scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Gordon H. Guyatt

Bio: Gordon H. Guyatt is an academic researcher from McMaster University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Randomized controlled trial & Evidence-based medicine. The author has an hindex of 231, co-authored 1620 publications receiving 228631 citations. Previous affiliations of Gordon H. Guyatt include Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center & Cayetano Heredia University.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This study demonstrates that the improvement in exercise tolerance achieved by COPD patients with an unsupervised home pulmonary rehabilitation program is similar to the gains of patients in an intensive hospital-based program, however, the hospital program afforded greater benefit on the HRQOL emotional function domain.
Abstract: Objective To compare the effects of a simple home pulmonary rehabilitation program and an intensive hospital-based program in terms of the exercise tolerance and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Patients and Methods Patients in this prospective, multicenter trial were randomized to 2 groups to receive hospital or home pulmonary rehabilitation. Patients in both groups attended 2 informative sessions about the disease and 4 physical therapy sessions. Patients in the hospital group then carried out a structured exercise program while home group patients performed low intensity exercises at home without supervision. Results Twenty-eight patients were randomized to the hospital rehabilitation group and 23 to the home group. Both groups improved on the 6-minute walk test (mean difference, 8.7 m; P =.61). HRQOL measured with the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire also improved in both groups, but the change was greater on the domain of emotional function in the hospital rehabilitation group (mean difference between groups, 0.58 on a scale for which the smallest clinically relevant difference is 0.5 points). The benefits were maintained in both groups 6 months after the programs ended. Conclusions This study demonstrates that the improvement in exercise tolerance achieved by COPD patients with an unsupervised home pulmonary rehabilitation program is similar to the gains of patients in an intensive hospital-based program. However, the hospital program afforded greater benefit on the HRQOL domain of emotional function.

73 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Nov 2000-Chest
TL;DR: Current procedures for administration and reimbursement of home oxygen result in a large proportion of recipients not meeting criteria, as well as the prescription of excessive oxygen flow rates.

73 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors suggest a three-step approach when using an article from the surgical literature to guide patient care: assess whether the study can provide valid results, review the results, and consider how the results might be applied to your patient.
Abstract: Summary We suggest a three-step approach when using an article from the surgical literature to guide your patient care: (1) assess whether the study can provide valid results, (2) review the results, and (3) consider how the results might be applied to your patient. Randomization, concealment, intention-to-treat analysis, similarity of patients for known prognostic factors, blinding of patients and outcome assessors, and completeness of follow-up are important guides to study validity. The 95% confidence interval around the treatment effect is a measure of precision. Consider whether all of the clinically important outcomes were reported and whether the likely benefits of treatment outweigh the potential harm and costs.

73 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The results of an international survey that was undertaken to compare how respirologists prescribed oxygen highlight the need for multicentre studies that improve the effectiveness of long-term oxygen therapy utilization.
Abstract: While there is broad agreement about who should receive long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT), there is little information available on how clinicians should decide on the oxygen prescription itself, at rest, during sleep and during exercise. The authors describe the results of an international survey that was undertaken to compare how respirologists prescribed oxygen. A questionnaire was sent to 100 respirologists in each of seven countries. The questionnaire identified whether resting flow rates were derived in a standard manner or by individualized patient testing. Test targets were ascertained for rest, exercise and sleep, as was the percentage of time that each test target had to reach for the test to be accepted. The majority of respondents individualized the oxygen prescription at rest (81%). Resting arterial oxygen saturation (Sa,O2) was most commonly targeted at 90-91%. The approach to night prescription varied (p<0.001). Respirologists in Canada and the USA increased the resting Sa,O2 by 1-2 L x min(-1) during sleep, while those in Spain used the resting (awake) flow for the night prescription (62%). Respirologists in the Netherlands, France, and Italy individualized the night prescription more frequently. Although oxygen during exercise was individualized in most countries (74%), significant differences remained among countries (p<0.001). The majority of respirologists (62%) aimed to achieve an Sa,O2 of 90-91% during exercise, while 70% of all respirologists tried to achieve the desired Sa,O2 for 90% of the test. There were substantial differences among countries as to how the oxygen prescription was written. This survey highlights the need for multicentre studies that improve the effectiveness of long-term oxygen therapy utilization.

72 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: To determine the prevalence and outcomes of clinical investigations of NHP-drug pharmacokinetic interactions, electronic databases were searched from inception through March 2004, as well as reference lists from published reports and experts in the field for unpublished studies.
Abstract: :Interactions between natural health products (NHP) and prescription medications are of increasing concern. This paper aims to identify all clinical trials of NHP-drug interactions. To determine the prevalence and outcomes of clinical investigations of NHP-drug pharmacokinetic interactions,

72 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Moher et al. as mentioned in this paper introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses, which is used in this paper.
Abstract: David Moher and colleagues introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses

62,157 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: The QUOROM Statement (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses) as mentioned in this paper was developed to address the suboptimal reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Abstract: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have become increasingly important in health care. Clinicians read them to keep up to date with their field,1,2 and they are often used as a starting point for developing clinical practice guidelines. Granting agencies may require a systematic review to ensure there is justification for further research,3 and some health care journals are moving in this direction.4 As with all research, the value of a systematic review depends on what was done, what was found, and the clarity of reporting. As with other publications, the reporting quality of systematic reviews varies, limiting readers' ability to assess the strengths and weaknesses of those reviews. Several early studies evaluated the quality of review reports. In 1987, Mulrow examined 50 review articles published in 4 leading medical journals in 1985 and 1986 and found that none met all 8 explicit scientific criteria, such as a quality assessment of included studies.5 In 1987, Sacks and colleagues6 evaluated the adequacy of reporting of 83 meta-analyses on 23 characteristics in 6 domains. Reporting was generally poor; between 1 and 14 characteristics were adequately reported (mean = 7.7; standard deviation = 2.7). A 1996 update of this study found little improvement.7 In 1996, to address the suboptimal reporting of meta-analyses, an international group developed a guidance called the QUOROM Statement (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses), which focused on the reporting of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.8 In this article, we summarize a revision of these guidelines, renamed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses), which have been updated to address several conceptual and practical advances in the science of systematic reviews (Box 1). Box 1 Conceptual issues in the evolution from QUOROM to PRISMA

46,935 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
04 Sep 2003-BMJ
TL;DR: A new quantity is developed, I 2, which the authors believe gives a better measure of the consistency between trials in a meta-analysis, which is susceptible to the number of trials included in the meta- analysis.
Abstract: Cochrane Reviews have recently started including the quantity I 2 to help readers assess the consistency of the results of studies in meta-analyses. What does this new quantity mean, and why is assessment of heterogeneity so important to clinical practice? Systematic reviews and meta-analyses can provide convincing and reliable evidence relevant to many aspects of medicine and health care.1 Their value is especially clear when the results of the studies they include show clinically important effects of similar magnitude. However, the conclusions are less clear when the included studies have differing results. In an attempt to establish whether studies are consistent, reports of meta-analyses commonly present a statistical test of heterogeneity. The test seeks to determine whether there are genuine differences underlying the results of the studies (heterogeneity), or whether the variation in findings is compatible with chance alone (homogeneity). However, the test is susceptible to the number of trials included in the meta-analysis. We have developed a new quantity, I 2, which we believe gives a better measure of the consistency between trials in a meta-analysis. Assessment of the consistency of effects across studies is an essential part of meta-analysis. Unless we know how consistent the results of studies are, we cannot determine the generalisability of the findings of the meta-analysis. Indeed, several hierarchical systems for grading evidence state that the results of studies must be consistent or homogeneous to obtain the highest grading.2–4 Tests for heterogeneity are commonly used to decide on methods for combining studies and for concluding consistency or inconsistency of findings.5 6 But what does the test achieve in practice, and how should the resulting P values be interpreted? A test for heterogeneity examines the null hypothesis that all studies are evaluating the same effect. The usual test statistic …

45,105 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
13 Sep 1997-BMJ
TL;DR: Funnel plots, plots of the trials' effect estimates against sample size, are skewed and asymmetrical in the presence of publication bias and other biases Funnel plot asymmetry, measured by regression analysis, predicts discordance of results when meta-analyses are compared with single large trials.
Abstract: Objective: Funnel plots (plots of effect estimates against sample size) may be useful to detect bias in meta-analyses that were later contradicted by large trials. We examined whether a simple test of asymmetry of funnel plots predicts discordance of results when meta-analyses are compared to large trials, and we assessed the prevalence of bias in published meta-analyses. Design: Medline search to identify pairs consisting of a meta-analysis and a single large trial (concordance of results was assumed if effects were in the same direction and the meta-analytic estimate was within 30% of the trial); analysis of funnel plots from 37 meta-analyses identified from a hand search of four leading general medicine journals 1993-6 and 38 meta-analyses from the second 1996 issue of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews . Main outcome measure: Degree of funnel plot asymmetry as measured by the intercept from regression of standard normal deviates against precision. Results: In the eight pairs of meta-analysis and large trial that were identified (five from cardiovascular medicine, one from diabetic medicine, one from geriatric medicine, one from perinatal medicine) there were four concordant and four discordant pairs. In all cases discordance was due to meta-analyses showing larger effects. Funnel plot asymmetry was present in three out of four discordant pairs but in none of concordant pairs. In 14 (38%) journal meta-analyses and 5 (13%) Cochrane reviews, funnel plot asymmetry indicated that there was bias. Conclusions: A simple analysis of funnel plots provides a useful test for the likely presence of bias in meta-analyses, but as the capacity to detect bias will be limited when meta-analyses are based on a limited number of small trials the results from such analyses should be treated with considerable caution. Key messages Systematic reviews of randomised trials are the best strategy for appraising evidence; however, the findings of some meta-analyses were later contradicted by large trials Funnel plots, plots of the trials9 effect estimates against sample size, are skewed and asymmetrical in the presence of publication bias and other biases Funnel plot asymmetry, measured by regression analysis, predicts discordance of results when meta-analyses are compared with single large trials Funnel plot asymmetry was found in 38% of meta-analyses published in leading general medicine journals and in 13% of reviews from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Critical examination of systematic reviews for publication and related biases should be considered a routine procedure

37,989 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as mentioned in this paper show that female breast cancer has surpassed lung cancer as the most commonly diagnosed cancer, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases (11.7%), followed by lung cancer, colorectal (11 4.4%), liver (8.3%), stomach (7.7%) and female breast (6.9%), and cervical cancer (5.6%) cancers.
Abstract: This article provides an update on the global cancer burden using the GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Worldwide, an estimated 19.3 million new cancer cases (18.1 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and almost 10.0 million cancer deaths (9.9 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) occurred in 2020. Female breast cancer has surpassed lung cancer as the most commonly diagnosed cancer, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases (11.7%), followed by lung (11.4%), colorectal (10.0 %), prostate (7.3%), and stomach (5.6%) cancers. Lung cancer remained the leading cause of cancer death, with an estimated 1.8 million deaths (18%), followed by colorectal (9.4%), liver (8.3%), stomach (7.7%), and female breast (6.9%) cancers. Overall incidence was from 2-fold to 3-fold higher in transitioned versus transitioning countries for both sexes, whereas mortality varied <2-fold for men and little for women. Death rates for female breast and cervical cancers, however, were considerably higher in transitioning versus transitioned countries (15.0 vs 12.8 per 100,000 and 12.4 vs 5.2 per 100,000, respectively). The global cancer burden is expected to be 28.4 million cases in 2040, a 47% rise from 2020, with a larger increase in transitioning (64% to 95%) versus transitioned (32% to 56%) countries due to demographic changes, although this may be further exacerbated by increasing risk factors associated with globalization and a growing economy. Efforts to build a sustainable infrastructure for the dissemination of cancer prevention measures and provision of cancer care in transitioning countries is critical for global cancer control.

35,190 citations