1
|
Ijaz N, Hunter J, Grant S, Templeman K. Protocol for a scoping review of traditional medicine research methods, methodologies, frameworks and strategies. Front Med (Lausanne) 2024; 11:1409392. [PMID: 39050530 PMCID: PMC11267516 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1409392] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/29/2024] [Accepted: 06/11/2024] [Indexed: 07/27/2024] Open
Abstract
Background The World Health Organization (WHO) has called for the evidence-informed integration of traditional medicine (TM) into health systems. Research rigor requires a good "fit" between research designs and what is being studied. The expectation that TM research fully adheres to biomedical evidentiary norms potentially creates tensions, as TM paradigms have their own distinct features. A scoping review will be conducted to describe and characterize the research approaches used in TM and their paradigmatic alignment with the TM being studied. Methods This scoping review protocol was informed by Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methods. This protocol outlines an a priori conceptual framework, provisionally termed "paradigmatic alignment." The review will include all populations, TM types, research approaches (i.e., methods, methodologies, frameworks, strategies), cultural contexts, and health care settings. Up to 38 English and non-English language databases will be searched sequentially for both published and gray literature until reaching data saturation across relevant concepts and contexts. Analysis will begin deductively, using a pre-piloted data extraction template to describe the TM research approaches. A basic qualitative content analysis of a sample of evidence sources will explore how research approaches are applied or modified to align with the TM therapeutic paradigm, and the manner in which they co-exist, contrast, complement or align with established biomedical research approaches. The findings will be narrated and summarized in charting tables and figures. The review will be reported according to the PRISMA scoping review extension. Consultative engagement with knowledge users across all review stages is planned. Discussion Aligned with the principle of Two-Eyed Seeing (Etuaptmumk), wherein Indigenous/traditional and biomedical knowledges may equitably co-exist, this review promises to advance scholarly insights of critical value in an increasingly pluralistic, globalized world.Clinical trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier INPLASY2023110071.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nadine Ijaz
- Department of Law and Legal Studies, Faculty of Public Affairs, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Jennifer Hunter
- Health Research Group, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Suzanne Grant
- NICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW, Australia
- Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Kate Templeman
- Health Research Group, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- NICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Griebler U, Dobrescu A, Ledinger D, Klingenstein P, Sommer I, Emprechtinger R, Persad E, Gadinger A, Trivella M, Klerings I, Nussbaumer-Streit B. Evaluation of the interim Cochrane rapid review methods guidance-A mixed-methods study on the understanding of and adherence to the guidance. Res Synth Methods 2023; 14:824-846. [PMID: 37483013 DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1656] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2023] [Revised: 06/11/2023] [Accepted: 07/02/2023] [Indexed: 07/25/2023]
Abstract
The Cochrane Rapid Review Methods Group (RRMG) first released interim guidance in March 2020 to support authors in conducting rapid reviews (RRs). The objective of this mixed-methods study was to assess the adherence and investigate authors' understanding of the RRMG guidance. We identified all documents citing the Interim Cochrane RRMG guidance up to February 17, 2022 and performed an exploratory adherence analysis. We interviewed 20 RR authors to assess the recommendations' comprehensibility and reasons for any deviations. Further, we surveyed nine authors of COVID-19-related Cochrane reviews for their reasons for not conducting a RR. We analyzed 128 RRs (111 non-Cochrane, 17 Cochrane) that cited the RRMG guidance. Several recommendations were not followed by a large proportion of RR authors such as stepwise approach to study design inclusion or peer review of search strategies, whereas others were exceeded, for example, dual independent screening of abstracts/full texts. The most reported reasons for deviating from the guidance were time constraints, unclarities in the recommended approach, or inapplicability to the specific RR. Overall, the guidance was viewed as user-friendly; however, without pre-existing knowledge of systematic review (SR) conduct, the application was perceived as difficult. The main reasons for conducting a full SR over a RR were late availability of the guidance, preset mandate to conduct a SR, uncertainty regarding methodological distinctions between SR and RR, and inapplicability to the evidence base. Clarifications are warranted throughout the Interim Cochrane RRMG guidance to ensure that users with various experience levels can understand and apply its recommendations accordingly.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ursula Griebler
- Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, University of Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria
| | - Andreea Dobrescu
- Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, University of Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria
| | - Dominic Ledinger
- Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, University of Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria
| | - Pauline Klingenstein
- Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, University of Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria
| | - Isolde Sommer
- Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, University of Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria
| | - Robert Emprechtinger
- Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, University of Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria
- Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria
| | - Emma Persad
- Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, University of Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Arianna Gadinger
- Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, University of Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria
| | - Marialena Trivella
- Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, University of Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria
- Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
- Department of Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Irma Klerings
- Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, University of Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria
| | - Barbara Nussbaumer-Streit
- Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, University of Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Yang GY, Hunter J, Bu FL, Hao WL, Zhang H, Wayne PM, Liu JP. Determining the safety and effectiveness of Tai Chi: a critical overview of 210 systematic reviews of controlled clinical trials. Syst Rev 2022; 11:260. [PMID: 36463306 PMCID: PMC9719113 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-022-02100-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2021] [Accepted: 10/14/2022] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This overview summarizes the best available systematic review (SR) evidence on the health effects of Tai Chi. METHODS Nine databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP), Sino-Med, and Wanfang Database) were searched for SRs of controlled clinical trials of Tai Chi interventions published between Jan 2010 and Dec 2020 in any language. Effect estimates were extracted from the most recent, comprehensive, highest-quality SR for each population, condition, and outcome. SR quality was appraised with AMSTAR 2 and overall certainty of effect estimates with the GRADE method. RESULTS Of the 210 included SRs, 193 only included randomized controlled trials, one only included non-randomized studies of interventions, and 16 included both. Common conditions were neurological (18.6%), falls/balance (14.7%), cardiovascular (14.7%), musculoskeletal (11.0%), cancer (7.1%), and diabetes mellitus (6.7%). Except for stroke, no evidence for disease prevention was found; however, multiple proxy-outcomes/risks factors were evaluated. One hundred and fourteen effect estimates were extracted from 37 SRs (2 high, 6 moderate, 18 low, and 11 critically low quality), representing 59,306 adults. Compared to active and/or inactive controls, 66 of the 114 effect estimates reported clinically important benefits from Tai Chi, 53 reported an equivalent or marginal benefit, and 6 an equivalent risk of adverse events. Eight of the 114 effect estimates (7.0%) were rated as high, 43 (37.7%) moderate, 36 (31.6%) low, and 27 (23.7%) very low certainty evidence due to concerns with risk of bias (92/114, 80.7%), imprecision (43/114, 37.7%), inconsistency (37/114, 32.5%), and publication bias (3/114, 2.6%). SR quality was often limited by the search strategies, language bias, inadequate consideration of clinical, methodological, and statistical heterogeneity, poor reporting standards, and/or no registered SR protocol. CONCLUSIONS The findings suggest Tai Chi has multidimensional effects, including physical, psychological and quality of life benefits for a wide range of conditions, as well as multimorbidity. Clinically important benefits were most consistently reported for Parkinson's disease, falls risk, knee osteoarthritis, low back pain, cerebrovascular, and cardiovascular diseases including hypertension. For most conditions, higher-quality SRs with rigorous primary studies are required. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION PROSPERO CRD42021225708.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Guo-Yan Yang
- grid.1029.a0000 0000 9939 5719NICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW 2751 Australia
| | | | - Fan-Long Bu
- grid.411609.b0000 0004 1758 4735National Center for Children’s Health, Beijing Children’s Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100045 China
| | - Wen-Li Hao
- grid.410612.00000 0004 0604 6392Public Health School, Inner Mongolia Medical University, Hohht, 010000 Inner Mongolia China
| | - Han Zhang
- grid.24695.3c0000 0001 1431 9176School of Acupuncture and Massage, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, 100029 China
| | - Peter M. Wayne
- grid.38142.3c000000041936754XOsher Center for Integrative Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215 USA
| | - Jian-Ping Liu
- grid.24695.3c0000 0001 1431 9176Center for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, 100029 China
- grid.10919.300000000122595234The Faculty of Health Science, Department of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, The National Research Center in Complementary and Alternative Medicine – NAFKAM, Hansine Hansens veg 19, 9037 Tromsø, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Beecher C, Toomey E, Maeso B, Whiting C, Stewart DC, Worrall A, Elliott J, Smith M, Tierney T, Blackwood B, Maguire T, Kampman M, Ling B, Gill C, Healy P, Houghton C, Booth A, Garritty C, Thomas J, Tricco AC, Burke NN, Keenan C, Devane D. Priority III: top 10 rapid review methodology research priorities identified using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership. J Clin Epidemiol 2022; 151:151-160. [PMID: 36038041 PMCID: PMC9487890 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2022] [Revised: 06/28/2022] [Accepted: 08/10/2022] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES A rapid review is a form of evidence synthesis considered a resource-efficient alternative to the conventional systematic review. Despite a dramatic rise in the number of rapid reviews commissioned and conducted in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, published evidence on the optimal methods of planning, doing, and sharing the results of these reviews is lacking. The Priority III study aimed to identify the top 10 unanswered questions on rapid review methodology to be addressed by future research. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING A modified James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership approach was adopted. This approach used two online surveys and a virtual prioritization workshop with patients and the public, reviewers, researchers, clinicians, policymakers, and funders to identify and prioritize unanswered questions. RESULTS Patients and the public, researchers, reviewers, clinicians, policymakers, and funders identified and prioritized the top 10 unanswered research questions about rapid review methodology. Priorities were identified throughout the entire review process, from stakeholder involvement and formulating the question, to the methods of a systematic review that are appropriate to use, through to the dissemination of results. CONCLUSION The results of the Priority III study will inform the future research agenda on rapid review methodology. We hope this will enhance the quality of evidence produced by rapid reviews, which will ultimately inform decision-making in the context of healthcare.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Beecher
- Evidence Synthesis Ireland and Cochrane Ireland, Galway, Ireland,School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland,HRB-Trials Methodology Research Network, Galway, Ireland,Corresponding author. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Aras Moyola, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland. Tel.: +353 91 493854
| | - Elaine Toomey
- School of Allied Health, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
| | - Beccy Maeso
- James Lind Alliance, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom
| | - Caroline Whiting
- James Lind Alliance, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom
| | | | - Andrew Worrall
- Public co-author, Evidence Synthesis Ireland, Galway, Ireland,Public co-author, Staffordshire, United Kingdom
| | - Jim Elliott
- Public co-author, Evidence Synthesis Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - Maureen Smith
- Public co-author, Cochrane Consumer Network Executive, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Theresa Tierney
- Patient Partner, HRB Primary Care Clinical Trials Network Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - Bronagh Blackwood
- Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom
| | | | | | | | | | - Patricia Healy
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
| | | | - Andrew Booth
- School of Health And Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
| | | | - James Thomas
- EPPI-Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College, London, United Kingdom
| | - Andrea C. Tricco
- Knowledge Translation Program, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, 209 Victoria St, M5B 1T8 Toronto, Ontario, Canada,Epidemiology Division and Institute for Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College St Room 500, M5T 3M7 Toronto, Ontario, Canada,Queen's Collaboration for Health Care Quality JBI Centre of Excellence, School of Nursing, Queen's University, 99 University Ave, K7L 3N6 Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Nikita N. Burke
- Evidence Synthesis Ireland and Cochrane Ireland, Galway, Ireland,School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
| | - Ciara Keenan
- Campbell UK & Ireland, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom
| | - Declan Devane
- Evidence Synthesis Ireland and Cochrane Ireland, Galway, Ireland,School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland,HRB-Trials Methodology Research Network, Galway, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Methodological issues in conducting yoga- and meditation-based research: A narrative review and research implications. J Ayurveda Integr Med 2022; 13:100620. [PMID: 36087391 PMCID: PMC9451492 DOI: 10.1016/j.jaim.2022.100620] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2021] [Revised: 05/08/2022] [Accepted: 06/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Yoga and meditation-based interventions have been extensively utilized in the field of contemporary complementary and alternative medicine for various physical and mental health conditions. Ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has rekindled the interest of researchers in yoga and meditation for its preventive and therapeutic utilities. However, the available literature in this area has several methodological concerns, limiting formers’ clinical utility. A comprehensive literature on this topic would stimulate researchers and guide them to conduct research on this topic with robust methodologies. The current review highlights the methodological issues with the yoga and meditation-based Research (henceforth, MBR), discusses some of the contentious issues, and provides future directions. The PubMed, Medline, and google scholar databases were searched to screen records dealing with the methodological issues on MBR. The search yielded 299 records, upon screening, only 24 articles were found suitable for the current study. Common methodological issues with MBR: lack of the consensus definitions of the yoga and meditations, interventions lacking theoretical framework of meditation; inadequate description of the study design; difficulty with participants recruitment, setting up the control groups, and blinding; difficulty in assessing the baseline characteristics of the participants, and validity issues with the outcome measures. A few research, however, have also highlighted the potential measures to overcome these methodological challenges. Yoga and meditation-based interventions are promising for several health conditions. However, literature suffers from considerable methodological issues, thus, limiting its utility in modern clinical practice. The study findings can stimulate and guide future research on this topic.
Collapse
|
6
|
Speckemeier C, Niemann A, Wasem J, Bucherger B, Neusser S. Methodological guidance for rapid reviews in healthcare: a scoping review. Res Synth Methods 2022; 13:394-404. [PMID: 35247034 DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1555] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2021] [Revised: 01/20/2022] [Accepted: 02/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of the present work was to identify published methodological guidance for rapid reviews (RRs) and to analyze the recommendations with regard to time-saving measures. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING A literature search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE in November 2020. In addition, a search based on Google Scholar and websites of governmental and non-governmental organizations was conducted. Literature screening was carried out by two researchers independently. RESULTS A total of 34 publications were included. These describe 38 distinct RR types. The timeframe to complete the identified RR types ranges from 24 hours to six months (mean time 2.2 months). For most RR types a specific research question (n=21) and a prioritizing search (n=25; preference for e.g. systematic reviews, meta-analyses) is employed. Different approaches such as reduced personnel in literature screening (n=21) and data extraction (n=21) are recommended. The majority of RR types include a bias assessment (n=28) and suggest a narrative report focusing on safety and efficacy. CONCLUSION The included RR types are heterogeneous in terms of completion time, considered domains and strategies to alter the standard systematic review methods. A rationale for the recommended shortcuts is rarely presented. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christian Speckemeier
- Institute for Healthcare Management and Research, University Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann-Straße 9, Essen, Germany
| | - Anja Niemann
- Institute for Healthcare Management and Research, University Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann-Straße 9, Essen, Germany
| | - Jürgen Wasem
- Institute for Healthcare Management and Research, University Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann-Straße 9, Essen, Germany
| | | | - Silke Neusser
- Institute for Healthcare Management and Research, University Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann-Straße 9, Essen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Ekberg S, Parry R, Land V, Ekberg K, Pino M, Antaki C, Jenkins L, Whittaker B. Communicating with patients and families about illness progression and end of life: a review of studies using direct observation of clinical practice. BMC Palliat Care 2021; 20:186. [PMID: 34876096 PMCID: PMC8651503 DOI: 10.1186/s12904-021-00876-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2021] [Accepted: 10/18/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is growing recognition that a diverse range of healthcare professionals need competence in palliative approaches to care. Effective communication is a core component of such practice. This article informs evidence-based communication about illness progression and end of life through a rapid review of studies that directly observe how experienced clinicians manage such discussions. METHODS The current rapid review updates findings of a 2014 systematic review, focussing more specifically on evidence related to illness progression and end-of-life conversations. Literature searches were conducted in nine bibliographic databases. Studies using conversation analysis or discourse analysis to examine recordings of actual conversations about illness progression or end of life were eligible for inclusion in the review. An aggregative approach was used to synthesise the findings of included studies. RESULTS Following screening, 26 sources were deemed to meet eligibility criteria. Synthesis of study findings identified the structure and functioning of ten communication practices used in discussions about illness progression and end-of-life. CONCLUSION The ten practices identified underpin five evidence-based recommendations for communicating with patients or family members about illness progression and end of life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stuart Ekberg
- School of Psychology & Counselling, Queensland University of Technology, Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, Queensland, 4059, Australia.,Centre for Healthcare Transformation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Ruth Parry
- School of Social Sciences and Humanities, Loughborough University, Brockington Building, Epinal Way, Margaret Keay Road, Loughborough, LE11 3TU, UK.
| | - Victoria Land
- School of Social Sciences and Humanities, Loughborough University, Brockington Building, Epinal Way, Margaret Keay Road, Loughborough, LE11 3TU, UK
| | - Katie Ekberg
- School of Early Childhood & Inclusive Education, Queensland University of Technology, Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, Queensland, 4059, Australia.,School of Health & Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, 4072, Australia
| | - Marco Pino
- School of Social Sciences and Humanities, Loughborough University, Brockington Building, Epinal Way, Margaret Keay Road, Loughborough, LE11 3TU, UK
| | - Charles Antaki
- School of Social Sciences and Humanities, Loughborough University, Brockington Building, Epinal Way, Margaret Keay Road, Loughborough, LE11 3TU, UK
| | - Laura Jenkins
- School of Social Sciences and Humanities, Loughborough University, Brockington Building, Epinal Way, Margaret Keay Road, Loughborough, LE11 3TU, UK
| | - Becky Whittaker
- School of Social Sciences and Humanities, Loughborough University, Brockington Building, Epinal Way, Margaret Keay Road, Loughborough, LE11 3TU, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Hunter J, Arentz S, Goldenberg J, Yang G, Beardsley J, Myers SP, Mertz D, Leeder S. Zinc for the prevention or treatment of acute viral respiratory tract infections in adults: a rapid systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ Open 2021; 11:e047474. [PMID: 34728441 PMCID: PMC8578211 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047474] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the benefits and risks of zinc formulations compared with controls for prevention or treatment of acute viral respiratory tract infections (RTIs) in adults. METHOD Seventeen English and Chinese databases were searched in April/May 2020 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and from April/May 2020 to August 2020 for SARS-CoV-2 RCTs. Cochrane rapid review methods were applied. Quality appraisals used the Risk of Bias 2.0 and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS Twenty-eight RCTs with 5446 participants were identified. None were specific to SARS-CoV-2. Compared with placebo, oral or intranasal zinc prevented 5 RTIs per 100 person-months (95% CI 1 to 8, numbers needed to treat (NNT)=20, moderate-certainty/quality). Sublingual zinc did not prevent clinical colds following human rhinovirus inoculations (relative risk, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.21, moderate-certainty/quality). On average, symptoms resolved 2 days earlier with sublingual or intranasal zinc compared with placebo (95% CI 0.61 to 3.50, very low-certainty/quality) and 19 more adults per 100 were likely to remain symptomatic on day 7 without zinc (95% CI 2 to 38, NNT=5, low-certainty/quality). There were clinically significant reductions in day 3 symptom severity scores (mean difference, MD -1.20 points, 95% CI -0.66 to -1.74, low-certainty/quality), but not average daily symptom severity scores (standardised MD -0.15, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.13, low-certainty/quality). Non-serious adverse events (AEs) (eg, nausea, mouth/nasal irritation) were higher (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.69, NNHarm=7, moderate-certainty/quality). Compared with active controls, there were no differences in illness duration or AEs (low-certainty/quality). No serious AEs were reported in the 25 RCTs that monitored them (low-certainty/quality). CONCLUSIONS In adult populations unlikely to be zinc deficient, there was some evidence suggesting zinc might prevent RTIs symptoms and shorten duration. Non-serious AEs may limit tolerability for some. The comparative efficacy/effectiveness of different zinc formulations and doses were unclear. The GRADE-certainty/quality of the evidence was limited by a high risk of bias, small sample sizes and/or heterogeneity. Further research, including SARS-CoV-2 clinical trials is warranted. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42020182044.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Hunter
- NICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Susan Arentz
- NICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Joshua Goldenberg
- Helfgott Research Institute, National University of Natural Medicine, Portland, Oregon, USA
| | - Guoyan Yang
- NICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia
| | | | - Stephen P Myers
- NICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia
- National Centre for Naturopathic Medicine, Southern Cross University, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Dominik Mertz
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Stephen Leeder
- The Menzies Centre for Health Policy, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Nejat N, Jadidi A, Hezave AK, Pour SMA. Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Using Traditional and Folk Medicine: A Content Analysis Study. Ethiop J Health Sci 2021; 31:1089-1098. [PMID: 35392333 PMCID: PMC8968377 DOI: 10.4314/ejhs.v31i6.3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2021] [Accepted: 08/21/2021] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) is a respiratory disease with no specific and definitive drug treatment. With the COVID-19 outbreak, traditional and folk methods were used for its treatment. This study was conducted to explore people's experiences of using traditional and folk medicine for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 in Iran. Methods This qualitative study was conducted on 37 people in Arak (Iran) from May to November 2020 using a conventional content analysis approach. The participants were selected using cluster sampling and interviewed using semistructured telephone interviews. After transcribing the interviews, they were analyzed using content analysis. Accordingly, semantic units were identified, related codes were extracted and placed in subcategories and categories based on similarities, and themes were formed. The interviews continued until data saturation. Results After analyzing the collected data, 116 different codes were extracted and classified into two subcategories of pharmacological and non-pharmacological methods. Then, each of the subcategories was classified into two categories: conventional medicine and traditional medicine. Finally, two main themes were obtained, including prevention methods and self-treatment methods for COVID-19. Conclusion People use various traditional and folk methods for COVID-19 prevention and treatment. Such methods can be either useful or lack the necessary effectiveness and have side effects. Thus, necessary training should be provided to the public about using these methods and avoiding unapproved treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nazi Nejat
- PhD in Nursing, Assistant Professor. School of Nursing, Arak University of Medical Sciences, Arak, Iran.,PhD in Nursing, Assistant Professor. Traditional and Complementary Medicine Research Center, Arak University of Medical Sciences, Arak, Iran
| | - Ali Jadidi
- PhD in Nursing, School of Nursing, Arak University of Medical Sciences, Arak, Iran
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Arentz S, Hunter J, Khamba B, Mravunac M, Lee Z, Alexander K, Lauche R, Goldenberg J, Myers SP. Honeybee products for the treatment and recovery from viral respiratory infections including SARS-COV-2: A rapid systematic review. Integr Med Res 2021; 10:100779. [PMID: 34611512 PMCID: PMC8483994 DOI: 10.1016/j.imr.2021.100779] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/13/2021] [Revised: 09/20/2021] [Accepted: 09/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This rapid review systematically evaluated the effects of honeybee products compared to controls for the prevention, duration, severity, and recovery of acute viral respiratory tract infections (RTIs), including SARS-CoV-2, in adults and children. METHODS Cochrane rapid review methods were applied. Four English databases plus preprint servers and trial registries were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The evidence was appraised and synthesized using RoB 2.0 and GRADE. RESULTS 27 results were derived from 9 RCTs that included 674 adults and 781 children. In hospitalized adults with SARS-CoV-2, propolis plus usual-care compared to usual-care alone reduced the risk of shock, respiratory failure and kidney injury and duration of hospital admission. Honey was less effective than Guaifenesin for reducing cough severity at 60-minutes in adults with non-specific acute viral RTIs. Compared to coffee, honey plus coffee, and honey alone reduced the severity of post-infectious cough in adults. Honey reduced the duration of cough in children compared to placebo and salbutamol; and the global impact of nocturnal cough after one night compared to usual-care alone and pharmaceutical cough medicines. CONCLUSION More studies are needed to robustly assess honeybee's role in SARS-CoV-2 and non-specific viral respiratory infections. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION PROSPERO: CRD42020193847.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Susan Arentz
- NICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Jennifer Hunter
- NICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | | | | | | | | | - Romy Lauche
- National Centre for Naturopathic Medicine, Faculty of Health, Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW Australia
| | - Joshua Goldenberg
- Helfgott Research Institute, National University of Natural Medicine, Portland, OR & Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Stephen P Myers
- NICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- National Centre for Naturopathic Medicine, Faculty of Health, Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW Australia
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Tai Chi for health and well-being: A bibliometric analysis of published clinical studies between 2010 and 2020. Complement Ther Med 2021; 60:102748. [PMID: 34118389 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctim.2021.102748] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2021] [Accepted: 05/17/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
The objective of this bibliometric review was to identify the volume, breadth, and characteristics of clinical studies evaluating Tai Chi published between January 2010 and January 2020. Five English and four Chinese language databases were searched. Following independent screening, 1018 eligible publications representing 987 studies were identified, which was a three-fold increase from the previous decade. Most common were randomized controlled trials (548/987, 55.5 %), followed by systematic reviews (157/987, 15.9 %), non-randomized controlled clinical studies (152/987, 15.4 %), case series (127/987, 12.9 %) and case reports (3/987, 0.3 %) that were conducted in China (730/987, 74.0 %), followed by the United States of America (123/987, 12.5 %) and South Korea (20/987, 2.0 %). Study participants were mostly in the adult (55.2 %) and/or older adult (72.0 %) age groups. The top ten diseases/conditions were hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, knee osteoarthritis, heart failure, depression, osteoporosis/osteopenia, breast cancer, coronary heart disease and insomnia. A quarter of the studies enrolled healthy participants to evaluate the effects of Tai Chi on health promotion/preservation, balance/falls, and physiological/biomechanical outcomes. Yang style Tai Chi was the most popular, followed by Chen and Sun style. Tai Chi was mostly commonly delivered face-to-face by a Tai Chi instructor in group settings for 60 min, three times a week, for 12 weeks. Most studies (93.8 %) reported at least one outcome in favor of Tai Chi. Adverse events were underreported (7.2 %). Over half fell short of expected intervention reporting standards, signalling the need for Tai Chi extensions to existing guidelines.
Collapse
|
12
|
Speckemeier C, Krabbe L, Schwenke S, Wasem J, Buchberger B, Neusser S. Discrete choice experiment to determine preferences of decision-makers in healthcare for different formats of rapid reviews. Syst Rev 2021; 10:121. [PMID: 33879246 PMCID: PMC8057003 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-021-01647-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2020] [Accepted: 03/22/2021] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Time-saving formats of evidence syntheses have been developed to fulfill healthcare policymakers' demands for timely evidence-based information. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) with decision-makers and people involved in the preparation of evidence syntheses was undertaken to elicit preferences for methodological shortcuts in the conduct of abbreviated reviews. METHODS D-efficient scenarios, each containing 14 pairwise comparisons, were designed for the DCE: the development of an evidence synthesis in 20 working days (scenario 1) and 12 months (scenario 2), respectively. Six attributes (number of databases, number of reviewers during screening, publication period, number of reviewers during data extraction, full-text analysis, types of HTA domains) with 2 to 3 levels each were defined. These were presented to the target population in an online survey. The relative importance of the individual attributes was determined using logistic regression models. RESULTS Scenario 1 was completed by 36 participants and scenario 2 by 26 participants. The linearity assumption was confirmed by the full model. In both scenarios, the linear difference model showed a preference for higher levels for "number of reviewers during data extraction", followed by "number of reviewers during screening" and "full-text analysis". Subgroup analyses showed that preferences were influenced by participation in the preparation of evidence syntheses. CONCLUSION The surveyed persons expressed preferences for quality standards in the process of literature screening and data extraction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christian Speckemeier
- Institute for Healthcare Management and Research, University of Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann-Str. 9, 45127 Essen, Germany
| | - Laura Krabbe
- Institute for Healthcare Management and Research, University of Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann-Str. 9, 45127 Essen, Germany
| | | | - Jürgen Wasem
- Institute for Healthcare Management and Research, University of Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann-Str. 9, 45127 Essen, Germany
| | | | - Silke Neusser
- Institute for Healthcare Management and Research, University of Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann-Str. 9, 45127 Essen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Abstract
A draft rapid peer reviewer checklist for rapid reviews (RAPeer) was developed for the journal Advances in Integrative Medicine (AIMED) to assist peer reviewers with making a rapid assessment of the manuscripts submitted for the special edition of World Naturopathic Federation COIVD-19 Rapid Reviews of Naturopathic Medicine. The background and rationale for the draft checklist is presented, along with a brief set of instructions and a copy of RAPeer (DRAFT). Feedback from AIMED reviewers will help determine its utility and inform any future development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Hunter
- NICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Affiliation(s)
- Myeong Soo Lee
- Clinical Medicine Division, Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine, Daejeon, Korea
| | - Eunhye Song
- Global Strategy Division, Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine, Daejeon, Korea
| |
Collapse
|