Author
David J. Magee
Other affiliations: Cross Cancer Institute
Bio: David J. Magee is an academic researcher from University of Alberta. The author has contributed to research in topics: Rehabilitation & Patellofemoral pain syndrome. The author has an hindex of 31, co-authored 55 publications receiving 3701 citations. Previous affiliations of David J. Magee include Cross Cancer Institute.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: A valid and reliable scale for the assessment of the methodological quality of physical therapy trials needs to be developed after it was found that the Jadad Scale presented the best validity and reliability evidence; however, its validity forPhysical therapy trials has not been supported.
Abstract: Background and Purpose: The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is commonly evaluated in order to assess the risk of biased estimates of treatment effects. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify scales used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs in health care research and summarize the content, construction, development, and psychometric properties of these scales.
Methods: Extensive electronic database searches, along with a manual search, were performed.
Results: One hundred five relevant studies were identified. They accounted for 21 scales and their modifications. The majority of scales had not been rigorously developed or tested for validity and reliability. The Jadad Scale presented the best validity and reliability evidence; however, its validity for physical therapy trials has not been supported.
Discussion and Conclusion: Many scales are used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs, but most of these scales have not been adequately developed and have not been adequately tested for validity and reliability. A valid and reliable scale for the assessment of the methodological quality of physical therapy trials needs to be developed.
750 citations
••
TL;DR: Most of the studies included in this review were of very poor methodological quality; therefore, the findings should be interpreted with caution.
Abstract: Background and Purpose. The purpose of this qualitative systematic review was to assess the evidence concerning the effectiveness of physical therapy interventions in the management of temporomandibular disorders.
Methods. A literature search of published and unpublished articles resulted in the retrieval of 36 potential articles.
Results. Twelve studies met all selection criteria for inclusion in the review: 4 studies addressed the use of therapeutic exercise interventions, 2 studies examined the use of acupuncture, and 6 studies examined electrophysical modalities. Two studies provided evidence in support of postural exercises to reduce pain and to improve function and oral opening. One study provided evidence for the use of manual therapy in combination with active exercises to reduce pain and to improve oral opening. One study provided evidence in support of acupuncture to reduce pain when compared with no treatment; however, in another study no significant differences in pain outcomes were found between acupuncture and sham acupuncture. Significant improvements in oral opening were found with muscular awareness relaxation therapy, biofeedback training, and low-level laser therapy treatment.
Discussion and Conclusion. Most of the studies included in this review were of very poor methodological quality; therefore, the findings should be interpreted with caution.
331 citations
••
TL;DR: This review is to clarify and summarise the important aspects of ITT limitations, and contributions to clinical research, and the concepts of effectiveness and efficacy will be discussed in the context of randomised controlled trial (RCT) analysis.
Abstract: Background: Pragmatically, intention to treat (ITT) analysis has become the 'gold standard' for analysing the results of clinical trials. Despite its popularity and wide use, ITT is not without its critics, controversies and misunderstandings. To perform an ideal ITT requires a full set of data, where all patients providing data are followed, independent of any protocol deviation. However, most of the time, clinicians and researchers are faced with non-compliance and drop-outs. Thus, researchers should be familiar with the concepts associated with ITT and strategies to deal with missing data. Objectives: The objective of this review is to clarify and summarise the important aspects of ITT limitations, and contributions to clinical research. In addition, the concepts of effectiveness and efficacy will be discussed in the context of randomised controlled trial (RCT) analysis. This will help clinicians and researchers to have a greater understanding of ITT and apply this knowledge when designing, ev...
294 citations
••
TL;DR: It is suggested that CB on its own should be considered as a primary treatment option in reducing arm lymphedema volume, as well as manual lymph drainage massage in combination with multi-layered compression bandaging.
Abstract: Purpose. The purpose of this investigation was to compare the reduction in arm lymphedema volume achieved from manual lymph drainage massage (MLD) in combination with multi-layered compression bandaging (CB) to that achieved by CB alone.
235 citations
••
TL;DR: Enhanced TA combined with active IFC appears to lead to clinically meaningful improvements in outcomes when treating patients with CLBP, and the context in which physical therapy interventions are offered has the potential to dramatically improve therapeutic effects.
Abstract: Background Physical therapy influences chronic pain by means of the specific ingredient of an intervention as well as contextual factors including the setting and therapeutic alliance (TA) between provider and patient.
Objective The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of enhanced versus limited TA on pain intensity and muscle pain sensitivity in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) receiving either active or sham interferential current therapy (IFC).
Design An experimental controlled study with repeated measures was conducted. Participants were randomly divided into 4 groups: (1) AL (n=30), which included the application of active IFC combined with a limited TA; (2) SL (n=29), which received sham IFC combined with a limited TA; (3) AE (n=29), which received active IFC combined with an enhanced TA; and (4) SE (n=29), which received sham IFC combined with an enhanced TA.
Methods One hundred seventeen individuals with CLBP received a single session of active or sham IFC. Measurements included pain intensity as assessed with a numerical rating scale (PI-NRS) and muscle pain sensitivity as assessed via pressure pain threshold (PPT).
Results Mean differences on the PI-NRS were 1.83 cm (95% CI=14.3–20.3), 1.03 cm (95% CI=6.6–12.7), 3.13 cm (95% CI=27.2–33.3), and 2.22 cm (95% CI=18.9–25.0) for the AL, SL, AE, and SE groups, respectively. Mean differences on PPTs were 1.2 kg (95% CI=0.7–1.6), 0.3 kg (95% CI=0.2–0.8), 2.0 kg (95% CI=1.6–2.5), and 1.7 kg (95% CI=1.3–2.1), for the AL, SL, AE, and SE groups, respectively.
Limitations The study protocol aimed to test the immediate effect of the TA within a clinical laboratory setting.
Conclusions The context in which physical therapy interventions are offered has the potential to dramatically improve therapeutic effects. Enhanced TA combined with active IFC appears to lead to clinically meaningful improvements in outcomes when treating patients with CLBP.
203 citations
Cited by
More filters
••
Monash University1, University of Ottawa2, University of Amsterdam3, University of Paris4, Bond University5, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio6, American University of Beirut7, Oregon Health & Science University8, University of York9, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute10, University of Southern Denmark11, Johns Hopkins University12, Brigham and Women's Hospital13, Indiana University14, University of Bristol15, University College London16, University of Toronto17
TL;DR: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA 2020) as mentioned in this paper was developed to facilitate transparent and complete reporting of systematic reviews, and has been updated to reflect recent advances in systematic review methodology and terminology.
Abstract: The methods and results of systematic reviews should be reported in sufficient detail to allow users to assess the trustworthiness and applicability of the review findings. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was developed to facilitate transparent and complete reporting of systematic reviews and has been updated (to PRISMA 2020) to reflect recent advances in systematic review methodology and terminology. Here, we present the explanation and elaboration paper for PRISMA 2020, where we explain why reporting of each item is recommended, present bullet points that detail the reporting recommendations, and present examples from published reviews. We hope that changes to the content and structure of PRISMA 2020 will facilitate uptake of the guideline and lead to more transparent, complete, and accurate reporting of systematic reviews.
2,217 citations
••
2,050 citations
••
University of Nottingham1, University of Edinburgh2, Case Western Reserve University3, New York University4, University of California, Los Angeles5, Southampton General Hospital6, Erasmus University Rotterdam7, Keele University8, University of Paris9, University of Maryland, Baltimore10, University of Sydney11, University of Pittsburgh12, Lund University13, University of Ottawa14
TL;DR: In this paper, a systematic literature search was undertaken using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, Science Citation Index and the Cochrane Library to examine whether research evidence has changed from 31 January 2006 to 31 January 2009.
1,624 citations
••
TL;DR: The American Cancer Society (ACS) conducted a study with a group of experts in nutrition, physical activity, and cancer survivorship to evaluate the scientific evidence and best clinical practices related to optimal nutrition and physical activity after the diagnosis of cancer.
Abstract: Cancer survivors are often highly motivated to seek information about food choices, physical activity, and dietary supplements to improve their treatment outcomes, quality of life, and overall survival. To address these concerns, the American Cancer Society (ACS) convened a group of experts in nutrition, physical activity, and cancer survivorship to evaluate the scientific evidence and best clinical practices related to optimal nutrition and physical activity after the diagnosis of cancer. This report summarizes their findings and is intended to present health care providers with the best possible information with which to help cancer survivors and their families make informed choices related to nutrition and physical activity. The report discusses nutrition and physical activity guidelines during the continuum of cancer care, briefly highlighting important issues during cancer treatment and for patients with advanced cancer, but focusing largely on the needs of the population of individuals who are disease free or who have stable disease following their recovery from treatment. It also discusses select nutrition and physical activity issues such as body weight, food choices, food safety, and dietary supplements; issues related to selected cancer sites; and common questions about diet, physical activity, and cancer survivorship.
1,570 citations
••
University of British Columbia1, Oregon Health & Science University2, Heidelberg University3, Utrecht University4, Northern Arizona University5, University of Alberta6, George Mason University7, Wingate University8, American Cancer Society9, University of California, San Francisco10, Penn State Cancer Institute11
TL;DR: Enough evidence was available to conclude that specific doses of aerobic, combined aerobic plus resistance training, and/or resistance training could improve common cancer-related health outcomes, including anxiety, depressive symptoms, fatigue, physical functioning, and health-related quality of life.
Abstract: PurposeThe number of cancer survivors worldwide is growing, with over 15.5 million cancer survivors in the United States alone—a figure expected to double in the coming decades. Cancer survivors face unique health challenges as a result of their cancer diagnosis and the impact of treatments
1,174 citations