scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Cochrane Collaboration

NonprofitOxford, United Kingdom
About: Cochrane Collaboration is a nonprofit organization based out in Oxford, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Systematic review & Randomized controlled trial. The organization has 1995 authors who have published 3928 publications receiving 382695 citations.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Delayed strategies in acute, uncomplicated respiratory infections were associated with slightly greater but clinically similar symptom burden and duration and also with substantially reduced antibiotic use when compared with an immediate strategy.
Abstract: Importance Delayed antibiotic prescription helps to reduce antibiotic use with reasonable symptom control. There are different strategies of delayed prescription, but it is not yet clear which one is the most effective. Objective To determine the efficacy and safety of 2 delayed strategies in acute, uncomplicated respiratory infections. Design, Setting, and Participants We recruited 405 adults with acute, uncomplicated respiratory infections from 23 primary care centers in Spain to participate in a pragmatic, open-label, randomized clinical trial. Interventions Patients were randomized to 1 of 4 potential prescription strategies: (1) a delayed patient-led prescription strategy; (2) a delayed prescription collection strategy requiring patients to collect their prescription from the primary care center; (3) an immediate prescription strategy; or (4) a no antibiotic strategy. Delayed prescription strategies consist of prescribing an antibiotic to take only if the symptoms worsen or if there is no improvement several days after the medical visit. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcomes were the duration of symptoms and severity of symptoms. Each symptom was scored using a 6-point Likert scale (scores of 3 or 4 were considered moderate; 5 or 6, severe). Secondary outcomes included antibiotic use, patient satisfaction, and patients’ beliefs in the effectiveness of antibiotics. Results A total of 405 patients were recruited, 398 of whom were included in the analysis; 136 patients (34.2%) were men; mean (SD) age, 45 (17) years. The mean severity of symptoms ranged from 1.8 to 3.5 points on the Likert scale, and mean (SD) duration of symptoms described on first visit was 6 (6) days. The mean (SD) general health status on first visit was 54 (20) based on a scale with 0 indicating worst health status; 100, best status. Overall, 314 patients (80.1%) were nonsmokers, and 372 patients (93.5%) did not have a respiratory comorbidity. The presence of symptoms on first visit was similar among the 4 groups. The mean (SD) duration of severe symptoms was 3.6 (3.3) days for the immediate prescription group and 4.7 (3.6) days for the no prescription group. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) of severe symptoms was 3 (1-4) days for the prescription collection group and 3 (2-6) days for the patient-led prescription group. The median (IQR) of the maximum severity for any symptom was 5 (3-5) for the immediate prescription group and the prescription collection group; 5 (4-5) for the patient-led prescription group; and 5 (4-6) for the no prescription group. Patients randomized to the no prescription strategy or to either of the delayed strategies used fewer antibiotics and less frequently believed in antibiotic effectiveness. Satisfaction was similar across groups. Conclusions and Relevance Delayed strategies were associated with slightly greater but clinically similar symptom burden and duration and also with substantially reduced antibiotic use when compared with an immediate strategy. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier:NCT01363531

70 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is emphasized that patients who are considered candidates for a multimodal approach, including radical surgery, should be treated as part of clinical trials in MPM-dedicated centres.
Abstract: The European Respiratory Society (ERS)/European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS)/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) task force brought together experts to update previous 2009 ERS/ESTS guidelines on management of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), a rare cancer with globally poor outcome, after a systematic review of the 2009-2018 literature. The evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The evidence syntheses were discussed and recommendations formulated by this multidisciplinary group of experts. Diagnosis: pleural biopsies remain the gold standard to confirm the diagnosis, usually obtained by thoracoscopy but occasionally via image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy in cases of pleural symphysis or poor performance status. Pathology: standard staining procedures are insufficient in ∼10% of cases, justifying the use of specific markers, including BAP-1 and CDKN2A (p16) for the separation of atypical mesothelial proliferation from MPM. Staging: in the absence of a uniform, robust and validated staging system, we advise using the most recent 2016 8th TNM (tumour, node, metastasis) classification, with an algorithm for pretherapeutic assessment. Monitoring: patient's performance status, histological subtype and tumour volume are the main prognostic factors of clinical importance in routine MPM management. Other potential parameters should be recorded at baseline and reported in clinical trials. Treatment: (chemo)therapy has limited efficacy in MPM patients and only selected patients are candidates for radical surgery. New promising targeted therapies, immunotherapies and strategies have been reviewed. Because of limited data on the best combination treatment, we emphasize that patients who are considered candidates for a multimodal approach, including radical surgery, should be treated as part of clinical trials in MPM-dedicated centres.

70 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A sensitive and precise filter, developed using records selected based on title and abstract information, is available for identifying reports of RCTs in the CINAHL Plus database via EBSCOhost and is likely to reduce the number of results needing to be screened to a quarter of those retrieved by other published filters.
Abstract: Background Evidence synthesis reviews in health care rely on the efficient identification of research evidence, particularly evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). There are no recently validated filters to identify RCTs in the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL Plus). Objectives To develop, test and validate a search filter to identify reports of RCTs from CINAHL Plus. Methods Nine sets of relevant and irrelevant records were identified to develop and test search filters iteratively. Two sets were used to validate the sensitivity and precision of the filters. The performance of two previously published filters and the filter built into EBSCOhost was evaluated. Results We present a validated filter which offers sensitivity of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.77-0.95) and precision of 0.36 (95% CI: 0.31-0.41). This is comparable to the sensitivity of published filters, but has much better precision. Conclusions A sensitive and precise filter, developed using records selected based on title and abstract information, is available for identifying reports of RCTs in the CINAHL Plus database via EBSCOhost. Using this filter is likely to reduce the number of results needing to be screened to a quarter of those retrieved by other published filters.

70 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This review will provide health care practitioners with a better understanding of the available prenatal screening methods for OCNTd and the benefits and risks associated with each technique to allow evidenced-based decisions on OCNTD screening, diagnosis, and obstetrical management.
Abstract: Objective To provide obstetrical and genetic health care practitioners with guidelines and recommendations for prenatal screening, diagnosis, and obstetrical management of fetal open and closed neural tube defects (OCNTD). Options This review includes prenatal screening and diagnostic techniques currently being used for the detection of OCNTD including maternal serum alpha fetoprotein screening, ultrasound, fetal magnetic resonance imaging, and amniocentesis. Outcomes To improve prenatal screening, diagnosis, and obstetrical management of OCNTD while taking into consideration patient care, efficacy, cost, and care procedures. Evidence Published literature was retrieved through searches of PubMed or MEDLINE, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library in November, 2013, using appropriate controlled vocabulary and key words (e.g., prenatal screening, congenital anomalies, neural tube defects, alpha fetoprotein, ultrasound scan, magnetic resonance imaging). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies published in English from 1977 to 2012. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to November 30, 2013. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies. An online survey of health care practitioners was also reviewed. Values The quality of evidence in this document was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Table). Benefits, harms, and costs This review will provide health care practitioners with a better understanding of the available prenatal screening methods for OCNTD and the benefits and risks associated with each technique to allow evidenced-based decisions on OCNTD screening, diagnosis, and obstetrical management.

70 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: RCTs published in higher impact journals were more likely to report methodological safeguards against bias and patient-important outcomes than those published in lower impact journals, however, sufficient limitations remain such that publication in a higher impact journal does not ensure low risk of bias.

70 citations


Authors

Showing all 2000 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Douglas G. Altman2531001680344
John P. A. Ioannidis1851311193612
Jasvinder A. Singh1762382223370
George A. Wells149941114256
Shah Ebrahim14673396807
Holger J. Schünemann141810113169
Paul G. Shekelle132601101639
Peter Tugwell129948125480
Jeremy M. Grimshaw123691115126
Peter Jüni12159399254
John J. McGrath120791124804
Arne Astrup11486668877
Mike Clarke1131037164328
Rachelle Buchbinder11261394973
Ian Roberts11271451933
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Copenhagen University Hospital
21.5K papers, 789.8K citations

88% related

VU University Medical Center
22.9K papers, 1.1M citations

88% related

University Medical Center Groningen
30.3K papers, 967K citations

88% related

World Health Organization
22.2K papers, 1.3M citations

87% related

Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre
12.6K papers, 659.2K citations

87% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
20231
202210
2021289
2020288
2019215
2018213