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.

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 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.

Rotational Bed Therapy to Prevent and Treat Respiratory Complications: A Review and Meta-Analysis

2007 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
David R. Goldhill ◽  
Michael Imhoff ◽  
Barbara McLean ◽  
Carl Waldmann
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Convincing Evidence ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Respiratory Complications ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses

• Background Immobility is associated with complications involving many body systems. • Objective To review the effect of rotational therapy (use of therapeutic surfaces that turn on their longitudinal axes) on prevention and/or treatment of respiratory complications in critically ill patients. • Methods Published articles evaluating prophylaxis and/or treatment were reviewed. Prospective randomized controlled trials were assessed for quality and included in meta-analyses. • Results A literature search yielded 15 nonrandomized, uncontrolled, or retrospective studies. Twenty prospective randomized controlled trials on rotational therapy were published between 1987 and 2004. Various types of beds were studied, but few details on the rotational parameters were reported. The usual control was manual turning of patients by nurses every 2 hours. One animal investigation and 12 clinical trials addressed the effectiveness of rotational therapy in preventing respiratory complications. Significant benefits were reported in the animal study and 4 of the trials. Significant benefits to patients were reported in 2 of another 4 studies focused on treatment of established complications. Researchers have examined the effects of rotational therapy on mucus transport, intrapulmonary shunt, hemodynamic effects, urine output, and intracranial pressure. Little convincing evidence is available, however, on the most effective rotation parameters (eg, degree, pause time, and amount of time per day). Meta-analysis suggests that rotational therapy decreases the incidence of pneumonia but has no effect on duration of mechanical ventilation, number of days in intensive care, or hospital mortality. • Conclusions Rotational therapy may be useful for preventing and treating respiratory complications in selected critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation.

scholarly journals Efficacy of Cancer Immunotherapy: An Umbrella Review of Meta-analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials

Cancers ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 1801 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim ◽  
Lee ◽  
Eisenhut ◽  
Vliet ◽  
Kronbichler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Cancer Immunotherapy ◽  
Prediction Interval ◽  
Convincing Evidence ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Interferon Α ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Cancer Immunotherapies

We conducted a systematic review for evidence of the clinical efficacy of cancer immunotherapies. We searched PubMed from inception to 14 February 2018 for meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of cancer immunotherapies. Re-analyses were performed to estimate the summary effect size under random-effects, the 95% confidence interval (CI), heterogeneity, and the 95% prediction interval, and we determined the strength of the evidence. We examined publication bias and excess significance bias. 63 articles corresponding to 247 meta-analyses were eligible. Nine meta-analyses were classified to have convincing evidence, and 75 were classified as suggestive evidence. The clinical benefit of immunotherapy was supported by convincing evidence in the following settings: anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy for treating advanced melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the combination of rituximab and chemotherapy for treating chronic lymphocytic leukemia and B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, adoptive cell immunotherapy for NSCLC, and the combination of interferon α and chemotherapy for metastatic melanoma. A further meta-analysis of 16 RCTs showed that anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAb therapy had a benefit in patients with solid tumors (overall survival; hazard ratio = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.68–0.79; p < 0.001), supported by convincing evidence. In the future, rigorous approaches are needed when interpreting meta-analyses to gain better insight into the true efficacy of cancer immunotherapy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document