The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/372/bmj.n71.full.pdf

The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

Background in 2010, the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP) published a sarcopenia definition that aimed to foster advances in identifying and caring for people with sarcopenia. In early 2018, the Working Group met again (EWGSOP2) to update the original definition in order to reflect scientific and clinical evidence that has built over the last decade. This paper presents our updated findings. Objectives to increase consistency of research design, clinical diagnoses and ultimately, care for people with sarcopenia. Recommendations sarcopenia is a muscle disease (muscle failure) rooted in adverse muscle changes that accrue across a lifetime; sarcopenia is common among adults of older age but can also occur earlier in life. In this updated consensus paper on sarcopenia, EWGSOP2: (1) focuses on low muscle strength as a key characteristic of sarcopenia, uses detection of low muscle quantity and quality to confirm the sarcopenia diagnosis, and identifies poor physical performance as indicative of severe sarcopenia; (2) updates the clinical algorithm that can be used for sarcopenia case-finding, diagnosis and confirmation, and severity determination and (3) provides clear cut-off points for measurements of variables that identify and characterise sarcopenia. Conclusions EWGSOP2's updated recommendations aim to increase awareness of sarcopenia and its risk. With these new recommendations, EWGSOP2 calls for healthcare professionals who treat patients at risk for sarcopenia to take actions that will promote early detection and treatment. We also encourage more research in the field of sarcopenia in order to prevent or delay adverse health outcomes that incur a heavy burden for patients and healthcare systems.

/pdf/sarcopenia-revised-european-consensus-on-definition-and-4bp7en4cxo.pdf

Sarcopenia: Revised European consensus on definition and diagnosis

Prospective Cohort Study

Secret History: Return of the Black Death Channel 4, 7-8pm In 1348 the Black Death swept through London, killing people within days of the appearance of their first symptoms. Exactly how many died, and why, has long been a mystery. This Secret History documentary follows experts as they pick through the evidence and reveal why the plague killed on such a scale. And they ask, what might be coming next?

Medscape

Doing Qualitative Research

/pdf/response-to-comment-on-responders-to-platelet-rich-plasma-in-1hlclqdtae.pdf

Response to: Comment on "Responders to Platelet-Rich Plasma in Osteoarthritis: A Technical Analysis".

Knee osteoarthitis and platelet-rich plasma treatment: How to improve the efficiency?

(1) Background: The supine testing position is suitable for early quadriceps strength (QS) assessment in intensive care unit, while a seated position is more appropriate for survivors who have regained mobility. Acquiring consistent measurements is essential for longitudinal follow-up. We compared the QS generated in different settings in healthy volunteers. (2) Methods: Isometric QS was assessed using a MicroFet2 and standardised protocols comparing different modalities. Hip and knee flexion angles were, respectively, 45° and 40° (H45-K40) in the supine position, and both at 90° (H90-K90) in the seated position. Dynamometer was either handheld (non-fixed configuration, NFC), or fixed (FC) in a cubicle. (3) Results: QS in H90–K90 and H45-K40 positions were strongly correlated, but QS was higher in the later position regardless of the configuration. Compared to H45-K40, biases of 108.2N (or 28.05%) and 110.3N (27.13%) were observed in H90-K90 position, respectively, in the NFC and FC. These biases were independently and positively associated with QS (p < 0.001). For both position, there were no significant differences between QS measured in NFC or FC. (4) Conclusions: The quadriceps was less efficient in the seated position, compared to the supine position, in healthy volunteers. These findings have practical implications for further assessments and research in critically ill patients.

/pdf/experimental-approach-of-quadriceps-strength-measurement-3nhub45p.pdf

Experimental Approach of Quadriceps Strength Measurement: Implications for Assessments in Critically Ill Survivors

Background The validity of self-reported mammography uptake is often questioned. We assessed the related selection and reporting biases among women aged 50-69 years in the Belgian Health Interview Survey (BHIS) using reimbursement data for mammography stemming from the Belgian Compulsory Health Insurance organizations (BCHI). Methods Individual BHIS 2013 data (n = 1040) were linked to BCHI data 2010-13 (BHIS-BCHI sample). Being reimbursed for mammography within the last 2-years was used as the gold standard. Selection bias was assessed by comparing BHIS estimates reimbursement rates in BHIS-BCHI with similar estimates from the Echantillon Permanent/Permanente Steekproef (EPS), a random sample of BCHI data, while reporting bias was investigated by comparing self-reported versus reimbursement information in the BHIS-BCHI. Reporting bias was further explored through measures of agreement and logistic regression. Results Mammography uptake rates based on self-reported information and reimbursement from the BHIS-BCHI were 75.5% and 69.8%, respectively. In the EPS, it was 64.1%. The validity is significantly affected by both selection bias {relative size = 8.93% [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.21-14.64]} and reporting bias [relative size = 8.22% (95% CI: 0.76-15.68)]. Sensitivity was excellent (93.7%), while the specificity was fair (66.4%). The agreement was moderate (kappa = 0.63). Women born in non-EU countries (OR = 2.81, 95% CI: 1.54-5.13), with high household income (OR = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.02-1.60) and those reporting poor perceived health (OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.14-1.73) were more likely to inaccurately report their mammography uptake. Conclusions The validity of self-reported mammography uptake in women aged 50-69 years is affected by both selection and reporting bias. Both administrative and survey data are complementary when assessing mammography uptake.

https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/8689144/file/8689145.pdf

Olivier Bruyère

Papers

Response to: Comment on "Responders to Platelet-Rich Plasma in Osteoarthritis: A Technical Analysis".

Knee osteoarthitis and platelet-rich plasma treatment: How to improve the efficiency?

Experimental Approach of Quadriceps Strength Measurement: Implications for Assessments in Critically Ill Survivors

Validity of self-reported mammography uptake in the Belgian health interview survey: selection and reporting bias.

Clinical components linked to sarcopenia: the sarcophage study