Nottingham Trent University

About: Nottingham Trent University is a education organization based out in Nottingham, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Context (language use). The organization has 4702 authors who have published 12862 publications receiving 307430 citations. The organization is also known as: NTU & Trent Polytechnic.

Systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials examining tinnitus management.

Abstract: Objectives/Hypothesis: To evaluate the existing level of evidence for tinnitus management strategies identified in the UK Department of Health's Good Practice Guideline. Study Design: Systematic review of peer-reviewed literature and meta-analyses. Methods: Searches were conducted in PubMed, Cambridge Scientific Abstracts, Web of Science, and EMBASE (earliest to August 2010), supplemented by hand searches in October 2010. Only randomized controlled trials that used validated questionnaire measures of symptoms (i.e., measures of tinnitus distress, anxiety, depression) were included. Results: Twenty-eight randomized controlled trials met our inclusion criteria, most of which provide moderate levels of evidence for the effects they reported. Levels of evidence were generally limited by the lack of blinding, lack of power calculations, and incomplete data reporting in these studies. Only studies examining cognitive behavioral therapy were numerous and similar enough to perform meta-analysis, from which the efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy (moderate effect size) appears to be reasonably established. Antidepressants were the only drug class to show any evidence of potential benefit. Conclusions: The efficacy of most interventions for tinnitus benefit remains to be demonstrated conclusively. In particular, high-level assessment of the benefit derived from those interventions most commonly used in practice, namely hearing aids, maskers, and tinnitus retraining therapy needs to be performed.

The prevalence of compulsive buying: a meta-analysis.

Abstract: Aims: To estimate the pooled prevalence of compulsive buying behaviour (CBB) indifferent populations and to determine the effect of age, gender, location and screening instrument on the reported heterogeneity inestimates of CBB and whether publication bias could be identified. Methods: Three databases were searched(Medline, PsychInfo, Web of Science) using the terms 'compulsive buying' 'pathological buying' and 'compulsive shopping' to estimate the pooled prevalence of CBB in different populations. Forty studies reporting 49 prevalence estimates from 16 countries were located (n=32000). To conduct the meta-analysis, data from non-clinical studies regarding mean age and gender proportion, geographical study location and screening instrument used to assess CBB were extracted by multiple independent observers and evaluated using a random-effects model. Four a priori subgroups were analysed using pooled estimation (Cohen's Q) and covariate testing (moderator and meta-regression analysis). Results: The CBB pooled prevalence of adult representative studies was 4.9% (3.4–6.9%, eight estimates, 10 102 participants), although estimates were higher among university students: 8.3% (5.9–11.5%,19 estimates, 14 947 participants) in adult non-representative samples: 12.3% (7.6–19.1%, 11 estimates, 3929 participants) and in shopping-specific samples: 16.2% (8.8–27.8%, 11 estimates, 4686 participants). Being young and female were associated with increased tendency, but not location (United States versus non-United States). Meta-regression revealed large heterogeneity within subgroups,due mainly to diverse measures and time-frames(current versus life-time) used to assess CBB. Conclusions: A pooled estimate of compulsive buying behaviour in the populations studied is approximately 5%, but there is large variation between samples accounted for largely by use of different time-frames and measures.