scholarly journals Primary decompressive craniectomy in neurocritical patients. a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, cohort and case-control studies

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 73-73
Author(s):  
Javier Muñoz ◽  
Elena Aurea Keough ◽  
Juan Camilo Barrios ◽  
Nerio José Fernández ◽  
Mario Guillermo Dalorzo ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 67 (5) ◽  
pp. 1225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kanwaljeet Garg ◽  
PreetM Singh ◽  
Raghav Singla ◽  
Ankita Aggarwal ◽  
Anuradha Borle ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Paige Penkert ◽  
Ruogu Li ◽  
Jing Huang ◽  
Anil Gurcan ◽  
Mei Chun Chung ◽  
...  

Pork is a frequently consumed red meat that provides substantial amounts of energy, macronutrients, and micronutrients to the diet. Its role in human nutrition and health is controversial and a plethora of data exist in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. Therefore, we conducted a scoping review of clinical and population-based studies to assess the effects of pork consumption on human nutrition and health. Results are reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews. Data were extracted from 86 studies, including 16 randomized controlled trials, 1 uncontrolled trial, 7 cohort studies, 4 nonrandomized controlled trials, 4 case-cohort and nested case-control studies, 33 case-control studies, and 21 cross-sectional studies. Intervention studies were conducted in healthy individuals and were short to moderate in duration. The effect of pork intake on patients’ nutrient status was the most commonly assessed outcome. The majority of observational studies assessed the effect of pork on cancer incidence, but no studies assessed the effects of pork on inflammation or oxidative stress. No interventional studies explored diabetes mellitus risk, and only one study assessed cancer risk associated with pork consumption. Several micronutrients in pork, including zinc, iron, selenium, choline, thiamin, and vitamins B6 and vitamin B12, are thought to influence cognitive function and may prove to be a unique area of research. To date, there is a dearth of high-quality randomized controlled trials assessing the effects of pork intake on disease risk factors and outcomes. This review helps highlight the many research gaps that future studies should be designed to address.


2016 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lei Zhang ◽  
Yong Yin ◽  
Hao Zhang ◽  
Wenwei Zhong ◽  
Jing Zhang

There is some evidence which shows that higher levels of serum leptin and lower levels of serum adiponectin are associated with the diagnosis of asthma. This meta-analysis evaluated the association of serum leptin and adiponectin levels with the diagnosis of asthma. We searched the MEDLINE, Cochrane, EMBASE and CINAHL Plus databases up to July 2015. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials, prospective studies, retrospective studies, case–control studies and cohort studies. 13 studies with 3642 patients were included in the study. The meta-analysis found that in the overall study population, the diagnosis of asthma was associated with higher levels of leptin (pooled standardized difference in means=0.867, 95% CI 0.416 to 1.318, p<0.001) and lower levels of adiponectin (pooled standardized difference in means=−0.371, 95% CI −0.728 to −0.014, p=0.042) in patients with asthma compared with controls. Subgroup analysis found that higher leptin levels were associated with asthma both in adults (standardized difference in means=1.374, 95% CI 0.621 to 2.126, p<0.001) and children (standardized difference in means=0.302, 95% CI 0.010 to 0.594, p=0.042). However, borderline association of adiponectin with asthma was seen in adults (p=0.05), but not in children (p=0.509). Sensitivity analysis indicated that the findings for leptin were robust. Our findings are consistent with higher levels of serum leptin being associated with asthma regardless of age, and low adiponectin levels being associated with asthma in adults only.


Author(s):  
Mark Harrison

This chapter describes types of trials as applied to Emergency Medicine, and in particular the Primary FRCEM examination. The chapter outlines the key details and advantages and disadvantages of case reports, case series, cohort studies, case–control studies, randomized controlled trials, crossover trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analysis. This chapter is laid out exactly following the RCEM syllabus, to allow easy reference and consolidation of learning.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document