RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach is a systematic method for assessing the certainty of evidence (CoE) and strength of recommendations in health care. We aimed to verify the effects of an online-based GRADE course on multirater consistency in the evaluation of the CoE in systematic reviews (SRs) analysis. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTINGS: Sixty-five Brazilian methodologists and researchers participated in an online course over 8 weeks. Asynchronous lessons and weekly synchronous meetings addressed the GRADE system in the context of CoE assessment. We asked participants to evaluate the CoE of random SRs (two before and another two after the course). Analyzes focused on the multirater agreement with a standard response, in the interrater agreement, and before-after changes in the proportion of participants that rated down the domains. RESULTS: 48 individuals completed the course. Participants presented improvements in the raters' assessment of the CoE using the GRADE approach after the course. The multirater consistency of indirectness, imprecision, and the overall CoE increased after the course, as well as the agreement between raters and the standard response. Furthermore, interrater reliability increased for risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, publication bias, and overall CoE, indicating progress in between-raters consistency. After the course, approximately 78% of individuals rated down the overall CoE to a low/very low degree, and participants presented more explanations for the judgment of each domain. CONCLUSION: An online GRADE course improved the consistency and agreement of the CoE assessment by Brazilian researchers. Online training courses have the potential to improve skills in guideline methodology development.

Assuntos

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the methodological quality of published systematic reviews on randomized and non-randomized clinical trials to synthesize evidence on the association between IL-6, immunosenescence, and aerobic and/or resistance exercise. METHOD: The Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Systematic Reviews (PRIO-harms) guideline was used, with registration number CRD42022346142-PROSPERO. Relevant databases such as Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched using English Medical Subject Headings terms. Inclusion criteria were systematic reviews analyzing aerobic exercise, resistance exercise, or a combination of both and assessing IL-6 as a biomarker of cellular immunosenescence in humans. The Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2) was employed. RESULTS: Out of 742 identified articles, 18 were eligible, and 13 were selected for analysis. Sample sizes ranged from 249 to 1421 participants, mostly female, with ages ranging from 17 to 95 years. Aerobic exercise was the most studied type (46.15%), followed by combined exercise (38.46%) and resistance exercise (15.38%). Aerobic exercise showed a statistically significant reduction in IL-6, C-reactive protein (CRP), and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) levels. Among the 13 reviews analyzed using AMSTAR-2, 8 were rated as critically low quality, and 5 were classified as low quality. CONCLUSION: Aerobic exercise has anti-inflammatory properties and the potential to modulate IL-6, CRP, and TNF-α levels in immunosenescence. However, the limited methodological quality of the analyzed systematic reviews highlights the urgent need for robust, high-quality studies to improve access to information and facilitate evidence-based decision-making in healthcare.

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Key performance indicators (KPIs) are quantifiable measures used to monitor the quality of health services. Implementation guidelines for clinical pharmacy services (CPS) do not specify KPIs. AIM: To assess the quality of the studies that have developed KPIs for CPS in inpatient hospital settings. METHOD: A systematic review was conducted by searching in Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed, supplemented with citation analyses and grey literature searches, to retrieve studies addressing the development of KPIs in CPS for hospital inpatients. Exclusions comprised drug- or disease-specific studies and those not written in English, French, Portuguese, or Spanish. The Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation (AIRE) instrument assessed methodological quality. Domain scores and an overall score were calculated using an equal-weight principle. KPIs were classified into structure, process, and outcome categories. The protocol is available at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/KS2G3 . RESULTS: We included thirteen studies that collectively developed 225 KPIs. Merely five studies scored over 50% on the AIRE instrument, with domains #3 (scientific evidence) and #4 (formulation and usage) displaying low scores. Among the KPIs, 8.4% were classified as structure, 85.8% as process, and 5.8% as outcome indicators. The overall methodological quality did not exhibit a clear association with a major focus on outcomes. None of the studies provided benchmarking reference values. CONCLUSION: The KPIs formulated for evaluating CPS in hospital settings primarily comprised process measures, predominantly suggested by pharmacists, with inadequate evidence support, lacked piloting or validation, and consequently, were devoid of benchmarking reference values.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Chronic heart failure continues to be one of the main causes of impairment in the functioning and quality of life of people who suffer from it, as well as one of the main causes of mortality in our country and around the world. Mexico has a high prevalence of risk factors for developing heart failure, such as high blood pressure, diabetes, and obesity, which makes it essential to have an evidence-based document that provides recommendations to health professionals involved in the diagnosis and treatment of these patients. This document establishes the clinical practice guide (CPG) prepared at the initiative of the Mexican Society of Cardiology (SMC) in collaboration with the Iberic American Agency for the Development and Evaluation of Health Technologies, with the purpose of establishing recommendations based on the best available evidence and agreed upon by an interdisciplinary group of experts. This document complies with international quality standards, such as those described by the US Institute of Medicine (IOM), the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE), the Intercollegiate Network for Scottish Guideline Development (SIGN) and the Guidelines International Network (G-I-N). The Guideline Development Group was integrated in a multi-collaborative and interdisciplinary manner with the support of methodologists with experience in systematic literature reviews and the development of CPG. A modified Delphi panel methodology was developed and conducted to achieve an adequate level of consensus in each of the recommendations contained in this CPG. We hope that this document contributes to better clinical decision making and becomes a reference point for clinicians who manage patients with chronic heart failure in all their clinical stages and in this way, we improve the quality of clinical care, improve their quality of life and reducing its complications.

La insuficiencia cardiaca crónica sigue siendo unas de las principales causas de afectación en el funcionamiento y en la calidad de vida de las personas que la presentan, así como una de las primeras causas de mortalidad en nuestro país y en todo el mundo. México tiene una alta prevalencia de factores de riesgo para desarrollar insuficiencia cardiaca, tales como hipertensión arterial, diabetes y obesidad, lo que hace imprescindible contar con un documento basado en la evidencia que brinde recomendaciones a los profesionales de la salud involucrados en el diagnóstico y el tratamiento de estos pacientes. Este documento establece la guía de práctica clínica (GPC) elaborada por iniciativa de la Sociedad Mexicana de Cardiología (SMC) en colaboración con la Agencia Iberoamericana de Desarrollo y Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud, con la finalidad de establecer recomendaciones basadas en la mejor evidencia disponible y consensuadas por un grupo interdisciplinario y multicolaborativo de expertos. Cumple con estándares internacionales de calidad, como los descritos por el Institute of Medicine de los Estados Unidos de América (IOM), el National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) del Reino Unido, la Intercollegiate Network for Scottish Guideline Development (SIGN) de Escocia y la Guidelines International Network (G-I-N). El grupo de desarrollo de la guía se integró de manera interdisciplinaria con el apoyo de metodólogos con experiencia en revisiones sistemáticas de la literatura y en el desarrollo de GPC. Se llevó a cabo y se condujo metodología de panel Delphi modificado para lograr un nivel de consenso adecuado en cada una de las recomendaciones contenidas en esta GPC. Esperamos que este documento contribuya para la mejor toma de decisiones clínicas y se convierta en un punto de referencia para los clínicos que manejan pacientes con insuficiencia cardiaca crónica en todas sus etapas clínicas, y de esta manera logremos mejorar la calidad en la atención clínica, aumentar la calidad de vida de los pacientes y disminuir las complicaciones de la enfermedad.

Assuntos

RESUMO

This is a protocol for an overview to summarize the findings of Systematic Reviews (SR) dealing with Photodynamic Inactivation (PDI) for control of oral diseases. Specific variables of oral infectious will be considered as outcomes, according to dental specialty. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), MEDLINE, LILACS, Embase, and Epistemonikos will be searched, as well as reference lists. A search strategy was developed for each database using only terms related to the intervention (PDI) aiming to maximize sensitivity. After checking for duplicate entries, selection of reviews will be performed in a two-stage technique: two authors will independently screening titles and abstracts, and then full texts will be assessed for inclusion/exclusion criteria. Any disagreement will be resolved through discussion and/or consultation with a third reviewer. Data will be extracted following the recommendations in Chapter V of Cochrane Handbook and using an electronic pre-specified form. The evaluation of the methodological quality and risk of bias (RoB) of the SR included will be carried out using the AMSTAR 2 and ROBIS. Narrative summaries of relevant results from the individual SR will be carried out and displayed in tables and figures. A specific summary will focus on PDI parameters and study designs, such as the type and concentration of photosensitizer, pre-irradiation time, irradiation dosimetry, and infection or microbiological models, to identify the PDI protocols with clinical potential. We will summarize the quantitative results of the SRs narratively.

Assuntos

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Penile fracture (PF) affects 1,14 to 10,48 men in every 100.000 men in East Asia, and the primary aetiology is sexual intercourse, but the knowledge regarding the most dangerous sexual position is not well explained. This study compares three sexual positions: man on top position (MTP), woman on top position (WTP), and doggy style position (DSP), leading to PF potential. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search of sexual position-related PF in Google Scholar, PubMed, Cochrane, and PMC Europe was performed. Criteria inclusion was the full text of relevant articles which describ the number of sexual positions. It was analyzed by odds ratio, random model effect, and the OR and 95%CI were calculated. RESULTS: 12 relevant papers involving 490 patients comprised 169 MTP, 120 WTP, 158 DSP, and 43 no intercourse cases. Meta-analysis of all sexual positions was a MTP P= 0,04, WTP P=0,49, and DSP P=0,0005. CONCLUSION: The man-dominant positions (MTP and DSP) were significantly potential for PF, which speculated that when a man is dominant and very excited, intercourse may become highly vigorous and impact trauma. This study found that man's dominant position consists of DSP and the MTP significantly lead to PF.

Assuntos

RESUMO

ABSTRACT Purpose: Penile fracture (PF) affects 1,14 to 10,48 men in every 100.000 men in East Asia, and the primary aetiology is sexual intercourse, but the knowledge regarding the most dangerous sexual position is not well explained. This study compares three sexual positions: man on top position (MTP), woman on top position (WTP), and doggy style position (DSP), leading to PF potential. Materials and methods: A search of sexual position-related PF in Google Scholar, PubMed, Cochrane, and PMC Europe was performed. Criteria inclusion was the full text of relevant articles which describ the number of sexual positions. It was analyzed by odds ratio, random model effect, and the OR and 95%CI were calculated. Results: Twelve relevant papers involving 490 patients comprised 169 MTP, 120 WTP, 158 DSP, and 43 no intercourse cases. Meta-analysis of all sexual positions was a MTP P= 0,04, WTP P=0,49, and DSP P=0,0005. Conclusions: The man-dominant positions (MTP and DSP) were significantly potential for PF, which speculated that when a man is dominant and very excited, intercourse may become highly vigorous and impact trauma. This study found that man's dominant position consists of DSP and the MTP significantly lead to PF.

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are considered high-level evidence to support a decision on therapeutic interventions, and their methodological quality is essential to provide reliable and applicable results. OBJECTIVE: This meta-epidemiological study aimed to map and critically appraise systematic reviews assessing treatments for vesiculobullous skin diseases. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search strategy on MEDLINE (via Pubmed) in December 2022 without restrictions to find systematic reviews evaluating pharmacological interventions for vesiculobullous skin diseases. The methodological quality was assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool, and additional information was extracted. We identified nine systematic reviews published between 2002 and 2021, seven assessing pemphigus. RESULTS: According to the AMSTAR-2 tool, 55.6% were classified as critically low quality, 22.2% as moderate quality, 11.1% as low and 11.1% as high quality. No review assessed the certainty of the evidence (GRADE); 86% of pemphigus reviews had at least two overlapping RCTs. There were some limitations regarding methodological flaws and the AMSTAR-2 tool use CONCLUSIONS: These findings reveal a frail methodological quality of systematic reviews about vesiculobullous diseases treatment that may impact the results. Therefore, methodological rigor is mandatory for future systematic reviews to avoid duplication of effort and increase the certainty of the evidence supporting decision-making.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Abstract Background Systematic reviews of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are considered high-level evidence to support a decision on therapeutic interventions, and their methodological quality is essential to provide reliable and applicable results. Objective This meta-epidemiological study aimed to map and critically appraise systematic reviews assessing treatments for vesiculobullous skin diseases. Methods We conducted a comprehensive search strategy on MEDLINE (via Pubmed) in December 2022 without restrictions to find systematic reviews evaluating pharmacological interventions for vesiculobullous skin diseases. The methodological quality was assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool, and additional information was extracted. We identified nine systematic reviews published between 2002 and 2021, seven assessing pemphigus. Results According to the AMSTAR-2 tool, 55.6% were classified as critically low quality, 22.2% as moderate quality, 11.1% as low and 11.1% as high quality. No review assessed the certainty of the evidence (GRADE); 86% of pemphigus reviews had at least two overlapping RCTs. There were some limitations regarding methodological flaws and the AMSTAR-2 tool use Conclusions These findings reveal a frail methodological quality of systematic reviews about vesiculobullous diseases treatment that may impact the results. Therefore, methodological rigor is mandatory for future systematic reviews to avoid duplication of effort and increase the certainty of the evidence supporting decision-making.

RESUMO

ABSTRACT Objective: This bibliometric study aimed to analyze the citation metrics, journal and author characteristics, and subject domains of the 100 top-cited Systematic Reviews (SR) and Meta-Analysis (MA) in orthodontics. Material and Methods: An electronic database search was conducted for SR and MA in the Web of Science on 16th July 2023, without language and time restrictions. Of the 802 hits returned, the 100 top-cited orthodontic articles were shortlisted. They were analyzed for citation metrics, journal characteristics (journal, year of publication, impact factor-IF), author and affiliation characteristics (number, primary and corresponding author's affiliation, and country), study domain, and keywords. Results: These articles were published from 1996 to 2021 in 20 journals, with an impact factor of 1.9 to 10.5, by 351 researchers affiliated with 104 universities. Their citations ranged from 45 to 344, and 34 poised to be classified as classic (≥ 100 citations). The maximum number of articles was published in the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (n=38), the European Journal of Orthodontics (n=18), and the Angle Orthodontist (n=8). The authors for individual papers ranged from 1 to 10, with 5 being the most common (n=58). Europe had the highest contribution regarding the number of corresponding authors, institutions, and citations. Bone anchorage and orthodontic tooth movement/Biomechanics were the most frequently researched domains (n=11 each). The most common keyword used was Orthodontics (n=19), followed by Systematic Review (n=16) and Meta-analysis (n=9). Conclusion: In general, the top cited SR and MA were published in high-impact orthodontic journals, were multi-authored, and reflected the collaborative work from different universities.

RESUMO Objetivo: Este estudo bibliométrico teve como objetivo analisar as métricas de citação, as características dos periódicos e dos autores, e os domínios temáticos das 100 Revisões Sistemáticas (RS) e Meta-Análises (MA) mais citadas em Ortodontia. Material e Métodos: Uma pesquisa em banco de dados eletrônico foi realizada para RS e MA na Web of Science no dia 16 de julho de 2023, sem restrições de idioma e data de publicação. Dos 802 resultados encontrados, foram selecionados os 100 artigos ortodônticos mais citados. Eles foram analisados quanto a métricas de citação, características do periódico (revista, ano de publicação e fator de impacto [FI]), características dos autores e afiliação (quantidade, afiliação dos autores principal e correspondente, e país), domínio do estudo e palavras-chave. Resultados: Esses artigos foram publicados entre 1996 e 2021 em 20 periódicos com fator de impacto de 1,9 a 10,5, por 351 pesquisadores afiliados a 104 universidades. Suas citações variaram de 45 a 344, com 34 prestes a serem classificados como clássicos (≥ 100 citações). A maior quantidade de artigos foi publicada na American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (n=38), na European Journal of Orthodontics (n=18), e no The Angle Orthodontist (n=8). A quantidade de autores por artigo variou de 1 a 10, sendo 5 o mais frequente (n=58). A Europa teve a maior contribuição em relação ao número de autores correspondentes, instituições e citações. Ancoragem óssea e movimentação dentária ortodôntica/Biomecânica foram os domínios mais abordados (n=11 cada). A palavra-chave mais utilizada foi Ortodontia (n=19), seguida de Revisão Sistemática (n=16) e Meta-análise (n=9). Conclusão: No geral, as RS e MA mais citadas foram publicadas em revistas ortodônticas de alto impacto, eram de autoria múltipla e refletiam o trabalho colaborativo de diferentes universidades.