (i.e., n > 1000, p < 10-6), including smartphone interventions outperforming inactive controls on measures of psychological symptoms and quality of life (ds = 0.32 to 0.47) and text message-based interventions outperforming non-specific controls and active controls for smoking cessation (ds = 0.31 and 0.19, respectively). The magnitude of effects and strength of evidence tended to diminish as comparison conditions became more rigorous (i.e., inactive to active, non-specific to specific). Four effect sizes provided suggestive evidence, 14 effect sizes provided weak evidence, and eight effect sizes were non-significant. Despite substantial heterogeneity, no moderators were identified. Adverse effects were not reported. Taken together, results support the potential of mobile phone-based interventions and highlight key directions to guide providers, policy makers, clinical trialists, and meta-analysts working in this area.

scholarly journals Treatment and Prophylaxis of Catheter-Related Thromboembolic Events in Children

2012 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 632 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucía Cortejoso ◽  
Silvia Manrique-Rodríguez ◽  
Cecilia M. Fernández-Llamazares ◽  
María Sanjurjo-Sáez
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Venous Catheter ◽  
Therapeutic Management ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Thromboembolic Events ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Meta Analyses

Purpose. The therapeutic management of catheter-related thromboembolic events in children is still a challenge due to the large number of potentially effective pharmacological alternatives and the insufficient scientific evidence available. A bibliographic review was performed in order to identify the available pharmacological alternatives for the prophylaxis and therapeutic management of catheter-related thrombosis in children. Methods. A literature search was carried out on MEDLINE using the medical subject heading (MeSH) central venous catheter thrombosis and on Google Scholar. The search was limited to review papers, meta-analyses, clinical practice guidelines, and randomized controlled trials performed on pediatric populations until November 2011. Results. The different options for anticoagulation include unfractionated heparin, low molecular weight heparin and vitamin K antagonists. Thrombus resolution is stimulated more rapidly with thrombolytic agents than with anticoagulants, but the risk-benefit ratio must be considered. Streptokinase is not considered an optimal alternative due to the risk of anaphylactic reactions and has been replaced by urokinase, alteplase or the newer reteplase. Preventive strategies have been considered and most centers have protocols for routine flushing of the catheter with heparin or normal saline. Intraluminal application of urokinase and alteplase has also been studied. Conclusions. The wide range of options available for the pharmacotherapeutic management of catheter-related thromboembolism in children and the lack of strong evidence on the comparative efficacy and safety of the different therapeutic options, make its positioning rather difficult. Randomized controlled trials and national plans should be set up urgently. This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see “For Readers”) may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue’s contents page.

Plant-based Medicines (Phytoceuticals) in the Treatment of Psychiatric Disorders: A Meta-review of Meta-analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials: Les médicaments à base de plantes (phytoceutiques) dans le traitement des troubles psychiatriques: une méta-revue des méta-analyses d’essais randomisés contrôlés

2021 ◽  
pp. 070674372097991
Author(s):  
Jerome Sarris ◽  
Wolfgang Marx ◽  
Melanie M. Ashton ◽  
Chee H. Ng ◽  
Nicole Galvao-Coelho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Psychiatric Disorders ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Negative Symptoms ◽  
Depression Symptoms ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Traditional Chinese Herbal Medicine ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Meta Review ◽  
Meta Analyses

Objectives: Plant-based medicines have had a long-standing history of use in psychiatric disorders. Highly quantified and standardized extracts or isolates may be termed “phytoceuticals,” in a similar way that medicinal nutrients are termed as “nutraceuticals.” Over the past 2 decades, several meta-analyses have examined the data for a range of plant-based medicines in the treatment of psychiatric disorders. The aim of this international project is to provide a “meta-review” of this top-tier evidence. Methods: We identified, synthesized, and appraised all available up to date meta-analyses... of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting on the efficacy and effectiveness of individual phytoceuticals across all major psychiatric disorders. Results: Our systematic search identified 9 relevant meta-analyses of RCTs, with primary analyses including outcome data from 5,927 individuals. Supportive meta-analytic evidence was found for St John’s wort for major depressive disorder (MDD); curcumin and saffron for MDD or depression symptoms, and ginkgo for total and negative symptoms in schizophrenia. Kava was not effective in treating diagnosed anxiety disorders. We also provide details on 22 traditional Chinese herbal medicine formulas’ meta-analyses (primarily for depression studies), all of which revealed highly significant and large effect sizes. Their methodology, reporting, and potential publication bias were, however, of marked concern. The same caveat was noted for the curcumin, ginkgo, and saffron meta-analyses, which may also have significant publication bias. Conclusions: More rigorous international studies are required to validate the efficacy of these phytoceuticals before treatment recommendations can be made. In conclusion, the breadth of data tentatively supports several phytoceuticals which may be effective for mental disorders alongside pharmaceutical, psychological therapies, and standard lifestyle recommendations.

scholarly journals Pre-Procedural Lumbar Neuraxial Ultrasound—A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials and Meta-Analysis

Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 479
Author(s):  
Tatiana Sidiropoulou ◽  
Kalliopi Christodoulaki ◽  
Charalampos Siristatidis
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Technical Failure ◽  
Obese Patients ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses

A pre-procedural ultrasound of the lumbar spine is frequently used to facilitate neuraxial procedures. The aim of this review is to examine the evidence sustaining the utilization of pre-procedural neuraxial ultrasound compared to conventional methods. We perform a systematic review of randomized controlled trials with meta-analyses. We search the electronic databases Medline, Cochrane Central, Science Direct and Scopus up to 1 June 2019. We include trials comparing a pre-procedural lumbar spine ultrasound to a non-ultrasound-assisted method. The primary endpoints are technical failure rate, first-attempt success rate, number of needle redirections and procedure time. We retrieve 32 trials (3439 patients) comparing pre-procedural lumbar ultrasounds to palpations for neuraxial procedures in various clinical settings. Pre-procedural ultrasounds decrease the overall risk of technical failure (Risk Ratio (RR) 0.69 (99% CI, 0.43 to 1.10), p = 0.04) but not in obese and difficult spinal patients (RR 0.53, p = 0.06) and increase the first-attempt success rate (RR 1.5 (99% CI, 1.22 to 1.86), p < 0.0001, NNT = 5). In difficult spines and obese patients, the RR is 1.84 (99% CI, 1.44 to 2.3; p < 0.0001, NNT = 3). The number of needle redirections is lower with pre-procedural ultrasounds (SMD = −0.55 (99% CI, −0.81 to −0.29), p < 0.0001), as is the case in difficult spines and obese patients (SMD = −0.85 (99% CI, −1.08 to −0.61), p < 0.0001). No differences are observed in procedural times. Ιn conclusion, a pre-procedural ultrasound provides significant benefit in terms of technical failure, number of needle redirections and first attempt-success rate. Τhe effect of pre-procedural ultrasound scanning of the lumbar spine is more significant in a subgroup analysis of difficult spines and obese patients.

scholarly journals A guide to do randomized controlled trials in the field of otolaryngology

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sameh M. Zamzam ◽  
Mosaad Abdel-Aziz ◽  
Ahmed Atef ◽  
Usama Abdel-Naseer ◽  
Mostafa Hamoda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Study Groups ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Main Body ◽  
Main Research ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
New Treatment ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Based Medicine

Abstract Background Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are prospective comparative studies in which study groups are allocated randomly to intervention or serve as controls. RCT is the mainstay to achieve evidence in the literature in clinical research. A RCT is the main research design to study the effect of an intervention and the only way to confirm the value of a new treatment. Main body RCT also gives the way to generate meta-analyses and systematic reviews giving a stronger evidence for clinical practice. Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is crucial for safe, effective, and standardized patient care. Although there is an agreement on the importance of performing RCT, it can be challenging to do it efficiently including different aspects like study design, funding, randomization, blinding, follow-up, data analysis, statistics, generalization of results, and reporting of quality of the studies. Conclusion In this article, we gave a comprehensive review for RCT in otolaryngology discussing their importance, advantages, and drawbacks, types, steps, challenges, reporting their quality and their prevalence in the literature.

scholarly journals The Antihypertensive Effects and Safety of LCZ696 in Patients with Hypertension: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (13) ◽  
pp. 2824
Author(s):  
Su-Kiat Chua ◽  
Wei-Ting Lai ◽  
Lung-Ching Chen ◽  
Huei-Fong Hung
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Systolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Diastolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Systemic Review ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
The Mean

Background: The management of hypertension remains suboptimal throughout the world. Methods: We performed a random-effects model meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to determine the effectiveness and safety of sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) for the treatment of high arterial pressure. Relevant published articles from PubMed, Cochrane base, and Medline were examined, and the last search date was December 2020. Only published randomized controlled trials and double-blind studies were selected for further analysis. The mean reductions in systolic blood pressure (msSBP) and diastolic blood pressure (msDBP) in the sitting position, as well as the mean reductions in ambulatory systolic blood pressure (maSBP) and ambulatory diastolic blood pressure (maDBP), were assumed as efficacy endpoints. Adverse events (AEs) were considered as safety outcomes. Results: Ten studies with a total of 5931patients were included for analysis. Compared with placebo, LCZ696 had a significant reduction in msSBP (weight mean difference (WMD) = −6.52 mmHg, 95% confidence interval (CI): −8.57 to −4.47; p < 0.001), msDBP (WMD = −3.32 mmHg, 95% CI: −4.57 to −2.07; p < 0.001), maSBP (WMD = −7.08 mmHg, 95% CI: −10.48 to −3.68; p < 0.001), maDBP (WMD = −3.28 mmHg, 95% CI: −4.55 to −2.02, p < 0.001). In subgroup analysis, only 200 mg and 400 mg LCZ696 showed a significant BP reduction. There was no difference in the AE rate between the LCZ696 and placebo groups (WMD = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.27, p = 0.54). Egger’s test revealed a potential publication bias for msSBP (p = 0.025), but no publication bias for other outcomes. Conclusion: LCZ696 may reduce blood pressure more efficaciously than traditional therapy in hypertensive patients without increasing adverse effects.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document