Showing papers by "Cochrane Collaboration published in 2022"
TL;DR: In this paper, four raters independently applied RoB2 on critical and important outcomes of individually randomized parallel-group trials (RCTs) included in the Cochrane Review “Cannabis and cannabinoids for people with multiple sclerosis.
23 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss some challenges faced when conducting living systematic reviews (LSR) in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, and provide methodological guidance for others doing similar work.
20 citations
TL;DR: The Living Overview of the Evidence (L•OVE) COVID-19 platform as discussed by the authors was used to assess the sensitivity of two secondary electronic sources of COVID19 studies.
9 citations
TL;DR: In this article , the Hartung-Knapp method and 95% prediction intervals (PIs) were used in random-effects meta-analyses to evaluate statistically significant meta-analysis results.
Abstract: Using the Hartung-Knapp method and 95% prediction intervals (PIs) in random-effects meta-analyses is recommended by experts but rarely applied. Therefore, we aimed to reevaluate statistically significant meta-analyses using the Hartung-Knapp method and 95% PIs. In this methodological study, three databases were searched from January 2010 to July 2019. We included systematic reviews reporting a statistically significant meta-analysis of at least four randomized controlled trials in advanced cancer patients using either a fixed-effect or random-effects model. We investigated the impact of switching from fixed-effect to random-effects meta-analysis and of using the recommended Hartung-Knapp method in random-effects meta-analyses. Furthermore, we calculated 95% PIs for all included meta-analyses. We identified 6234 hits, of which 261 statistically significant meta-analyses were included. Our recalculations of these 261 meta-analyses produced statistically significant results in 132 of 138 fixed-effect and 114 of 123 random-effects meta-analyses. When switching to a random-effects model, 19 of 132 fixed-effect meta-analyses (14.4%) were no longer statistically significant. Using the Hartung-Knapp method in random-effects meta-analyses resulted in 34 of 114 nonsignificant meta-analyses (29.8%). In the full sample (N = 261), the null effect was included by the 95% PI in 195 (74.7%) and the opposite effect (e.g., hazard ratio 0.5, opposite effect 2) in 98 meta-analyses (37.5%). Using the Hartung-Knapp method and PIs substantially influenced the interpretation of many published, statistically significant meta-analyses. We strongly encourage researchers to check if using the Hartung-Knapp method and reporting 95% PIs is appropriate in random-effects meta-analyses.
4 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors used a phenomenological qualitative study to understand the evolution of coping among women diagnosed with breast cancer over time, and the effect of age and family income on coping.
Abstract: To understand the evolution of coping among women diagnosed with breast cancer over time, and the effect of age and family income on coping. Using a phenomenological qualitative study, data was collected through semi-structured interviews with sixteen women in a hospital in Barcelona (Spain) between January 2018 and June 2019. An analysis of thematic content and discursive profile was carried out, assisted by the Nvivo v.12 program. Coping strategies change according to the meaning of breast cancer in each phase and the age and family income. In the acute phase, multiple coping strategies are identified, and this variety was more frequent among the young women in the study. In the extended phase, planning, distancing, and seeking social support become important. The latter used during treatment by older women in the study, regardless of family income. In the follow-up phase, distancing stands out, but also the search for social support among young women with fewer resources. Coping with breast cancer evolves according to the meaning that the disease receives in each phase. In addition, the analysis by discursive profile shows how the social support context is also related to the coping strategies in each phase.
2 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors presented and discussed the advantages and limitations of meta-analytical approaches to handle complex interventions, including single-effect model, full interaction model, additive main effects model, and two-way interaction model.
Abstract: There is a rapid increase in trials assessing healthcare interventions consisting of a combination of drugs (polytherapies) or multiple components. In the latter type of interventions (also known as complex interventions), the aspect of complexity is of paramount importance. For example, nonpharmacological interventions, such as psychological interventions or self-management interventions, usually share common components that relate to the nature of intervention, who delivers it, or where and how. In a network of trials, there is often the need to identify the most effective (or safest) component and/or combination of components. Four key meta-analytical approaches have been presented in the literature to handle complex interventions. These include (a) the single-effect model, (b) the full interaction model, (c) the additive main effects model, and (d) the two-way interaction model. In this chapter, we present and discuss the advantages and limitations of these approaches. We illustrate these methods using a network that assesses the relative effects of self-management interventions on waist size in patients with type 2 diabetes.
1 citations
TL;DR: It has been widely suspected that SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that caused the Covid-19 pandemic, escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology because of sloppy safety procedures and that it was man-made as part of the so-called gain-offunction research at the institute as mentioned in this paper .
Abstract: It has been widely suspected that SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that caused the Covid-19 pandemic, escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology because of sloppy safety procedures and that it was man-made as part of the so-called gain-of-function research at the institute [1]. If this is the case, it makes China responsible for over 5 million deaths so far and the United States complicit, as it funded the highly dangerous research [1]. The public has been misled about the likely origins of the pandemic right from the start [2].
1 citations
17 Feb 2022
TL;DR: In medical science, the ability to image microcirculation has become extremely helpful in early diagnosis of many health conditions, including cancer as mentioned in this paper , which is a very promising area of research.
Abstract: <p>[Para. 1 of Summary] -- In humans, the microcirculation network lies somewhere between 200 and 800 microns underneath the surface of our skin and other organs. In medical science, the ability to image microcirculation has become extremely helpful in early diagnosis of many health conditions, including cancer.<br></p><div><br></div>
12 Apr 2022
12 Apr 2022
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors conducted a systematic literature search of 17 databases and found that while most countries recognise that prisons are at risk of high levels of COVID-19 transmission, only a minority have explicitly prioritised people who live and work in prisons for vaccination.
Abstract: Abstract Overcrowding, poor conditions, and high population turnover make prisons highly susceptible to COVID-19. Vaccination is key to controlling COVID-19, yet there is disagreement regarding whether people who live and work in prisons should be prioritised in national vaccination programmes. To help resolve this, we critically examine the extent, nature, and quality of extant literature regarding prioritisation of COVID-19 vaccinations for people who live and work in prisons. Using a scoping review as our methodological framework, we conducted a systematic literature search of 17 databases. From 2,307 potentially eligible articles, we removed duplicates and screened titles and abstracts to retain 45 articles for review and quality appraisal. Findings indicated that while most countries recognise that prisons are at risk of high levels of COVID-19 transmission, only a minority have explicitly prioritised people who live and work in prisons for COVID-19 vaccination. Even among those that have, prioritisation criteria varies considerably. This is set against a backdrop of political barriers, such as politicians questioning the moral deservingness of people in prison; policy barriers, such as the absence of a unified international framework of how vaccine prioritisation should proceed in prisons; logistical barriers regarding vaccine administration in prisons; and behavioural barriers including vaccine hesitancy. We outline five strategies to prioritise people who live and work in prisons in COVID-19 vaccination plans: (1) improving data collection on COVID-19 vaccination, (2) reducing the number of people imprisoned, (3) tackling vaccine populism through advocacy, (4) challenging arbitrary prioritisation processes via legal processes, and (5) conducting more empirical research on COVID-19 vaccination planning, delivery, and acceptability. Implementing these strategies would help to reduce the impact of COVID-19 on the prison population, prevent community transmission, improve vaccine uptake in prisons beyond the current pandemic, foster political accountability, and inform future decision-making.