Living systematic review: 1. Introduction-the why, what, when, and how

Safety and Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines During Pregnancy: A Living Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pregnant persons are susceptible to significant complications following COVID-19, even death. However, worldwide COVID-19 vaccination coverage during pregnancy remains suboptimal.

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines administered to pregnant persons and shared this evidence via an interactive online website.

METHODS

We followed Cochrane methods to conduct this living systematic review. We included studies assessing the effects of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant persons. We conducted searches every other week for studies until October 2023, without restrictions on language or publication status, in ten databases, guidelines, preprint servers, and COVID-19 websites. The reference lists of eligible studies were hand searched to identify additional relevant studies. Pairs of review authors independently selected eligible studies using the web-based software COVIDENCE. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed independently by pairs of authors. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. We performed random-effects meta-analyses of adjusted relative effects for relevant confounders of comparative studies and proportional meta-analyses to summarize frequencies from one-sample studies using R statistical software. We present the GRADE certainty of evidence from comparative studies. Findings are available on an interactive living systematic review webpage, including an updated evidence map and real-time meta-analyses customizable by subgroups and filters.

RESULTS

We included 177 studies involving 638,791 participants from 41 countries. Among the 11 types of COVID-19 vaccines identified, the most frequently used platforms were mRNA (154 studies), viral vector (51), and inactivated virus vaccines (17). Low to very low-certainty evidence suggests that vaccination may result in minimal to no important differences compared to no vaccination in all assessed maternal and infant safety outcomes from 26 fewer to 17 more events per 1000 pregnant persons, and 13 fewer to 9 more events per 1000 neonates, respectively. We found statistically significant reductions in emergency cesarean deliveries (9%) with mRNA vaccines, and in stillbirth (75-83%) with mRNA/viral vector vaccines. Low to very low-certainty evidence suggests that vaccination during pregnancy with mRNA vaccines may reduce severe cases or hospitalizations in pregnant persons with COVID-19 (72%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 42-86), symptomatic COVID-19 (78%; 95% CI 21-94), and virologically confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (82%; 95% CI 39-95). Reductions were lower with other vaccine types and during Omicron variant dominance than Alpha and Delta dominance. Infants also presented with fewer severe cases or hospitalizations due to COVID-19 and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (64%; 95% CI 37-80 and 66%; 95% CI 37-81, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

We found a large body of evidence supporting the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy. While the certainty of evidence is not high, it stands as the most reliable option available, given the current absence of pregnant individuals in clinical trials. Results are shared in near real time in an accessible and interactive format for scientists, decision makers, clinicians, and the general public. This living systematic review highlights the relevance of continuous vaccine safety and effectiveness monitoring, particularly in at-risk populations for COVID-19 impact such as pregnant persons, during the introduction of new vaccines.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42021281290.

Antidepressants for treating depression among older adults with dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Depression and dementia represent significant health challenges in older adults. Despite guidelines recommending antidepressants, their efficacy in depressed patients with dementia remains undetermined.

OBJECTIVE

This review, in following a living systematic review approach, primarily aims to determine the effect of any-type antidepressant on the level of depressive symptoms in older adults with dementia and secondly if there is an effect of any-type antidepressants on cognitive state, quality of life, and functionality in the old-age population with dementia.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs from Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Register. Participants were ≥65 years, with both depression and any type of dementia. Certainty-of-Evidence was assessed through the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool and GRADE. Analysis involved standardized mean difference, with 95 % confidence-intervals (CIs).

FINDINGS

Of the 27,771 screened articles, 8 studies (617 participants), treated with SSRI, SSNRI, atypical, and tricyclic antidepressants were retained for quantitative synthesis. No evidence for an effect was found (SMD -0.10 [-0.26, 0.07]), nor when subgrouped based on depression severity or dementia level, nor for secondary outcomes.

INTERPRETATION

This review did not find evidence of a clinical effect of antidepressants for treating depression in older adults with dementia. Methodological challenges might contribute to this finding.

Cochrane systematic reviews in orthodontics: trends across updates

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews (SR) are regularly updated to reflect new evidence. However, updates are time-consuming and costly, and therefore should ideally be informed by new high-quality research. The purpose of this study is to assess trends in the quantity, quality, and recency of evidence intervening updates of orthodontic SR.

METHODS

SR relevant to orthodontics with at least two versions were identified from the Cochrane Database. The number, risk of bias, and year of publication of included trials were recorded for each update. Multivariate regression was conducted to assess factors affecting the risk of bias in trials, and the proportions within SR.

RESULTS

Forty-five SR inclusive of updates were included. The median number of trials was three per review and this increased across subsequent versions. Seven reviews (15.6%) included no evidence, and 40.74% of updates included no new evidence. Most of the primary research was considered high risk of bias (57.3%), although this was reduced marginally across updates. The proportion of studies considered low risk did not improve significantly between updates. There was no impact of publication year of clinical trials on the risk of bias (P = 0.349). However, average age of trials included in a systematic review significantly affected the proportion of low risk-of-bias studies (P = 0.039).

CONCLUSIONS

SR are frequently updated without including new evidence. New evidence that is included is commonly deemed to be at high risk of bias. Targeted strategies to improve the efficient use of resources and improve research quality should be considered.

A living critical interpretive synthesis to yield a framework on the production and dissemination of living evidence syntheses for decision-making

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact in the global research production and has also increased research waste. Living evidence syntheses (LESs) seek to regularly update a body of evidence addressing a specific question. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the production and dissemination of LESs emerged as a cornerstone of the evidence infrastructure. This critical interpretive synthesis answers the questions: What constitutes an LES to support decision-making?; when should one be produced, updated, and discontinued?; and how should one be disseminated?

METHODS

Searches included the Cochrane Library, EMBASE (Ovid), Health Systems Evidence, MEDLINE (Ovid), PubMed, and Web of Science up to 23 April 2024 and included articles that provide any insights on addressing the compass questions on LESs. Articles were selected and appraised, and their insights extracted. An interpretive and iterative coding process was used to identify relevant thematic categories and create a conceptual framework.

RESULTS

Among the 16,630 non-duplicate records identified, 208 publications proved eligible. Most were non-empirical articles, followed by actual LESs. Approximately one in three articles were published in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The conceptual framework addresses six thematic categories: (1) what is an LES; (2) what methodological approaches facilitate LESs production; (3) when to produce an LES; (4) when to update an LES; (5) how to make available the findings of an LES; and (6) when to discontinue LES updates.

CONCLUSION

LESs can play a critical role in reducing research waste and ensuring alignment with advisory and decision-making processes. This critical interpretive synthesis provides relevant insights on how to better organize the global evidence architecture to support their production.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration: CRD42021241875.

(Semi)automated approaches to data extraction for systematic reviews and meta-analyses in social sciences: A living review

Background

An abundance of rapidly accumulating scientific evidence presents novel opportunities for researchers and practitioners alike, yet such advantages are often overshadowed by resource demands associated with finding and aggregating a continually expanding body of scientific information. Data extraction activities associated with evidence synthesis have been described as time-consuming to the point of critically limiting the usefulness of research. Across social science disciplines, the use of automation technologies for timely and accurate knowledge synthesis can enhance research translation value, better inform key policy development, and expand the current understanding of human interactions, organizations, and systems. Ongoing developments surrounding automation are highly concentrated in research for evidence-based medicine with limited evidence surrounding tools and techniques applied outside of the clinical research community. The goal of the present study is to extend the automation knowledge base by synthesizing current trends in the application of extraction technologies of key data elements of interest for social scientists.

Methods

We report the baseline results of a living systematic review of automated data extraction techniques supporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the social sciences. This review follows PRISMA standards for reporting systematic reviews.

Results

The baseline review of social science research yielded 23 relevant studies.

Conclusions

When considering the process of automating systematic review and meta-analysis information extraction, social science research falls short as compared to clinical research that focuses on automatic processing of information related to the PICO framework. With a few exceptions, most tools were either in the infancy stage and not accessible to applied researchers, were domain specific, or required substantial manual coding of articles before automation could occur. Additionally, few solutions considered extraction of data from tables which is where key data elements reside that social and behavioral scientists analyze.

Interventions for increasing fruit and vegetable consumption in children aged five years and under

BACKGROUND

Insufficient consumption of fruits and vegetables in childhood increases the risk of future non-communicable diseases, including cardiovascular disease. Testing the effects of interventions designed to increase children's consumption of fruit and vegetables, including those focused on specific child-feeding strategies or broader multicomponent interventions targeting the home or childcare environment, is required to assess the potential to reduce this disease burden.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of interventions designed to increase the consumption of fruit, vegetables or both amongst children aged five years and under.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two clinical trials registries to identify eligible trials on 25 March 2023. We searched Proquest Dissertations and Theses in December 2022. We reviewed reference lists of included trials and contacted authors of the included trials to identify further potentially relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-randomised controlled trials (C-RCTs) and cross-over trials, of any intervention primarily targeting consumption of fruit, vegetables or both amongst children aged five years and under compared to no-intervention control, and incorporating a dietary or biochemical assessment of fruit or vegetable consumption. Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts of identified papers; a third review author resolved disagreements.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risks of bias of included trials; a third review author resolved disagreements. We used random-effects models in meta-analyses for the primary review outcomes where we identified sufficient trials. We calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) to account for the heterogeneity of fruit and vegetable consumption measures. We conducted assessments of risks of bias and evaluated the certainty of evidence (GRADE approach) using Cochrane procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 53 trials with 120 trial arms and 12,350 participants. Sixteen trials examined the impact of child-feeding practice interventions only (e.g. repeated food exposure) in increasing child vegetable intake. Twenty trials examined the impact of multicomponent interventions primarily conducted in the childcare setting (e.g. parent nutrition education and preschool policy changes) in increasing child fruit and vegetable intake. Seventeen trials examined the impact of parent nutrition education only in increasing child fruit and vegetable intake. Two trials examined the effect of a nutrition education intervention delivered to children only in increasing child fruit and vegetable intake and one each examined a child-focused mindfulness intervention or providing families with fruit and vegetable interventions. We judged nine of the 53 included trials as free from high risks of bias across all domains. Performance, detection and attrition bias were the most common domains judged at high risk of bias for the remaining trials. There is moderate-certainty evidence that child-feeding practice interventions versus no-intervention control probably have a small positive effect on child vegetable consumption, equivalent to an increase of 15.5 grams as-desired consumption of vegetables (SMD 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24 to 0.65; 15 trials, 1976 participants; mean post-intervention follow-up = 12.3 weeks). No trials in this comparison reported information about intervention costs. One trial reported no harms or serious unintended adverse consequences (low-certainty evidence). Multicomponent interventions versus no-intervention control probably have a small effect on child consumption of fruit and vegetables (SMD 0.27, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.43; 14 trials, 4318 participants; moderate-certainty evidence; mean post-intervention follow-up = 4.0 weeks), equivalent to an increase of 0.34 cups of fruit and vegetables a day. One trial, which tested a multicomponent garden-based intervention, reported the installation of the garden as part of the intervention to be USD 1500 per childcare centre (low-certainty evidence). No trials in this comparison reported information about unintended adverse consequences of interventions. Parent nutrition education interventions may have little to no short-term impact on child consumption of fruit and vegetables versus no-intervention control (SMD 0.10, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.22; 14 trials, 4122 participants; low-certainty evidence; mean post-intervention follow-up = 6.4 weeks). One trial reported the total estimated cost of delivering a parent nutrition education intervention for infant feeding, physical activity and sedentary behaviours delivered by a dietitian as approximately AUD 500 per family (low-certainty evidence). One trial reported no unintended adverse consequences on family food expenditure following implementation of an intervention delivered over the telephone to improve parental knowledge and skills about the home food environment (low-certainty evidence). Trials reported receiving governmental or charitable funds, except for one trial reporting industry funding.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was moderate-certainty evidence that child-feeding practice interventions and multicomponent interventions probably lead to only small increases in fruit and vegetable consumption in children aged five years and under. Parent nutrition education interventions may have little or no effect on increasing fruit and vegetable consumption in children aged five years and under. Future research should be prioritised on assessment and reporting of both intervention cost and adverse effects, and development and evaluation of interventions in research gaps, including in a broader range of settings and in low- and middle-income countries. This review continues to be maintained as a living systematic review with monthly searches for new evidence and incorporation of relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

PROTOCOL: Behavioral, information and monetary interventions to reduce energy consumption in households: A "living" systematic review

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: Our proposed systematic review and meta-analysis will integrate the evidence available from all sources to answer the following questions: (1) to what extent can information, behavioral and monetary interventions reduce energy consumption of households in residential buildings? (average treatment effect of interventions) (2) what is the relative effectiveness of interventions? (account for heterogeneity in treatment effects across and within studies) (3) how effective are combinations of different interventions?

The clinical effectiveness of elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ETI) for people with CF without a F508del variant: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Access to elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ETI) for people with cystic fibrosis (PwCF) without a F508del variant is limited due to lack of clinical data supporting efficacy.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we examined patient-level data from studies reporting the clinical response to ETI for PwCF with non-F508del CFTR variants. We searched electronic data sources including Embase, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL from January 1st, 2019 to May 14th, 2024.

FINDINGS

Our search results identified 4,795 studies and 20 met the eligibility criteria. 120 of 164 (73 %) individuals had a positive clinical response to ETI, defined by a sweat chloride (SwCl) decrease of ≥10 mmol/L or percent-predicted FEV1 (ppFEV1) improvement of ≥5 %. 51 unique ETI-responsive variants were represented across these 120 individuals and 27 of these variants (53 %) have not been previously approved by the U.S. FDA. For variants with at least 10 individuals treated with ETI to date, a consistent positive clinical response was observed for N1303K and G85E. For N1303K (n = 48), the median increase in ppFEV1 was 16 % (IQR: 8 %, 29 %), with a median decrease in SwCl of -9 (IQR: -4, -22) mmol/L. For G85E (n = 16), the median increase in ppFEV1 was 13.5 % (IQR: 8 %, 19 %) with a median decrease in SwCl of -46 (IQR: -39, -66) mmol/L.

CONCLUSION

Additional ETI-responsive variants were identified following a comprehensive review of ETI clinical use in PwCF without F508del. This data can be used by the CF community in efforts to expand the labelled indications or to help advocate for off-label ETI reimbursement.

Experiences and Challenges Updating a Living Evidence-Based Review of Randomized Controlled Trials on Mental Health and Behavioral Disorders in Individuals With Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

OBJECTIVE

To describe experiences and challenges when updating a living evidence-based review database of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on mental health and behavioral disorders in moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (MSTBI).

METHOD

This commentary derives from our experience developing an extensive database of RCTs on MSTBI that has been conceptualized as a living evidence-based review. Our working group focused on mental health and behavior RCTs and reflected upon their experiences and challenges using the living systematic approach. We discuss challenges associated with metrics of study quality, injury etiology and severity, time post-injury, country of origin, and variability in outcome measures.

RESULTS

RCTs were conducted almost solely in high income countries, with smaller sample sizes, and most conducted in the chronic phase post-TBI. Issues related to lack of transparency, unclear and incomplete reporting of injury severity, etiology, and time post-injury remain a concern and can lead to challenges associated with interpretation of results, validity, and reliability of the data. There was significant heterogeneity regarding the use of outcome measures and constructs, underscoring the need for standardization.

CONCLUSION

Lack of standardization and incomplete reporting of injury characteristics makes it difficult to compare data between RCTs of MSTBI, perform meta-analyses, and generate evidence-based clinical recommendations.

Methodological components, structure and quality assessment tools for evidence summaries: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review was to identify and map the available information related to the definition, structure, and core methodological components of evidence summaries, as well as to identify any indicators of quality.

INTRODUCTION

Evidence summaries offer a practical solution to overcoming some of the barriers present in evidence-based health care, such as lack of access to evidence at the point of care, and the knowledge and expertise to evaluate the quality and translate the evidence into clinical decision-making. However, lack of transparency in reporting and inconsistencies in the methodology of evidence summary development have previously been cited and pose problems for end-users (eg, clinicians, policymakers).

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Any English-language resource that described the methodological development or appraisal of an evidence summary was included.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL (EBSCOhost) were systematically searched in November 2019, with no limits on the search. The search was updated in June 2021 and January 2023. Gray literature searches and pearling of references of included sources were also conducted at the same time as the database searches. All resources (ie, articles, papers, books, dissertations, reports, and websites) were eligible for inclusion in the review if they evaluated or described the development or appraisal of an evidence summary methodology within a point-of-care context and were published in English. Literature reviews (eg, systematic reviews, rapid reviews), including summaries of evidence on interventions or health care activities that either measure effects, a phenomena of interest, or where the objective was the development, description or evaluation of methods without a clear point-of-care target, were excluded from the review.

RESULTS

A total of 76 resources (n=56 articles from databases and n=20 reports from gray literature sources) were included in the review. The most common type/name included critically appraised topic (n=18) and evidence summary (n=17). A total of 25 resources provided a definition of an evidence summary: commonalities included a clinical question; a structured, systematic literature search; a description of literature selection; and appraisal of evidence. Of these 25, 16 included descriptors such as brief, concise, rapid, short, succinct and snapshot. The reported methodological components closely reflected the definition results, with the most reported methodological components being a systematic, multi-database search, and critical appraisal. Evidence summary examples were mostly presented as narrative summaries and usually included a reference list, background or clinical context, and recommendations or implications for practice or policy. Four quality assessment tools and a systematic review of tools were included.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study highlight the wide variability in the definition, language, methodological components and structure used for point-of-care resources that met our definition of an evidence summary. This scoping review is one of the first steps aimed at improving the credibility and transparency of evidence summaries in evidence-based health care, with further research required to standardize the definitions and methodologies associated with point-of-care resources and accepted tools for quality assessment.

SUPPLEMENTAL DIGITAL CONTENT

A Chinese-language version of the abstract of this review is available at http://links.lww.com/SRX/A59, studies ineligible following full-text review http://links.lww.com/SRX/A60.

Antiplatelet therapy versus intravenous thrombolysis for mild acute ischaemic stroke: a living systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have shown contradictory results between early application of antiplatelet therapy and intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) for mild acute ischaemic stroke (AIS), with National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 0-5.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the benefits and risks of antiplatelet therapy and IVT in patients with mild AIS.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library was conducted from database inception until July 2023, without language restriction. Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) or observational studies were selected. The primary outcomes were 90-day functional outcomes, measured by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score. The protocol has been registered before data collection.

RESULTS

Two RCTs and four observational studies with relatively low risk of bias that enrolled 3975 patients were analysed (2454 in antiplatelet therapy and 1521 in IVT therapy). There were no significant differences between antiplatelet therapy and IVT in 90-day functional outcomes (mRS 0-1, OR 1.08 (95% CI 0.73 to 1.58); mRS 0-2, OR, 1.04 (95% CI 0.63 to 1.73)), death (OR, 0.64 (95% CI 0.19 to 2.13)) and stroke recurrence (OR, 0.71 (95% CI 0.28 to 1.79)). Antiplatelet therapy was associated with a reduced risk of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (sICH) compared with IVT (OR, 0.20 (95% CI 0.06 to 0.69)).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with mild AIS, compared with IVT, early application of antiplatelet therapy was not significantly associated with improved functional outcomes, reduced death or stroke recurrence, but was significantly associated with a reduced risk of sICH.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023447862.

Improving Evidence-Synthesis for School-Based Obesity Prevention Interventions. Comment on Ginell et al. Unreliable Findings Due to Miscalculations and Errors. Comment on "Nally et al. The Effectiveness of School-Based Interventions on Obesity-Related Behaviours in Primary School Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials. Children 2021, 8, 489"

As researchers with substantial experience in the child obesity field [...].

A PROGRESS-driven approach to cognitive outcomes after traumatic brain injury: A study protocol for advancing equity, diversity, and inclusion through knowledge synthesis and mobilization

Evidence syntheses for advancing equitable traumatic brain injury (TBI) research, policy, and practice presents formidable challenges. Research and clinical frameworks are currently not specific to equity, diversity, and inclusion considerations, despite evidence that persons with TBI live in societies in which power imbalances and systems of social dominance may privilege some people and marginalize others. The present protocol outlines a strategy for a research program, supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, that explores the integration of PROGRESS-Plus parameters in research with the goal of advancing open-science databases and tools to improve our understanding of equity in cognitive and brain health outcomes in TBI. PROGRESS-Plus is a framework outlining social, economic, and cultural parameters that may influence health opportunities and outcomes (e.g., place of residence, race, occupation, gender, etc.). A multistep research program is proposed to support three objectives: (1) organizing existing data on TBI-induced changes in cognition and brain health into a template to facilitate future research, including research using machine learning techniques; (2) updating published evidence with a more rigorous approach to the consideration of PROGRESS-Plus parameters; and (3) mobilizing knowledge on the current state of evidence that is relevant, equitable, and accessible. This program facilitates partnerships with knowledge users across clinical, research, academic, and community sectors to address the three research objectives through a unifying workflow of exchange, synthesis, and knowledge mobilization. We anticipate that this global collaboration between topic experts and community leaders in equity in brain health will add significant value to the field of TBI by promoting equity-transformative advancements in knowledge synthesis, policy, and practice.

Safety, Immunogenicity, and Effectiveness of Chinese-Made COVID-19 Vaccines in the Real World: An Interim Report of a Living Systematic Review

Background: Several COVID-19 vaccines were developed and approved in China. Of these, the BIBB-CorV and CoronaVac inactivated whole-virion vaccines were widely distributed in China and developing countries. However, the performance of the two vaccines in the real world has not been summarized. Methods: A living systematic review based on findings from ongoing post-licensure studies was conducted, applying standardized algorithms. Articles published between 1 May 2020 and 31 May 2022 in English and Chinese were searched for in Medline, Embase, WanFang Data, medRxiv, bioRxiv, arXiv, SSRN, and Research Square, using SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, and vaccine as the MeSH terms. Studies with estimates of safety, immunogenicity, and effectiveness from receiving the BIBB-CorV or CoronaVac vaccine that met the predefined screening criteria underwent a full-text review. The Joanna Briggs Institute's Critical Appraisal Checklist and the Cochrane risk of bias were used for assessment of the quality. A random-effects meta-regression model was applied to identify the potential impact factors on the vaccines' effectiveness. Results: In total, 32578 articles were identified, of these, 770 studies underwent a full-text review. Eventually, 213 studies were included. The pooled occurrence of solicited and unsolicited adverse events after any dose of either vaccine varied between 10% and 40%. The top five commonly reported rare adverse events were immunization stress-related responses (211 cases, 50.0%), cutaneous responses (43 cases, 10.2%), acute neurological syndrome (39 cases, 9.2%), anaphylaxis (17 cases, 4.0%), and acute stroke (16 cases, 3.8%). The majority (83.3%) recovered or were relieved within several days. The peak neutralization titers against the ancestral strain was found within 1 month after the completion of the primary series of either vaccine, with a GMT (geometric mean titer) of 43.7 (95% CI: 23.2-82.4), followed by a dramatic decrease within 3 months. At Month 12, the GMT was 4.1 (95% CI: 3.8-4.4). Homologous boosting could restore humoral immunity, while heterologous boosting elicited around sixfold higher neutralization titers in comparison with homologous boosting. The effectiveness of receiving either vaccine against death and severe disease was around 85% for both shortly after the primary series. At Month 12, the protection against death did not decline, while the protection against severe disease decreased to ~75%. Conclusions: Both the BIBP-CorV and CoronaVac inactivated vaccines are safe. Sustained vaccine effectiveness against death was determined 12 months after the primary series, although protection against severe disease decreased slightly over time. A booster dose could strengthen the waning effectiveness; however, the duration of the incremental effectiveness and the additional benefit provided by a heterologous booster need to be studied.

Nine quick tips for open meta-analyses

Open science principles are revolutionizing the transparency, reproducibility, and accessibility of research. Meta-analysis has become a key technique for synthesizing data across studies in a principled way; however, its impact is contingent on adherence to open science practices. Here, we outline 9 quick tips for open meta-analyses, aimed at guiding researchers to maximize the reach and utility of their findings. We advocate for outlining preregistering clear protocols, opting for open tools and software, and the use of version control systems to ensure transparency and facilitate collaboration. We further emphasize the importance of reproducibility, for example, by sharing search syntax and analysis scripts, and discuss the benefits of planning for dynamic updating to enable living meta-analyses. We also recommend publication in open-access formats, as well as open data, open code, and open access publication. We close by encouraging active promotion of research findings to bridge the gap between complex syntheses and public discourse, and provide a detailed submission checklist to equip researchers, reviewers and journal editors with a structured approach to conducting and reporting open meta-analyses.

Axial spondyloarthritis guidelines - aiming for maximum impact

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review discusses international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) focusing on methodology, guideline quality, and implementation.

RECENT FINDINGS

The Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (ASAS/EULAR) and Pan-American League of Associations for Rheumatology (PANLAR) recently published axSpA CPGs and updates of the American College of Rheumatology/Spondylitis Association of America/Spondyloarthritis Research and Treatment Network (ACR/SAA/SPARTAN) and Asia-Pacific League of Associations for Rheumatology (APLAR) CPGs are expected. GRADE has emerged as the dominant framework for CPG development and has been used by three of the four international axSpA guidelines. Notable differences exist among these guidelines in the way that the recommendations are presented. Two of the four acknowledge the need for implementation strategies, but little detail about this is provided. The few studies that have evaluated the implementation of axSpA CPGs have identified poor adherence to recommendations on physical therapy/exercise and disease activity monitoring. Implementation science has identified many barriers and facilitators affecting guideline uptake, including those related to healthcare professionals and to the guidelines themselves. Creation of a tailored implementation plan simultaneously with the CPG is recommended.

SUMMARY

While methodological rigor in the creation of evidence-based recommendations is the focus of CPG development, recommendations must be presented in a user-friendly format that makes them easy to apply. 'Living guidelines' could facilitate keeping content up to date. Implementation is critical for the success of a CPG and should be emphasized in future axSpA guideline updates. Further research is needed to better understand the factors impacting the successful implementation of axSpA CPGs.

Editorial Perspective: Extending IPDMA methodology to drive treatment personalisation in child mental health

To improve outcomes for youth who do not respond optimally to existing treatments, we need to identify robust predictors, moderators, and mediators that are ideal targets for personalisation in mental health care. We propose a solution to leverage the Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis (IPDMA) approach to allow broader access to individual-level data while maintaining methodological rigour. Such a resource has the potential to answer questions that are unable to be addressed by single studies, reduce researcher burden, and enable the application of newer statistical techniques, all to provide data-driven strategies for clinical decision-making. Using childhood anxiety as the worked example, the editorial perspective outlines the rationale for leveraging IPDMA methodology to build a data repository, the Platform for Anxiety Disorder Data in Youth. We also include recommendations to address the methods and challenges inherent in this endeavour.

Exploratory mapping of tumor associated macrophage nanoparticle article abstracts using an eLDA topic modeling machine learning approach

The role of macrophages in regulating the tumor microenvironment has spurned the exponential generation of nanoparticle targeting technologies. With the large amount of literature and the speed at which it is generated it is difficult to remain current with the most up-to-date literature. In this study we performed a topic modeling analysis of 854 abstracts of peer-reviewed literature for the most common usages of nanoparticle targeting of tumor associated macrophages (TAMs) in solid tumors. The data spans 20 years of literature, providing a broad perspective of the nanoparticle strategies. Our topic model found 6 distinct topics: Immune and TAMs, Nanoparticles, Imaging, Gene Delivery and Exosomes, Vaccines, and Multi-modal Therapies. We also found distinct nanoparticle usage, tumor types, and therapeutic trends across these topics. Moreover, we established that the topic model could be used to assign new papers into the existing topics, thereby creating a Living Review. This type of "birds-eye-view" analysis provides a useful assessment tool for exploring new and emerging themes within a large field.

Peripheral immune function and Alzheimer's disease: a living systematic review and critical appraisal

BACKGROUND

A growing body of literature examines the relationship between peripheral immune function and Alzheimer's Disease (AD) in human populations. Our living systematic review summarizes the characteristics and findings of these studies, appraises their quality, and formulates recommendations for future research.

METHODS

We searched the electronic databases PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science, and reviewed references of previous reviews and meta-analyses to identify human studies examining the relationship between any peripheral immune biomarkers and AD up to September 7th, 2023. We examined patterns of reported statistical associations (positive, negative, and null) between each biomarker and AD across studies. Evidence for each biomarker was categorized into four groups based on the proportion of studies reporting different associations: corroborating a positive association with AD, a negative association, a null association, and presenting contradictory findings. A modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) was employed to assess the quality of the included studies.

FINDINGS

In total, 286 studies were included in this review. The majority were cross-sectional (n = 245, 85.7%) and hospital-based (n = 248, 86.7%), examining relationships between 187 different peripheral immune biomarkers and AD. Cytokines were the most frequently studied group of peripheral immune biomarkers. Evidence supported a positive association with AD for six biomarkers, including IL-6, IL-1β, IFN-γ, ACT, IL-18, and IL-12, and a negative association for two biomarkers, including lymphocytes and IL-6R. Only a small proportion of included studies (n = 22, 7.7%) were deemed to be of high quality based on quality assessment.

INTERPRETATION

Existing research on peripheral immune function and AD exhibits substantial methodological variations and limitations, with a notable lack of longitudinal, population-based studies investigating a broad range of biomarkers with prospective AD outcomes. The extent and manner in which peripheral immune function can contribute to AD pathophysiology remain open questions. Given the biomarkers that we identified to be associated with AD, we posit that targeting peripheral immune dysregulation may present a promising intervention point to reduce the burden of AD.

PROTOCOL: Abortion and mental health outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This is a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of research on mental health outcomes of abortion. Does abortion increase the risk of adverse mental health outcomes? That is the central question for this review. Our review aims to inform policy and practice by locating, critically appraising, and synthesizing empirical evidence on associations between abortion and subsequent mental health outcomes. Given the controversies surrounding this topic and the complex social, political, legal, and ideological contexts in which research and reviews on abortion are conducted, it is especially important to conduct this systematic review and meta-analysis with comprehensive, rigorous, unbiased, and transparent methods. We will include a variety of study designs to enhance understanding of studies' methodological strengths and weaknesses and to identify potential explanations for conflicting results. We will follow open science principles, providing access to our methods, measures, and results, and making data available for re-analysis.

Building a sharable literature collection to advance the science and practice of implementation facilitation

Background

Implementation science seeks to produce generalizable knowledge on strategies that promote the adoption and sustained use of evidence-based innovations. Literature reviews on specific implementation strategies can help us understand how they are conceptualized and applied, synthesize findings, and identify knowledge gaps. Although rigorous literature reviews can advance scientific knowledge and facilitate theory development, they are time-consuming and costly to produce. Improving the efficiency of literature review processes and reducing redundancy of effort is especially important for this rapidly developing field. We sought to amass relevant literature on one increasingly used evidence-based strategy, implementation facilitation (IF), as a publicly available resource.

Methods

We conducted a rigorous systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science citation databases for peer-reviewed, English-language articles with "facilitation" and a combination of other terms published from January 1996 to December 2021. We searched bibliographies of articles published from 1996 to 2015 and identified articles during the full text review that reported on the same study. Two authors screened 3,168 abstracts. After establishing inter-rater reliability, they individually conducted full-text review of 786 relevant articles. A multidisciplinary team of investigators provided recommendations for preparing and disseminating the literature collection.

Findings

The literature collection is comprised of 510 articles. It includes 277 empirical studies of IF and 77 other articles, including conceptual/theoretical articles, literature reviews, debate papers and descriptions of large-scale clinical initiatives. Over half of the articles were published between 2017 and 2021. The collection is publicly available as an Excel file and as an xml file that can be imported into reference management software.

Conclusion

We created a publicly accessible collection of literature about the application of IF to implement evidence-based innovations in healthcare. The comprehensiveness of this collection has the potential to maximize efficiency and minimize redundancy in scientific inquiry about this strategy. Scientists and practitioners can use the collection to more rapidly identify developments in the application of IF and to investigate a wide range of compelling questions on its use within and across different healthcare disciplines/settings, countries, and payer systems. We offer several examples of how this collection has already been used.

The effect of complement C3 or C5 inhibition on geographic atrophy secondary to age-related macular degeneration: A living systematic review and meta-analysis

With the introduction of therapies to treat geographic atrophy (GA), GA management in clinical practice is now possible. A living systematic review can provide access to timely and robust evidence synthesis. This review found that complement factor 3 and 5 (C3 and C5) inhibition compared to sham likely reduces change in square root GA area at 12 months and untransformed GA area at 24 months. There is likely little to no difference in the rate of systemic treatment-emergent adverse events compared to sham. C3 and C5 inhibition, however, likely does not improve best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 12 months, and the evidence is uncertain regarding change in BCVA at 24 months. Higher rates of ocular treatment emergent adverse effects with complement inhibition occur at 12 months and likely at 24 months. Complement inhibition likely results in new onset neovascular age-related macular degeneration at 12 months. This living meta-analysis will continuously incorporate new evidence.

Assessing the Risk of Bias in Randomized Clinical Trials With Large Language Models

Importance

Large language models (LLMs) may facilitate the labor-intensive process of systematic reviews. However, the exact methods and reliability remain uncertain.

Objective

To explore the feasibility and reliability of using LLMs to assess risk of bias (ROB) in randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

Design, Setting, and Participants

A survey study was conducted between August 10, 2023, and October 30, 2023. Thirty RCTs were selected from published systematic reviews.

Main Outcomes and Measures

A structured prompt was developed to guide ChatGPT (LLM 1) and Claude (LLM 2) in assessing the ROB in these RCTs using a modified version of the Cochrane ROB tool developed by the CLARITY group at McMaster University. Each RCT was assessed twice by both models, and the results were documented. The results were compared with an assessment by 3 experts, which was considered a criterion standard. Correct assessment rates, sensitivity, specificity, and F1 scores were calculated to reflect accuracy, both overall and for each domain of the Cochrane ROB tool; consistent assessment rates and Cohen κ were calculated to gauge consistency; and assessment time was calculated to measure efficiency. Performance between the 2 models was compared using risk differences.

Results

Both models demonstrated high correct assessment rates. LLM 1 reached a mean correct assessment rate of 84.5% (95% CI, 81.5%-87.3%), and LLM 2 reached a significantly higher rate of 89.5% (95% CI, 87.0%-91.8%). The risk difference between the 2 models was 0.05 (95% CI, 0.01-0.09). In most domains, domain-specific correct rates were around 80% to 90%; however, sensitivity below 0.80 was observed in domains 1 (random sequence generation), 2 (allocation concealment), and 6 (other concerns). Domains 4 (missing outcome data), 5 (selective outcome reporting), and 6 had F1 scores below 0.50. The consistent rates between the 2 assessments were 84.0% for LLM 1 and 87.3% for LLM 2. LLM 1's κ exceeded 0.80 in 7 and LLM 2's in 8 domains. The mean (SD) time needed for assessment was 77 (16) seconds for LLM 1 and 53 (12) seconds for LLM 2.

Conclusions

In this survey study of applying LLMs for ROB assessment, LLM 1 and LLM 2 demonstrated substantial accuracy and consistency in evaluating RCTs, suggesting their potential as supportive tools in systematic review processes.

The Australian Traumatic Brain Injury Initiative: Statement of Working Principles and Rapid Review of Methods to Define Data Dictionaries for Neurological Conditions

The Australian Traumatic Brain Injury Initiative (AUS-TBI) aims to develop a health informatics approach to collect data predictive of outcomes for persons with moderate-severe TBI across Australia. Central to this approach is a data dictionary; however, no systematic reviews of methods to define and develop data dictionaries exist to-date. This rapid systematic review aimed to identify and characterize methods for designing data dictionaries to collect outcomes or variables in persons with neurological conditions. Database searches were conducted from inception through October 2021. Records were screened in two stages against set criteria to identify methods to define data dictionaries for neurological conditions (International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision: 08, 22, and 23). Standardized data were extracted. Processes were checked at each stage by independent review of a random 25% of records. Consensus was reached through discussion where necessary. Thirty-nine initiatives were identified across 29 neurological conditions. No single established or recommended method for defining a data dictionary was identified. Nine initiatives conducted systematic reviews to collate information before implementing a consensus process. Thirty-seven initiatives consulted with end-users. Methods of consultation were "roundtable" discussion (n = 30); with facilitation (n = 16); that was iterative (n = 27); and frequently conducted in-person (n = 27). Researcher stakeholders were involved in all initiatives and clinicians in 25. Importantly, only six initiatives involved persons with lived experience of TBI and four involved carers. Methods for defining data dictionaries were variable and reporting is sparse. Our findings are instructive for AUS-TBI and can be used to further development of methods for defining data dictionaries.

Is it possible to make 'living' guidelines? An evaluation of the Australian Living Stroke Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Keeping best practice guidelines up-to-date with rapidly emerging research evidence is challenging. 'Living guidelines' approaches enable continual incorporation of new research, assisting healthcare professionals to apply the latest evidence to their clinical practice. However, information about how living guidelines are developed, maintained and applied is limited. The Stroke Foundation in Australia was one of the first organisations to apply living guideline development methods for their Living Stroke Guidelines (LSGs), presenting a unique opportunity to evaluate the process and impact of this novel approach.

METHODS

A mixed-methods study was conducted to understand the experience of LSGs developers and end-users. We used thematic analysis of one-on-one semi-structured interview and online survey data to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and facilitators and barriers of the LSGs. Website analytics data were also reviewed to understand usage.

RESULTS

Overall, the living guidelines approach was both feasible and acceptable to developers and users. Facilitators to use included collaboration with multidisciplinary clinicians and stroke survivors or carers. Increased workload for developers, workload unpredictability, and limited information sharing, and interoperability of technological platforms were identified as barriers. Users indicated increased trust in the LSGs (69%), likelihood of following the LSGs (66%), and frequency of access (58%), compared with previous static versions. Web analytics data showed individual access by 16,517 users in 2016 rising to 53,154 users in 2020, a threefold increase. There was also a fourfold increase in unique LSG pageviews from 2016 to 2020.

CONCLUSIONS

This study, the first evaluation of living guidelines, demonstrates that this approach to stroke guideline development is feasible and acceptable, that these approaches may add value to developers and users, and may increase guideline use. Future evaluations should be embedded along with guideline implementation to capture data prospectively.

Methodological challenges in systematic reviews of mHealth interventions: Survey and consensus-based recommendations

OBJECTIVE

Mobile Health (mHealth) refers to using mobile devices to support health. This study aimed to identify specific methodological challenges in systematic reviews (SRs) of mHealth interventions and to develop guidance for addressing selected challenges.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Two-phase participatory research project. First, we sent an online survey to corresponding authors of SRs of mHealth interventions. On a five-category scale, survey respondents rated how challenging they found 24 methodological aspects in SRs of mHealth interventions compared to non-mHealth intervention SRs. Second, a subset of survey respondents participated in an online workshop to discuss recommendations to address the most challenging methodological aspects identified in the survey. Finally, consensus-based recommendations were developed based on the workshop discussion and subsequent interaction via email with the workshop participants and two external mHealth SR authors.

RESULTS

We contacted 953 corresponding authors of mHealth intervention SRs, of whom 50 (5 %) completed the survey. All the respondents identified at least one methodological aspect as more or much more challenging in mHealth intervention SRs than in non-mHealth SRs. A median of 11 (IQR 7.25-15) out of 24 aspects (46 %) were rated as more or much more challenging. Those most frequently reported were: defining intervention intensity and components (85 %), extracting mHealth intervention details (71 %), dealing with dynamic research with evolving interventions (70 %), assessing intervention integrity (69 %), defining the intervention (66 %) and maintaining an updated review (65 %). Eleven survey respondents participated in the workshop (five had authored more than three mHealth SRs). Eighteen consensus-based recommendations were developed to address issues related to mHealth intervention integrity and to keep mHealth SRs up to date.

CONCLUSION

mHealth SRs present specific methodological challenges compared to non-mHealth interventions, particularly related to intervention integrity and keeping SRs current. Our recommendations for addressing these challenges can improve mHealth SRs.

"Going into the black box": a policy analysis of how the World Health Organization uses evidence to inform guideline recommendations

Background

The World Health Organization (WHO) plays a crucial role in producing global guidelines. In response to previous criticism, WHO has made efforts to enhance the process of guideline development, aiming for greater systematicity and transparency. However, it remains unclear whether these changes have effectively addressed these earlier critiques. This paper examines the policy process employed by WHO to inform guideline recommendations, using the update of the WHO Consolidated HIV Testing Services (HTS) Guidelines as a case study.

Methods

We observed guideline development meetings and conducted semi-structured interviews with key participants involved in the WHO guideline-making process. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically. The data were deductively coded and analysed in line with the main themes from a published conceptual framework for context-based evidence-based decision making: introduction, interpretation, and application of evidence.

Results

The HTS guideline update was characterized by an inclusive and transparent process, involving a wide range of stakeholders. However, it was noted that not all stakeholders could participate equally due to gaps in training and preparation, particularly regarding the complexity of the Grading Recommendations Assessment Development Evaluation (GRADE) framework. We also found that WHO does not set priorities for which or how many guidelines should be produced each year and does not systematically evaluate the implementation of their recommendations. Our interviews revealed disconnects in the evidence synthesis process, starting from the development of systematic review protocols. While GRADE prioritizes evidence from RCTs, the Guideline Development Group (GDG) heavily emphasized "other" GRADE domains for which little or no evidence was available from the systematic reviews. As a result, expert judgements and opinions played a role in making recommendations. Finally, the role of donors and their presence as observers during GDG meetings was not clearly defined.

Conclusion

We found a need for a different approach to evidence synthesis due to the diverse range of global guidelines produced by WHO. Ideally, the evidence synthesis should be broad enough to capture evidence from different types of studies for all domains in the GRADE framework. Greater structure is required in formulating GDGs and clarifying the role of donors through the process.

Inter-reviewer reliability of human literature reviewing and implications for the introduction of machine-assisted systematic reviews: a mixed-methods review

OBJECTIVES

Our main objective is to assess the inter-reviewer reliability (IRR) reported in published systematic literature reviews (SLRs). Our secondary objective is to determine the expected IRR by authors of SLRs for both human and machine-assisted reviews.

METHODS

We performed a review of SLRs of randomised controlled trials using the PubMed and Embase databases. Data were extracted on IRR by means of Cohen's kappa score of abstract/title screening, full-text screening and data extraction in combination with review team size, items screened and the quality of the review was assessed with the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2. In addition, we performed a survey of authors of SLRs on their expectations of machine learning automation and human performed IRR in SLRs.

RESULTS

After removal of duplicates, 836 articles were screened for abstract, and 413 were screened full text. In total, 45 eligible articles were included. The average Cohen's kappa score reported was 0.82 (SD=0.11, n=12) for abstract screening, 0.77 (SD=0.18, n=14) for full-text screening, 0.86 (SD=0.07, n=15) for the whole screening process and 0.88 (SD=0.08, n=16) for data extraction. No association was observed between the IRR reported and review team size, items screened and quality of the SLR. The survey (n=37) showed overlapping expected Cohen's kappa values ranging between approximately 0.6-0.9 for either human or machine learning-assisted SLRs. No trend was observed between reviewer experience and expected IRR. Authors expect a higher-than-average IRR for machine learning-assisted SLR compared with human based SLR in both screening and data extraction.

CONCLUSION

Currently, it is not common to report on IRR in the scientific literature for either human and machine learning-assisted SLRs. This mixed-methods review gives first guidance on the human IRR benchmark, which could be used as a minimal threshold for IRR in machine learning-assisted SLRs.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023386706.

[Development of criteria for the prospective assessment of the need for updating guideline recommendations: The AGIL criteria]

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based guideline and vaccination recommendations should continuously be updated to appropriately support health care decisions. However, resources for updating guidelines are often limited. The aim of this project was to develop a list of criteria for the prospective assessment of the need for updating individual guideline or vaccination recommendations, which can be applied from the time a guideline or guideline update is finalised.

METHODS

In this article we describe the development of the AGIL criteria (Assessment of Guidelines for Updating Recommendations). The AGIL criteria were developed by experienced scientists and experts in the field of guideline development in a multi-step process. The five steps included: 1) development of an initial list of criteria by the project team; 2) online survey of guideline experts on the initial version of the criteria list; 3) revision of the criteria list based on the results of the online survey; 4) workshop on the criteria list at the EbM Congress 2023; 5) creation of version 1.0 of the AGIL criteria based on the workshop results.

RESULTS

The initial list included the following three criteria: 1) relevance of the question 2) availability of new relevant evidence, and 3) impact of potentially new evidence. The response rate of the online survey for fully completed questionnaires was 31.0% (N=195; 630 guideline experts were contacted by email). For 90.3% (n=176) of the respondents, the criteria list included all essential aspects for assessing the need for updating guideline recommendations. More than three quarters of respondents rated the importance of the three criteria as "very important" or "important" (criteria 1-3: 75.3%, 86.1%, 85.2%) and - with the exception of criterion 1 - comprehensibility as "very comprehensible" or "comprehensible" (criteria 1-3: 58.4%, 75.9%, 78.5%). The results of the online survey and the workshop generally confirmed the three criteria with their two sub-questions. The incorporation of all feedback resulted in the AGIL criteria (version 1.0), recapping: 1) relevance of the question regarding a) PICO components and b) other factors, e.g. epidemiological aspects; 2) availability of new evidence a) on health-related benefits and harms and b) on other decision factors, e.g. feasibility, acceptability; 3) impact of new evidence a) on the certainty of evidence on which the recommendation is based and b) on the present recommendation, e.g.

STRENGTH OF RECOMMENDATION

DISCUSSION

The moderate response rate of the online survey may have limited its representativeness. Nevertheless, we consider the response rate to be satisfactory in this research context. The inclusion of many experts in the online survey and the EbM Congress workshop is a strength of the project and supports the quality of the results.

CONCLUSIONS

The AGIL criteria provide a structured guidance for the prospective assessment of the need for updating individual guideline recommendations and other evidence-based recommendations. The implementation and evaluation of the AGIL criteria 1.0 in a field test is planned.

The association between influenza vaccination, cardiovascular mortality and hospitalization: A living systematic review and prospective meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effects of seasonal influenza vaccination on cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes, including among individuals with established CVD, are uncertain.

METHODS

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of influenza vaccines compared to no vaccines or placebo for preventing all-cause/CVD mortality or all-cause/CVD hospitalization in the general population and in populations with pre-existing CVD, we conducted a living systematic review (LSR) and prospective meta-analysis (PMA). Published randomized controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies between 1994 and 2023 were searched. PRISMA guidelines were followed in the extraction of study details, and risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tools. Analyses were stratified by study design and CVD history. Study quality was evaluated using GRADE system. Meta analyses based on random-effects models were performed between July and October 2022. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) for all-cause/CVD mortality and all-cause/CVD hospitalization were main outcomes.

RESULTS

Six published RCTs comprising 12,662 participants (mean age, 62 years; 45 % women; 8,797 with pre-existing CVD) and 37 observational studies comprising 6,311,703 participants (mean age, 49 years; 50 % women; 1,189,955 with pre-existing CVD) were included. Only those RCTs judged to be low risk were included in the analyses, and observational studies at anything greater than moderate risk of bias were excluded. In RCTs, influenza vaccine was not significantly associated with lower all-cause mortality (RR, 0.85; 95 %CI, 0.61-1.17), cardiovascular death (RR, 0.80; 95 %CI, 0.60-1.07), or CVD hospitalization (RR, 0.69; 95 %CI, 0.47-1.02). A statistically significant reduction in all-cause hospitalization (RR, 0.86; 95 %CI, 0.76-0.97) was observed. The evidence level was assessed as moderate for all-cause hospitalization, and low for other outcomes. Overall, observational studies suggested a stronger protective association between influenza vaccination and outcomes, except for CVD hospitalization. Based on RCTs, there was no difference in the effects of influenza vaccination on all-cause mortality among the general population compared to those with pre-existing CVD, although the summary point estimate favored benefits only in those with pre-existing CVD.

CONCLUSIONS

While observational studies suggest that influenza vaccination may be associated with lower all-cause and CVD mortality and all-cause hospitalization, RCTs reported to date suggest a reduction in the risk of all-cause hospitalization but do not provide clear evidence to support preventive effects on mortality (all-cause or CVD) or CVD hospitalization.

The blessing and curse of "no strings attached": An automated literature analysis of psychological health and non-attachmental work in the digitalization era

Amidst tremendous changes in the worlds of work in light of digitalization, non-attachmental work designs, where individuals gain income without being bound by a fixed administrative attachment to an employer, hold promises of self-actualization along with threats of insecurity. Today's technology boom and the consequent flexibility and uncertainty it brings into workers' lives may translate into inspiring growth opportunities or overloading pressure, contingent upon mental health and wellbeing impacts. This paper first provides a conceptualization of the non-attachmental work designs of the 21st century, before proceeding to an extensive mapping of literature at their intersection with psychological health. This involves a machine-learning-driven review of 1094 scientific articles using topic modeling, combined with in-depth manual content analyses and inductive-deductive cycles of pattern discovery and category building. The resulting scholarly blueprint reveals several tendencies, including a prevalence of positive psychology concepts in research on work designs with high levels of autonomy and control, contrasted with narratives of disempowerment in service- and task-based work. We note that some psychological health issues are researched with respect to specific work designs but not others, for instance neurodiversity and the role of gender in ownership-based work, self-image and digital addiction in content-based work, and ratings-induced anxiety in platform-mediated task-based work. We also find a heavy representation of 'heroic' entrepreneurs, quantitative methods, and western contexts in addition to a surprising dearth of analyses on the roles of policy and technological interventions. The results are positioned to guide academics, decision-makers, technologists, and workers in the pursuit of healthier work designs for a more sustainable future.

Strategies for evidence-based in head and neck cancer: practical examples in developing systematic review questions

A systematic review (SR) requires several steps to be conducted. A major and initial challenge is to formulate a focused research question that may have high scientific relevance to provide evidence-based results and strategies. This narrative mini-review aims to present different categories of systematic reviews currently applied in Head and Neck Cancers (HNC), focusing on the strategies to provide results for evidence-based decision making. The SRs identified were of intervention, diagnostic testing, prognosis, in vitro and in vivo studies, prevalence, and epidemiological studies, and of association and risk factors. Focused questions that define the type of review, whether it is a therapy question (intervention), a question of prevalence or an outcome (prognosis) of disease, are discussed. Additionally, the importance in building interesting research questions and following all proposed steps to produce quality evidence are highlighted. This narrative mini-review may guide future research by showing how to perform and report relevant evidence in terms of HNC.

Designing tailored maintenance strategies for systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines using the Portfolio Maintenance by Test-Treatment (POMBYTT) framework

BACKGROUND

Organizations face diverse contexts and requirements when updating and maintaining their portfolio, or pool, of systematic reviews or clinical practice guidelines they need to manage. We aimed to develop a comprehensive, theoretical framework that might enable the design and tailoring of maintenance strategies for portfolios containing systematic reviews and guidelines.

METHODS

We employed a conceptual approach combined with a literature review. Components of the diagnostic test-treatment pathway used in clinical healthcare were transferred to develop a framework specifically for systematic review and guideline portfolio maintenance strategies.

RESULTS

We developed the Portfolio Maintenance by Test-Treatment (POMBYTT) framework comprising diagnosis, staging, management, and monitoring components. To illustrate the framework's components and their elements, we provided examples from both a clinical healthcare test-treatment pathway and a clinical practice guideline maintenance scenario. Additionally, our literature review provided possible examples for the elements in the framework, such as detection variables, detection tests, and detection thresholds. We furthermore provide three example strategies using the framework, of which one was based on living recommendations strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

The developed framework might support the design of maintenance strategies that could contain multiple options besides updating to manage a portfolio (e.g. withdrawing and archiving), even in the absence of the target condition. By making different choices for variables, tests, test protocols, indications, management options, and monitoring, organizations might tailor their maintenance strategy to suit specific contexts and needs. The framework's elements could potentially aid in the design by being explicit about the operational aspects of maintenance strategies. This might also be helpful for end-users and other stakeholders of systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines.

Optimizing process and methods for a living systematic review: 30 search updates and three review updates later

OBJECTIVE

To describe the living systematic review (LSR) process and to share experience of planning, searches, screening, extraction, publishing and dissemination to inform and assist authors planning their own LSR. Many LSR do not publish more than one update, we hope this paper helps to increase this.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A Cochrane LSR with an international author team that has been 'living' for two years, with monthly search updates and three full updates published in this time. LSRs are regularly updated systematic reviews that allow new evidence to be incorporated as it becomes available. LSR are ideally suited to policy-relevant topics where there is uncertainty and new evidence will likely impact the interpretation and/or certainty of outcomes.

RESULTS

The key features of the process that require consideration are: specifying the frequency of searches and triggers for full updates in the protocol; stakeholder input; publishing and disseminating monthly search findings. A strong team, incorporating methodological and topic expertise, with core members that meet regularly is essential. Regular search updates make it important to have a clear cyclical schedule of activity. To achieve timely updates this process should be streamlined, for example, using automated monthly searches, and systematic reviewing software for screening. LSR provide a unique opportunity to incorporate stakeholder feedback.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend that LSRs should be: justified; carefully planned including the timing of search updates, triggers for publication and termination; published in a timely manner; have a clear dissemination plan; and a strong core team of authors.

Barriers to and facilitators of living guidelines use in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Living guidelines provide reliable, ongoing evidence surveillance and regularly updated recommendations for healthcare decision-making. As a relatively new concept, most of the initial application of living approaches has been undertaken in high-income countries. However, in this scoping review, we looked at what is currently known about how living guidelines were developed, used and applied in low-income and middle-income countries.

METHODS

Searches for published literature were conducted in Medline, Global Health, Cochrane Library and Embase. Grey literature was identified using Google Scholar and the WHO website. In addition, the reference lists of included studies were checked for missing studies. Studies were included if they described or reflected on the development, application or utility of living guideline approaches for low-income and middle-income countries.

RESULTS

After a full-text review, 21 studies were included in the review, reporting on the development and application of living recommendations in low-income and middle-income countries. Most studies reported living guideline activities conducted by the WHO (15, 71.4%), followed by China (4, 19%), Chile (1, 4.8%) and Lebanon (1, 4.8%). All studies based on WHO reports relate to living COVID-19 management guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the studies in this review were WHO-reported studies focusing solely on COVID-19 disease treatment living guidelines. However, there was no clear explanation of how living guidelines were used nor information on the prospects for and obstacles to the implementation of living guidelines in low-income and middle-income countries.

Health systems resilience in fragile and conflict-affected settings: a systematic scoping review

BACKGROUND

Health systems resilience (HSR) research is a rapidly expanding field, in which key concepts are discussed and theoretical frameworks are emerging with vibrant debate. Fragile and conflict-affected settings (FCAS) are contexts exposed to compounding stressors, for which resilience is an important characteristic. However, only limited evidence has been generated in such settings. We conducted a scoping review to: (a) identify the conceptual frameworks of HSR used in the analysis of shocks and stressors in FCAS; (b) describe the representation of different actors involved in health care governance and service provision in these settings; and (c) identify health systems operations as they relate to absorption, adaptation, and transformation in FCAS.

METHODS

We used standard, extensive search methods. The search captured studies published between 2006 and January 2022. We included all peer reviewed and grey literature that adopted a HSR lens in the analysis of health responses to crises. Thematic analysis using both inductive and deductive approaches was conducted, adopting frameworks related to resilience characteristics identified by Kruk et al., and the resilience capacities described by Blanchet et al. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies met our inclusion criteria. The governance-centred, capacity-oriented framework for HSR emerged as the most frequently used lens of analysis to describe the health responses to conflict and chronic violence specifically. Most studies focused on public health systems' resilience analysis, while the private health sector is only examined in complementarity with the former. Communities are minimally represented, despite their widely acknowledged role in supporting HSR. The documentation of operations enacting HSR in FCAS is focused on absorption and adaptation, while transformation is seldom described. Absorptive, adaptive, and transformative interventions are described across seven different domains: safety and security, society, health system governance, stocks and supplies, built environment, health care workforce, and health care services.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review findings suggest that the governance-centred framework can be useful to better understand HSR in FCAS. Future HSR research should document adaptive and transformative strategies that advance HSR, particularly in relation to actions intended to promote the safety and security of health systems, the built environment for health, and the adoption of a social justice lens.

Finding the right power balance: Better study design and collaboration can reduce dependence on statistical power

Power analysis currently dominates sample size determination for experiments, particularly in grant and ethics applications. Yet, this focus could paradoxically result in suboptimal study design because publication biases towards studies with the largest effects can lead to the overestimation of effect sizes. In this Essay, we propose a paradigm shift towards better study designs that focus less on statistical power. We also advocate for (pre)registration and obligatory reporting of all results (regardless of statistical significance), better facilitation of team science and multi-institutional collaboration that incorporates heterogenization, and the use of prospective and living meta-analyses to generate generalizable results. Such changes could make science more effective and, potentially, more equitable, helping to cultivate better collaborations.

Guidance to best tools and practices for systematic reviews

Data continue to accumulate indicating that many systematic reviews are methodologically flawed, biased, redundant, or uninformative. Some improvements have occurred in recent years based on empirical methods research and standardization of appraisal tools; however, many authors do not routinely or consistently apply these updated methods. In addition, guideline developers, peer reviewers, and journal editors often disregard current methodological standards. Although extensively acknowledged and explored in the methodological literature, most clinicians seem unaware of these issues and may automatically accept evidence syntheses (and clinical practice guidelines based on their conclusions) as trustworthy. A plethora of methods and tools are recommended for the development and evaluation of evidence syntheses. It is important to understand what these are intended to do (and cannot do) and how they can be utilized. Our objective is to distill this sprawling information into a format that is understandable and readily accessible to authors, peer reviewers, and editors. In doing so, we aim to promote appreciation and understanding of the demanding science of evidence synthesis among stakeholders. We focus on well-documented deficiencies in key components of evidence syntheses to elucidate the rationale for current standards. The constructs underlying the tools developed to assess reporting, risk of bias, and methodological quality of evidence syntheses are distinguished from those involved in determining overall certainty of a body of evidence. Another important distinction is made between those tools used by authors to develop their syntheses as opposed to those used to ultimately judge their work. Exemplar methods and research practices are described, complemented by novel pragmatic strategies to improve evidence syntheses. The latter include preferred terminology and a scheme to characterize types of research evidence. We organize best practice resources in a Concise Guide that can be widely adopted and adapted for routine implementation by authors and journals. Appropriate, informed use of these is encouraged, but we caution against their superficial application and emphasize their endorsement does not substitute for in-depth methodological training. By highlighting best practices with their rationale, we hope this guidance will inspire further evolution of methods and tools that can advance the field.

Living evidence and adaptive policy: perfect partners?

BACKGROUND

While there has been widespread global acceptance of the importance of evidence-informed policy, many opportunities to inform health policy with research are missed, often because of a mismatch between when and where reliable evidence is needed, and when and where it is available. 'Living evidence' is an approach where systematic evidence syntheses (e.g. living reviews, living guidelines, living policy briefs, etc.) are continually updated to incorporate new relevant evidence as it becomes available. Living evidence approaches have the potential to overcome a major barrier to evidence-informed policy, making up-to-date systematic summaries of policy-relevant research available at any time that policy-makers need them. These approaches are likely to be particularly beneficial given increasing calls for policy that is responsive, and rapidly adaptive to changes in the policy context. We describe the opportunities presented by living evidence for evidence-informed policy-making and highlight areas for further exploration.

DISCUSSION

There are several elements of living approaches to evidence synthesis that might support increased and improved use of evidence to inform policy. Reviews are explicitly prioritised to be 'living' by partnerships between policy-makers and researchers based on relevance to decision-making, as well as uncertainty of existing evidence, and likelihood that new evidence will arise. The ongoing nature of the work means evidence synthesis teams can be dynamic and engage with policy-makers in a variety of ways over time; and synthesis topics, questions and methods can be adapted as policy interests or contextual factors shift. Policy-makers can sign-up to be notified when relevant new evidence is found, and can be confident that living syntheses are up-to-date and contain all research whenever they access them. The always up-to-date nature of living evidence syntheses means producers can rapidly demonstrate availability of relevant, reliable evidence when it is needed, addressing a frequently cited barrier to evidence-informed policymaking.

CONCLUSIONS

While there are challenges to be overcome, living evidence provides opportunities to enable policy-makers to access up-to-date evidence whenever they need it and also enable researchers to respond to the issues of the day with up-to-date research; and update policy-makers on changes in the evidence base as they arise. It also provides an opportunity to build flexible partnerships between researchers and policy-makers to ensure that evidence syntheses reflect the changing needs of policy-makers.

Methods and guidance on conducting, reporting, publishing, and appraising living systematic reviews: a scoping review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The living systematic review (LSR) approach is based on ongoing surveillance of the literature and continual updating. Most currently available guidance documents address the conduct, reporting, publishing, and appraisal of systematic reviews (SRs), but are not suitable for LSRs per se and miss additional LSR-specific considerations. In this scoping review, we aim to systematically collate methodological guidance literature on how to conduct, report, publish, and appraise the quality of LSRs and identify current gaps in guidance.

METHODS

A standard scoping review methodology was used. We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), and The Cochrane Library on August 28, 2021. As for searching gray literature, we looked for existing guidelines and handbooks on LSRs from organizations that conduct evidence syntheses. The screening was conducted by two authors independently in Rayyan, and data extraction was done in duplicate using a pilot-tested data extraction form in Excel. Data was extracted according to four pre-defined categories for (i) conducting, (ii) reporting, (iii) publishing, and (iv) appraising LSRs. We mapped the findings by visualizing overview tables created in Microsoft Word.

RESULTS

Of the 21 included papers, methodological guidance was found in 17 papers for conducting, in six papers for reporting, in 15 papers for publishing, and in two papers for appraising LSRs. Some of the identified key items for (i) conducting LSRs were identifying the rationale, screening tools, or re-revaluating inclusion criteria. Identified items of (ii) the original PRISMA checklist included reporting the registration and protocol, title, or synthesis methods. For (iii) publishing, there was guidance available on publication type and frequency or update trigger, and for (iv) appraising, guidance on the appropriate use of bias assessment or reporting funding of included studies was found. Our search revealed major evidence gaps, particularly for guidance on certain PRISMA items such as reporting results, discussion, support and funding, and availability of data and material of a LSR.

CONCLUSION

Important evidence gaps were identified for guidance on how to report in LSRs and appraise their quality. Our findings were applied to inform and prepare a PRISMA 2020 extension for LSR.

The gut microbiome dysbiosis and regulation by fecal microbiota transplantation: umbrella review

Background

Gut microbiome dysbiosis has been implicated in various gastrointestinal and extra-gastrointestinal diseases, but evidence on the efficacy and safety of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) for therapeutic indications remains unclear.

Methods

The gutMDisorder database was used to summarize the associations between gut microbiome dysbiosis and diseases. We performed an umbrella review of published meta-analyses to determine the evidence synthesis on the efficacy and safety of FMT in treating various diseases. Our study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022301226).

Results

Gut microbiome dysbiosis was associated with 117 gastrointestinal and extra-gastrointestinal. Colorectal cancer was associated with 92 dysbiosis. Dysbiosis involving Firmicutes (phylum) was associated with 34 diseases. We identified 62 published meta-analyses of FMT. FMT was found to be effective for 13 diseases, with a 95.56% cure rate (95% CI: 93.88-97.05%) for recurrent Chloridoids difficile infection (rCDI). Evidence was high quality for rCDI and moderate to high quality for ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease but low to very low quality for other diseases.

Conclusion

Gut microbiome dysbiosis may be implicated in numerous diseases. Substantial evidence suggests FMT improves clinical outcomes for certain indications, but evidence quality varies greatly depending on the specific indication, route of administration, frequency of instillation, fecal preparation, and donor type. This variability should inform clinical, policy, and implementation decisions regarding FMT.

New horizons in evidence synthesis for older adults

Evidence synthesis, embedded within a systematic review of the literature, is a well-established approach for collating and combining all the relevant information on a particular research question. A robust synthesis can establish the evidence base, which underpins best practice guidance. Such endeavours are frequently used by policymakers and practitioners to inform their decision making. Traditionally, an evidence synthesis of interventions consisted of a meta-analysis of quantitative data comparing two treatment alternatives addressing a specific and focussed clinical question. However, as the methods in the field have evolved, especially in response to the increasingly complex healthcare questions, more advanced evidence synthesis techniques have been developed. These can deal with extended data structures considering more than two treatment alternatives (network meta-analysis) and complex multicomponent interventions. The array of questions capable of being answered has also increased with specific approaches being developed for different evidence types including diagnostic, prognostic and qualitative data. Furthermore, driven by a desire for increasingly up-to-date evidence summaries, living systematic reviews have emerged. All of these methods can potentially have a role in informing older adult healthcare decisions. The aim of this review is to increase awareness and uptake of the increasingly comprehensive array of newer synthesis methods available and highlight their utility for answering clinically relevant questions in the context of older adult research, giving examples of where such techniques have already been effectively applied within the field. Their strengths and limitations are discussed, and we suggest user-friendly software options to implement the methods described.

Conservative and Surgical Modalities in the Management of Pediatric Parapneumonic Effusion and Empyema: A Living Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment for community-acquired childhood pneumonia complicated by empyema remains unclear.

RESEARCH QUESTION

In children with parapneumonic effusion or empyema, do hospital length of stay and other key clinical outcomes differ according to the treatment modality used?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A living systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Ovid MEDLINE, and Web of Science Core Collection databases. Eligible RCTs included patients aged < 18 years and compared two of the following treatment modalities: antibiotics alone, chest tube insertion with or without fibrinolytics, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), and decortication via thoracotomy. A network meta-analysis was performed to evaluate treatment effects on hospital length of stay (LOS), the primary outcome.

RESULTS

Eleven trials including a total of 590 patients were selected for the network meta-analysis. Compared with a chest tube alone, a chest tube with fibrinolytics, thoracotomy, and VATS were all associated with shorter LOS, with a mean difference of 5.05 days (95% CI, 2.46-7.64), 6.33 days (95% CI, 3.17-9.50), and 5.86 days (95% CI, 3.38-8.35), respectively. No substantial differences in LOS were observed between the latter three interventions. None of the 11 RCTs compared antibiotics alone vs other types of treatment. Most trials reported peri-procedural complications and the need for reintervention, but the descriptions differed significantly between trials, preventing meta-analysis. In trials reporting health care-associated costs, fibrinolytics had cost advantages compared with VATS. Short- and long-term morbidity and mortality were very low, regardless of the treatment modality.

INTERPRETATION

The results of this network meta-analysis showed that a chest tube alone was associated with a longer LOS compared with other treatment modalities. The lower cost associated with a chest tube plus fibrinolytics warrants consideration when choosing between treatment options, given similar LOS and clinical outcomes compared with the other modalities.

Using machine learning to extract information and predict outcomes from reports of randomised trials of smoking cessation interventions in the Human Behaviour-Change Project

Background  Using reports of randomised trials of smoking cessation interventions as a test case, this study aimed to develop and evaluate machine learning (ML) algorithms for extracting information from study reports and predicting outcomes as part of the Human Behaviour-Change Project. It is the first of two linked papers, with the second paper reporting on further development of a prediction system. Methods  Researchers manually annotated 70 items of information ('entities') in 512 reports of randomised trials of smoking cessation interventions covering intervention content and delivery, population, setting, outcome and study methodology using the Behaviour Change Intervention Ontology. These entities were used to train ML algorithms to extract the information automatically. The information extraction ML algorithm involved a named-entity recognition system using the 'FLAIR' framework. The manually annotated intervention, population, setting and study entities were used to develop a deep-learning algorithm using multiple layers of long-short-term-memory (LSTM) components to predict smoking cessation outcomes. Results  The F1 evaluation score, derived from the false positive and false negative rates (range 0-1), for the information extraction algorithm averaged 0.42 across different types of entity (SD=0.22, range 0.05-0.88) compared with an average human annotator's score of 0.75 (SD=0.15, range 0.38-1.00). The algorithm for assigning entities to study arms ( e.g., intervention or control) was not successful. This initial ML outcome prediction algorithm did not outperform prediction based just on the mean outcome value or a linear regression model. Conclusions  While some success was achieved in using ML to extract information from reports of randomised trials of smoking cessation interventions, we identified major challenges that could be addressed by greater standardisation in the way that studies are reported. Outcome prediction from smoking cessation studies may benefit from development of novel algorithms, e.g., using ontological information to inform ML (as reported in the linked paper 3).