Introduction to systematic reviews and meta-analysis

A review and meta-analysis of conventional sternotomy versus minimally invasive mitral valve surgery for degenerative mitral valve disease focused on the last decade of evidence

OBJECTIVES

Early meta-analyses comparing minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) with conventional sternotomy (CS) have determined the safety of MIMVS. We performed this review and meta-analysis based on studies from 2014 onwards to examine the differences in outcomes between MIMVS and CS. Specifically, some outcomes of interest included renal failure, new onset atrial fibrillation, mortality, stroke, reoperation for bleeding, blood transfusion and pulmonary infection.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in six databases for studies comparing MIMVS with CS. Although the initial search identified 821 papers in total, nine studies were suitable for the final analysis. All studies included compared CS with MIMVS. The Mantel - Haenszel statistical method was chosen due the use of inverse variance and random effects. A meta-analysis was performed on the data.

RESULTS

MIMVS had significantly lower odds of renal failure (OR: 0.52; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.73, p < 0.001), new onset atrial fibrillation (OR: 0.78; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.90, p < 0.001), reduced prolonged intubation (OR: 0.50; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.87, p = 0.01) and reduced mortality (OR: 0.58; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.87, p < 0.01). MIMVS had shorter ICU stay (WMD: -0.42; 95% CI -0.59 to -0.24, p < 0.001) and shorter time to discharge (WMD: -2.79; 95% CI -3.86 to -1.71, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In the modern era, MIMVS for degenerative disease is associated with improved short-term outcomes when compared to the CS.

Association between insulin receptor substrate 1 gene polymorphism rs1801278 and gestational diabetes mellitus: an updated meta- analysis

OBJECTIVES

we performed this meta- analysis to investigate the impact of insulin receptor substrate 1 (IRS1) gene rs1801278 on susceptibility to gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).

METHODS

The pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated, and p value is used to determine statistical significance. Sensitivity analysis was performed under three models (dominant, recessive and allele model), and the pooled ORs and 95%CI were calculated. Funnel plots and Begger's regression test were employed to test the publication bias.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 4777 participants (2116 cases and 2661 controls). The IRS1 rs1801278 (C/T) were not significant associated with GDM risk under the dominant and allele models, OR (95%CI) = 1.22 (0.88-1.70) and 1.24 (0.91-1.68), respectively (both p values were more than 0.05). But we also found the IRS1 rs1801278 (C/T) were significant associated with GDM risk under the recessive model, OR (95%CI) = 0.37 (0.16-0.86), p = 0.030. Our results showed that none of the studies affected the quality of the pooled OR. We also found no significant publication bias existed in this meta study for three genetic models, PTT + CT vs. CC = 0.445; PCC+CT vs. TT= 0.095; PC vs. T = 0.697.

CONCLUSION

this meta-analysis indicated that IRS1 rs1801278 (C/T) was associated with the GDM risk under the recessive model but was not associated with the GDM risk under dominant and allele models.

Meta-analysis on studies with heterogeneous and partially observed covariates

Individual participant data meta-analysis is a commonly used alternative to the traditional aggregate data meta-analysis. It is popular because it avoids relying on published results and enables direct adjustment for relevant covariates. However, a practical challenge is that the studies being combined often vary in terms of the potential confounders that were measured. Furthermore, it will inevitably be the case that some individuals have missing values for some of those covariates. In this paper, we demonstrate how these challenges can be resolved using a propensity score approach, combined with multiple imputation, as a strategy to adjust for covariates in the context of individual participant data meta-analysis. To illustrate, we analyze data from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation-funded Healthy Birth, Growth, and Development Knowledge Integration project to investigate the relationship between physical growth rate in the first year of life and cognition measured later during childhood. We found that the overall effect of average growth velocity on cognitive outcome is slightly, but significantly, positive with an estimated effect size of 0.36 (95% CI 0.18, 0.55).

Comparison of statistical methods used to meta-analyse results from interrupted time series studies: an empirical study

BACKGROUND

The Interrupted Time Series (ITS) is a robust design for evaluating public health and policy interventions or exposures when randomisation may be infeasible. Several statistical methods are available for the analysis and meta-analysis of ITS studies. We sought to empirically compare available methods when applied to real-world ITS data.

METHODS

We sourced ITS data from published meta-analyses to create an online data repository. Each dataset was re-analysed using two ITS estimation methods. The level- and slope-change effect estimates (and standard errors) were calculated and combined using fixed-effect and four random-effects meta-analysis methods. We examined differences in meta-analytic level- and slope-change estimates, their 95% confidence intervals, p-values, and estimates of heterogeneity across the statistical methods.

RESULTS

Of 40 eligible meta-analyses, data from 17 meta-analyses including 282 ITS studies were obtained (predominantly investigating the effects of public health interruptions (88%)) and analysed. We found that on average, the meta-analytic effect estimates, their standard errors and between-study variances were not sensitive to meta-analysis method choice, irrespective of the ITS analysis method. However, across ITS analysis methods, for any given meta-analysis, there could be small to moderate differences in meta-analytic effect estimates, and important differences in the meta-analytic standard errors. Furthermore, the confidence interval widths and p-values for the meta-analytic effect estimates varied depending on the choice of confidence interval method and ITS analysis method.

CONCLUSIONS

Our empirical study showed that meta-analysis effect estimates, their standard errors, confidence interval widths and p-values can be affected by statistical method choice. These differences may importantly impact interpretations and conclusions of a meta-analysis and suggest that the statistical methods are not interchangeable in practice.

Assessment of the prevalence and related factors of financial toxicity in cancer patients based on the COST scale: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The high cost of cancer treatment exposes patients to financial toxicity during treatment; however, no study has comprehensively analyzed the incidence of financial toxicity using a validated assessment tool. In this study, the objective was to ascertain the incidence of financial toxicity in cancer patients and the factors influencing it.

METHODS

Nine electronic databases were retrieved to collect cross-sectional studies reporting financial toxicity in cancer patients. A random effects meta-analysis was applied to yield the overall prevalence of financial toxicity. Subgroup analyses were conducted depending on the factors affecting financial toxicity.

RESULTS

In total, 30 studies met our inclusion criteria. The pooled prevalence of financial toxicity in cancer patients was 48% (95%CI:38%-58%, I2 = 99.4%, p < 0.001). In the subgroup analysis, a higher prevalence of financial toxicity in patients aged <67 years (47%, 95%CI: 28%-66%, I2 = 97.5%, p < 0.001), female (46%, 95%CI:39%-53%, I2 = 94.9%,p < 0.001), lung cancer(57%, 95%CI:38%-75%, I2 = 96.9%, p < 0.001), developing countries (64%, 95%CI:55%-72%, I2 = 98.1%, p < 0.001), time of investigation following COVID-19 (53%, 95%CI:37%-69%, I2 = 99.4%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Financial toxicity is prevalent in cancer patients and is increasingly evident after COVID-19. Furthermore, the odds of financial toxicity are higher in patients who are female, younger, whose cancer type is lung cancer, and from developing countries. These findings emphasize the significance of evaluating financial toxicity in cancer patients after COVID-19, especially in developing countries. This may play a pivotal role in helping patients cope with financial toxicity.

Effect of low-frequency noise exposure on cognitive function: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Low-frequency noise may cause changes in cognitive function. However, there is no established consensus on the effect of low-frequency noise on cognitive function. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to explore the relationship between low-frequency noise exposure and cognitive function.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and identified original studies written in English on low-frequency noise and cognition published before December 2022 using the PsycINFO, PubMed, Medline, and Web of Science databases. The risk of bias was evaluated according to established guidelines. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed where appropriate. To explore the association between low-frequency noise exposure and cognitive function, we reviewed eight relevant studies. These studies covered cognitive functions grouped into four domains: attention, executive function, memory, and higher-order cognitive functions. The data extraction process was followed by a random-effects meta-analysis for each domain, which allowed us to quantify the overall effect.

RESULTS

Our analysis of the selected studies suggested that interventions involving low-frequency noise only had a negative impact on higher-order cognitive functions (Z = 2.42, p = 0.02), with a standardized mean difference of -0.37 (95% confidence interval: -0.67, -0.07). A moderate level of heterogeneity was observed among studies (p = 0.24, I2 = 29%, Tau2 = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study findings suggest that low-frequency noise can negatively impact higher-order cognitive functions, such as logical reasoning, mathematical calculation, and data processing. Therefore, it becomes important to consider the potential negative consequences of low-frequency noise in everyday situations, and proactive measures should be taken to address this issue and mitigate the associated potential adverse outcomes.

Describing financial toxicity among cancer patients in different income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

There is limited evidence of financial toxicity (FT) among cancer patients from countries of various income levels. Hence, this study aimed to determine the prevalence of objective and subjective FT and their measurements in relation to cancer treatment.

Methods

PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, and CINAHL databases were searched to find studies that examined FT. There was no limit on the design or setting of the study. Random-effects meta-analysis was utilized to obtain the pooled prevalence of objective FT.

Results

Out of 244 identified studies during the initial screening, only 64 studies were included in this review. The catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) method was often used in the included studies to determine the objective FT. The pooled prevalence of CHE was 47% (95% CI: 24.0-70.0) in middle- and high-income countries, and the highest percentage was noted in low-income countries (74.4%). A total of 30 studies focused on subjective FT, of which 9 used the Comprehensive Score for FT (COST) tool and reported median scores ranging between 17.0 and 31.9.

Conclusion

This study shows that cancer patients from various income-group countries experienced a significant financial burden during their treatment. It is imperative to conduct further studies on interventions and policies that can lower FT caused by cancer treatment.

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.

Critical elements of synthesis questions are incompletely reported: survey of systematic reviews of intervention effects

OBJECTIVES

To examine the characteristics of population, intervention and outcome groups and the extent to which they were completely reported for each synthesis in a sample of systematic reviews (SRs) of interventions.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We coded groups that were intended (or used) for comparisons in 100 randomly sampled SRs of public health and health systems interventions published in 2018 from the Health Evidence and Health Systems Evidence databases.

RESULTS

Authors commonly used population, intervention and outcome groups to structure comparisons, but these groups were often incompletely reported. For example, of 41 SRs that identified and/or used intervention groups for comparisons, 29 (71%) identified the groups in their methods description before reporting of the results (e.g., in the Background or Methods), 12 (29%) defined the groups in enough detail to replicate decisions about which included studies were eligible for each synthesis, 6 (15%) provided a rationale, and 24 (59%) stated that the groups would be used for comparisons. Sixteen (39%) SRs used intervention groups in their synthesis without any mention in the methods. Reporting for population, outcome and methodological groups was similarly incomplete.

CONCLUSION

Complete reporting of the groups used for synthesis would improve transparency and replicability of reviews, and help ensure that the synthesis is not driven by what is reported in the included studies. Although concerted effort is needed to improve reporting, this should lead to more focused and useful reviews for decision-makers.

Evaluation of statistical methods used to meta-analyse results from interrupted time series studies: A simulation study

Interrupted time series (ITS) are often meta-analysed to inform public health and policy decisions but examination of the statistical methods for ITS analysis and meta-analysis in this context is limited. We simulated meta-analyses of ITS studies with continuous outcome data, analysed the studies using segmented linear regression with two estimation methods [ordinary least squares (OLS) and restricted maximum likelihood (REML)], and meta-analysed the immediate level- and slope-change effect estimates using fixed-effect and (multiple) random-effects meta-analysis methods. Simulation design parameters included varying series length; magnitude of lag-1 autocorrelation; magnitude of level- and slope-changes; number of included studies; and, effect size heterogeneity. All meta-analysis methods yielded unbiased estimates of the interruption effects. All random effects meta-analysis methods yielded coverage close to the nominal level, irrespective of the ITS analysis method used and other design parameters. However, heterogeneity was frequently overestimated in scenarios where the ITS study standard errors were underestimated, which occurred for short series or when the ITS analysis method did not appropriately account for autocorrelation. The performance of meta-analysis methods depends on the design and analysis of the included ITS studies. Although all random effects methods performed well in terms of coverage, irrespective of the ITS analysis method, we recommend the use of effect estimates calculated from ITS methods that adjust for autocorrelation when possible. Doing so will likely to lead to more accurate estimates of the heterogeneity variance.

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.

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.

Effect estimates can be accurately calculated with data digitally extracted from interrupted time series graphs

Interrupted time series (ITS) studies are frequently used to examine the impact of population-level interventions or exposures. Systematic reviews with meta-analyses including ITS designs may inform public health and policy decision-making. Re-analysis of ITS may be required for inclusion in meta-analysis. While publications of ITS rarely provide raw data for re-analysis, graphs are often included, from which time series data can be digitally extracted. However, the accuracy of effect estimates calculated from data digitally extracted from ITS graphs is currently unknown. Forty-three ITS with available datasets and time series graphs were included. Time series data from each graph was extracted by four researchers using digital data extraction software. Data extraction errors were analysed. Segmented linear regression models were fitted to the extracted and provided datasets, from which estimates of immediate level and slope change (and associated statistics) were calculated and compared across the datasets. Although there were some data extraction errors of time points, primarily due to complications in the original graphs, they did not translate into important differences in estimates of interruption effects (and associated statistics). Using digital data extraction to obtain data from ITS graphs should be considered in reviews including ITS. Including these studies in meta-analyses, even with slight inaccuracy, is likely to outweigh the loss of information from non-inclusion.

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.

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.

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.

Microplastics stimulated nitrous oxide emissions primarily through denitrification: A meta-analysis

Microplastics can profoundly alter nitrogen cycling. However, it remains poorly understood how microplastics impact soil nitrogen processes and generate N₂O. A meta-analysis was conducted for this investigation based on 60 published studies to elucidate the effects of microplastics on soil nitrogen cycling, from genes to processes. Under microplastic exposure, the emissions of soil N₂O was significantly increased (140.6%), while the nitrate reductase activities increased by 4.8%. The denitrification rate and number of denitrifier genes were increased by 17.8% and 10.6%, respectively. Meanwhile, the nitrification rate and nitrifier genes were not significantly altered, so did the nitrogen immobilization and mineralization rates. The additional emission of soil N₂O might primarily from stimulated denitrification. Soil N₂O emission and denitrification genes were always increased, regardless of the concentrations of microplastic or experiment duration. As a result, the nitrite was increased by 38.8% and nitrate was decreased by 22.4%, respectively. Interestingly, the N₂O emission increments and copy number of denitrifiers genes diminished over time. This study revealed divergent changes in soil nitrogen processes and highlighted N₂O emissions with a greater denitrification rate under microplastic exposure. The negative impacts of microplastics on soil health were revealed from the perspective of soil nitrogen availability and N₂O emissions.

Drugs to reduce bleeding and transfusion in major open vascular or endovascular surgery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Vascular surgery may be followed by internal bleeding due to inadequate surgical haemostasis, abnormal clotting, or surgical complications. Bleeding ranges from minor, with no transfusion requirement, to massive, requiring multiple blood product transfusions. There are a number of drugs, given systemically or applied locally, which may reduce the need for blood transfusion.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of anti-fibrinolytic and haemostatic drugs and agents in reducing bleeding and the need for blood transfusion in people undergoing major vascular surgery or vascular procedures with a risk of moderate or severe (> 500 mL) blood loss.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL, and Transfusion Evidence Library. We also searched the WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov trial registries for ongoing and unpublished trials. Searches used a combination of MeSH and free text terms from database inception to 31 March 2022, without restriction on language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults of drug treatments to reduce bleeding due to major vascular surgery or vascular procedures with a risk of moderate or severe blood loss, which used placebo, usual care or another drug regimen as control.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were units of red cells transfused and all-cause mortality. Our secondary outcomes included risk of receiving an allogeneic blood product, risk of reoperation or repeat procedure due to bleeding, risk of a thromboembolic event, risk of a serious adverse event and length of hospital stay. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 22 RCTs with 3393 participants analysed, of which one RCT with 69 participants was reported only in abstract form, with no usable data. Seven RCTs evaluated systemic drug treatments (three aprotinin, two desmopressin, two tranexamic acid) and 15 RCTs evaluated topical drug treatments (drug-containing bioabsorbable dressings or glues), including fibrin, thrombin, collagen, gelatin, synthetic sealants and one investigational new agent. Most trials were conducted in high-income countries and the majority of the trials only included participants undergoing elective surgery. We also identified two ongoing RCTs. We were unable to perform the planned network meta-analysis due to the sparse reporting of outcomes relevant to this review. Systemic drug treatments We identified seven trials of three systemic drugs: aprotinin, desmopressin and tranexamic acid, all with placebo controls. The trials of aprotinin and desmopressin were small with very low-certainty evidence for all of our outcomes. Tranexamic acid versus placebo was the systemic drug comparison with the largest number of participants (2 trials; 1460 participants), both at low risk of bias. The largest of these included a total of 9535 individuals undergoing a number of different higher risk surgeries and reported limited information on the vascular subgroup (1399 participants). Neither trial reported the number of units of red cells transfused per participant up to 30 days. Three outcomes were associated with very low-certainty evidence due to the very wide confidence intervals (CIs) resulting from small study sizes and low number of events. These were: all-cause mortality up to 30 days; number of participants requiring an allogeneic blood transfusion up to 30 days; and risk of requiring a repeat procedure or operation due to bleeding. Tranexamic acid may have no effect on the risk of thromboembolic events up to 30 days (risk ratio (RR) 1.10, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.36; 1 trial, 1360 participants; low-certainty evidence due to imprecision). There is one large ongoing trial (8320 participants) comparing tranexamic acid versus placebo in people undergoing non-cardiac surgery who are at high risk of requiring a red cell transfusion. This aims to complete recruitment in April 2023. This trial has primary outcomes of proportion of participants transfused with red blood cells and incidence of venous thromboembolism (DVT or PE). Topical drug treatments Most trials of topical drug treatments were at high risk of bias due to their open-label design (compared with usual care, or liquids were compared with sponges). All of the trials were small, most were very small, and few reported clinically relevant outcomes in the postoperative period. Fibrin sealant versus usual care was the topical drug comparison with the largest number of participants (5 trials, 784 participants). The five trials that compared fibrin sealant with usual care were all at high risk of bias, due to the open-label trial design with no measures put in place to minimise reporting bias. All of the trials were funded by pharmaceutical companies. None of the five trials reported the number of red cells transfused per participant up to 30 days or the number of participants requiring an allogeneic blood transfusion up to 30 days. The other three outcomes were associated with very low-certainty evidence with wide confidence intervals due to small sample sizes and the low number of events, these were: all-cause mortality up to 30 days; risk of requiring a repeat procedure due to bleeding; and risk of thromboembolic disease up to 30 days. We identified one large trial (500 participants) comparing fibrin sealant versus usual care in participants undergoing abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, which has not yet started recruitment. This trial lists death due to arterial disease and reintervention rates as primary outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Because of a lack of data, we are uncertain whether any systemic or topical treatments used to reduce bleeding due to major vascular surgery have an effect on: all-cause mortality up to 30 days; risk of requiring a repeat procedure or operation due to bleeding; number of red cells transfused per participant up to 30 days or the number of participants requiring an allogeneic blood transfusion up to 30 days. There may be no effect of tranexamic acid on the risk of thromboembolic events up to 30 days, this is important as there has been concern that this risk may be increased. Trials with sample size targets of thousands of participants and clinically relevant outcomes are needed, and we look forward to seeing the results of the ongoing trials in the future.

Synthesis methods other than meta-analysis were commonly used but seldom specified: survey of systematic reviews

OBJECTIVES

To examine the specification and use of summary and statistical synthesis methods, focusing on synthesis methods other than meta-analysis.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We coded the specification and use of summary and synthesis methods in 100 randomly sampled systematic reviews (SRs) of public health and health systems interventions published in 2018 from the Health Evidence and Health Systems Evidence databases.

RESULTS

Sixty of the 100 SRs used other synthesis methods for some (27/100) or all syntheses (33/100). Of these, 54/60 used vote counting: three based on direction of effect, 36 on statistical significance, and 15 were unclear. Eight SRs summarized effect estimates (for example, using medians). Seventeen SRs used the term 'narrative synthesis' (or equivalent) without describing methods; in practice 15 of these used vote counting. 58/100 SRs used meta-analysis. In SRs providing a rationale for not proceeding with meta-analysis, the most common reason was due to diversity in study characteristics (33/39).

CONCLUSION

Statistical synthesis methods other than meta-analysis are commonly used, but few SRs describe the methods. Improved description of methods is required to allow users to appropriately interpret findings, critique methods used and verify the results. Greater awareness of the serious limitations of vote counting based on statistical significance is required.

Guidance to best tools and practices for systematic reviews1

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.

The Effects of Forest Therapy on the Blood Pressure and Salivary Cortisol Levels of Urban Residents: A Meta-Analysis

Urban residents have a higher risk of hypertension and psychological stress than rural residents. Aside from medical interventions, understanding how to control hypertension and alleviate the stress of urban populations has become a public concern. As an alternative medical measure, forest therapy has shown the effects of normalizing blood pressure (BP) and reducing stress increasingly in recent literature, but this is still inconclusive. In order to systematically verify forest therapy’s effects on the BP and mental stress of urban residents, we conducted meta-analyses to assess the changes in systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and salivary cortisol concentration (SCC; a stress biomarker) between the forest therapy group and urban control group. We searched 4 online databases, and 21 studies on BP involving 2270 participants and 13 studies on SCC involving 1786 participants were included. Through the meta-analysis, the mean difference and confidence interval (CI) estimates indicated that forest therapy significantly reduced participants’ SBP −3.44 (95% CI −5.74, −1.14), DBP −3.07 (95% CI −5.59, −0.54), and SCC −0.07 (95% CI −0.10, −0.04), as compared with urban control. Yet, there was substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 72.87−88.59%) among these studies. We also found that each prediction interval (PI) for SBP (95% PI −13.30, 6.42), DBP (95% PI −15.54, 9.41), and SCC (95% PI −0.18, 0.05) were all much wider than the CIs and contained values above 0. This means that forest therapy may reduce SBP, DBP, and SCC on average, but may not exclude adverse results. Meta-regression analyses showed that participants’ age and baseline SBP levels determined the heterogeneity among SBP studies. After forest therapy, older participants and those with higher baseline SBP levels had greater SBP-lowering effects. Among DBP studies, the primary source of heterogeneity was participants’ baseline DBP levels; participants with higher baseline DBP levels had greater DBP reduction. In subgroup analyses, we discovered that longer-term forest therapy programs (≥20 min) resulted in a greater reduction in BP and SCC than shorter-term forest therapy programs (<20 min). Additionally, seated viewing, walking, or multi-session programs in forests were observed to have similar effects on reducing BP and SCC. Despite extensive analyses, the study did not identify any sources of heterogeneity among forest therapy programs for lowering SCC levels. Overall, we conclude that forest therapy programs have beneficial therapeutic effects on urban residents’ physio-psychological health through lowering BP and relieving stress (reducing SCC). This finding provides solid evidence of the contribution of forest therapy to urban residents’ health and wellbeing.

Financial toxicity of cancer care in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The costs associated with cancer diagnosis, treatment and care present enormous financial toxicity. However, evidence of financial toxicity associated with cancer in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is scarce.

AIM

To determine the prevalence, determinants and how financial toxicity has been measured among cancer patients in LMICs.

METHODS

Four electronic databases were searched to identify studies of any design that reported financial toxicity among cancer patients in LMICs. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to derive the pooled prevalence of financial toxicity. Sub-group analyses were performed according to costs and determinants of financial toxicity.

RESULTS

A total of 31 studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of objective financial toxicity was 56.96% (95% CI, 30.51, 106.32). In sub-group meta-analyses, the objective financial toxicity was higher among cancer patients with household size of more than four (1.17% [95% CI, 1.03, 1.32]; p = 0.02; I2 = 0%), multiple cycles of chemotherapy (1.94% [95% CI, 1.00, 3.75]; p = 0.05; I2 = 43%) and private health facilities (2.87% [95% CI, 1.89, 4.35]; p < 0.00001; I2 = 26%). Included studies hardly focused primarily on subjective measures of financial toxicity, such as material, behavioural and psychosocial. One study reported that 35.4% (n = 152 of 429) of cancer patients experienced high subjective financial toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that cancer diagnosis, treatment and care impose high financial toxicity on cancer patients in LMICs. Further rigorous research on cancer-related financial toxicity is needed.

Acupuncture as a Complementary Therapy for Cancer-Induced Bone Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) is a special type of cancer pain and lacks safe and effective treatments. Acupuncture is a potentially valuable treatment for CIBP, studies evaluating the effect of acupuncture on CIBP have increased significantly, but the safety and efficacy of acupuncture to control CIBP remains controversial.

Objective

To provide the first meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of acupuncture in CIBP management.

Data Sources

CNKI, CBM, Wanfang, VIP Database, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from their inception until 1 June 2022.

Study Selection

RCTs with primary bone tumor patients or other types of primary cancer companied by bone metastases as the research subjects and to evaluate the efficacy of acupuncture treatment alone or combined with the control treatment were included. Meanwhile, RCTs should choose the pain score as the primary outcome and pain relief rate, frequency of breakthrough pain, analgesic onset time, analgesia duration, quality of life, and adverse events as reference outcomes.

Data Collection and Analysis

We designed a data-extraction form that was used to extract key information from the articles. Data extraction study evaluation was conducted independently by two reviewers, and a third reviewer would resolve any disagreements. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk bias. The quality of the evidence for main outcomes was evaluated by the GRADE system. Mean differences (MD), relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The forest plots were performed using the Review Manager Software (5.3 version). Subgroup analysis was used to investigate the possible sources of potential heterogeneity. Descriptive analysis was performed in case of unacceptable clinical heterogeneity.

Results

Thirteen RCTs (with 1,069 patients) were included, and all studies were at high risk of bias owing to lack of blinding or other bias. Eleven studies evaluated the effectiveness of acupuncture as a complementary therapy, and showed that acupuncture plus control treatment (compared with control treatment) was connected with reduced pain intensity (MD = −1.34, 95% CI −1.74 to −0.94; Q &lt; 0.1; I2 = 98%, P &lt; 0.01). Subgroup analyses based on acupoints type partly explain the potential heterogeneity. The results also showed that acupuncture plus control treatment (compared with control treatment) was connected with relieving pain intensity, increasing the pain relief rate, reducing the frequency of breakthrough pain, shortening analgesic onset time, extending the analgesic duration, and improving the quality of life. We have no sufficient evidence to prove the effectiveness of acupuncture alone. Four RCTs reported only adverse events related to opioids' side effects. Evidence was qualified as “very low” because of low methodological quality, considerable heterogeneity, or a low number of included studies.

Conclusion

Acupuncture has a certain effect as a complementary therapy on pain management of CIBP, which not only mitigates the pain intensity but also improves the quality of life and reduces the incidence of opioids' side effects, although the evidence level was very low. In future, a larger sample size and rigorously designed RCTs are needed to provide sufficient evidence to identify the efficacy and safety of acupuncture as a treatment for CIBP.

Evaluation of patches for rotator cuff repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on animal studies

Based on the published animal studies, we systematically evaluated the outcomes of various materials for rotator cuff repair in animal models and the potentials of their clinical translation. 74 animal studies were finally included, of which naturally derived biomaterials were applied the most widely (50.0%), rats were the most commonly used animal model (47.0%), and autologous tissue demonstrated the best outcomes in all animal models. The biomechanical properties of naturally derived biomaterials (maximum failure load: WMD 18.68 [95%CI 7.71-29.66]; P = 0.001, and stiffness: WMD 1.30 [95%CI 0.01-2.60]; P = 0.048) was statistically significant in the rabbit model. The rabbit model showed better outcomes even though the injury was severer compared with the rat model.

Methodological systematic review recommends improvements to conduct and reporting when meta-analysing interrupted time series studies

OBJECTIVES

Interrupted Time Series (ITS) are a type of non-randomised design commonly used to evaluate public health policy interventions, and the impact of exposures, at the population level. Meta-analysis may be used to combine results from ITS across studies (in the context of systematic reviews) or across sites within the same study. We aimed to examine the statistical approaches, methods, and completeness of reporting in reviews that meta-analyse results from ITS.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTINGS

Eight electronic databases were searched to identify reviews (published 2000-2019) that meta-analysed at least two ITS. Characteristics of the included reviews, the statistical methods used to analyse the ITS and meta-analyse their results, effect measures, and risk of bias assessment tools were extracted.

RESULTS

Of the 4213 identified records, 54 reviews were included. Nearly all reviews (94%) used two-stage meta-analysis, most commonly fitting a random effects model (69%). Among the 41 reviews that re-analysed the ITS, linear regression (39%) and ARIMA (20%) were most commonly used; 38% adjusted for autocorrelation. The most common effect measure meta-analysed was an immediate level-change (46/54). Reporting of the statistical methods and ITS characteristics was often incomplete.

CONCLUSION

Improvement is needed in the conduct and reporting of reviews that meta-analyse results from ITS.

Meta-Analysis for Epigenome-Wide Association Studies

With the rapid development of methylation profiling technology, many datasets are generated to quantify genome-wide methylation patterns. Given the heavy burden of multiple testing of hundreds of thousands of DNA methylation markers, individual studies often have limited sample sizes and power. The EWAS meta-analysis is an approach that combines results from multiple studies on the same scientific question. It helps to improve statistical power by combining information from individual studies and reduce the chances of false positives. This chapter introduces commonly used meta-analysis methods and analytical tools with application to EWAS data.

Associations between ADIPOQ rs2241766 SNP and breast cancer risk: a systematic review and a meta-analysis

Purpose

We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to accurately evaluate the potential association between ADIPOQ rs2241766 gene SNP and breast cancer risk.

Methods

A systematic literature search on Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) identified 8 articles with 1692 cases and 1890 controls. Strength of association was evaluated by pooled odds ratio (OR), 95 % confidence interval (CI) and p value. Funnel plots and Begger’s regression test were applied for testing the publication bias. Statistical analysis of all data was performed by Stata 12.0.

Results

The meta-analysis results indicated that the ADIPOQ rs2241766 gene polymorphism did not significantly associated with the risk of breast cancer for these genetic models (TT vs. TG + GG: OR = 1.20, 95 % CI = 0.77–1.89, p=0.417; TT + TG vs. GG: OR = 1.05, 95 % CI = 0.71–1.56, p=0.805; T vs. G: OR =1.17, 95 % CI = 0.79–1.74, p=0.437).

Conclusions

This study indicated that no significant relationship between the ADIPOQ rs2241766 SNP and breast cancer. Further large-scale and well-designed studies will be indispensable to confirm our result.

Effects of mirror therapy on phantom limb sensation and phantom limb pain in amputees: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of mirror therapy on phantom limb sensation and phantom limb pain in amputees.

DATA SOURCES

Nine electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycInfo, PreQuest, PEDro) were searched from their inception to May 10th, 2021.

METHODS

Two authors independently selected relevant studies and extracted the data. The effect sizes were calculated under a random-effects model meta-analysis, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I² test. The risk of bias was evaluated by the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the methodological quality was appraised by the PEDro scale. The GRADE approach was applied to assess the confidence of the effect.

RESULTS

A total of 11 RCTs involving 491 participants were included in this review and nine RCTs involving 372 participants were included in meta-analysis. The quality of these studies was from poor to good with scores ranging from 2 to 8 points according to PEDro scale. The pooled SMD showed that mirror therapy reduced the pain with a large effect size (-0.81; 95% CI = -1.36 to -0.25; P = 0.005; I² = 82%; n = 372) compared with other methods (four covered mirror, one phantom exercise, three mental visualization, one sensorimotor exercise, one transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, one tactile stimuli). The quality of evidence for the outcome pain intensity was determined to be fair according to GRADE approach.

CONCLUSION

There is fair-quality evidence that MT is beneficial for reducing phantom limb pain.

Effect of KCNQ1 rs2237892 polymorphism on the predisposition to type 2 diabetes mellitus: An updated meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Previous studies have analyzed the potential effect of KCNQ1 rs2237892 polymorphism on the predisposition to type 2 diabetes mellitus, but the findings are inconclusive and the subject of debate. The purpose of our study was to provide further insight into the potential association between KCNQ1 rs2237892 polymorphism and the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

In total, 50 articles (60 studies) with 77,276 cases and 76,054 controls were utilized in our analysis. The pooled odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (95% CI), and p value were used to evaluate the significance of our findings. Funnel plots and Beggar's regression tests were utilized to determine the presence of publication bias.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis results indicated that KCNQ1 rs2237892 polymorphism could be correlated with the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus under the C allelic, recessive, and dominant genetic models (OR = 1.25, 95% 1.19-1.32, p < 0.001; OR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.34-1.68, p < 0.001; OR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.14-1.40, p < 0.001, respectively). Additionally, ethnicity analysis revealed that the source of control, case size, and Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium status were correlated to the polymorphism in the three genetic models.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis demonstrated significant evidence to support the association between KCNQ1 rs2237892 polymorphism and predisposition to type 2 diabetes mellitus.

PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews

The methods and results of systematic reviews should be reported in sufficient detail to allow users to assess the trustworthiness and applicability of the review findings. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was developed to facilitate transparent and complete reporting of systematic reviews and has been updated (to PRISMA 2020) to reflect recent advances in systematic review methodology and terminology. Here, we present the explanation and elaboration paper for PRISMA 2020, where we explain why reporting of each item is recommended, present bullet points that detail the reporting recommendations, and present examples from published reviews. We hope that changes to the content and structure of PRISMA 2020 will facilitate uptake of the guideline and lead to more transparent, complete, and accurate reporting of systematic reviews.

The use of 'PICO for synthesis' and methods for synthesis without meta-analysis: protocol for a survey of current practice in systematic reviews of health interventions

Introduction: Systematic reviews involve synthesis of research to inform decision making by clinicians, consumers, policy makers and researchers. While guidance for synthesis often focuses on meta-analysis, synthesis begins with specifying the ’PICO for each synthesis’ (i.e. the criteria for deciding which populations, interventions, comparators and outcomes are eligible for each analysis). Synthesis may also involve the use of statistical methods other than meta-analysis (e.g. vote counting based on the direction of effect, presenting the range of effects, combining P values) augmented by visual display, tables and text-based summaries. This study examines these two aspects of synthesis.

Objectives: To identify and describe current practice in systematic reviews of health interventions in relation to: (i) approaches to grouping and definition of PICO characteristics for synthesis; and (ii) methods of summary and synthesis when meta-analysis is not used.

Methods: We will randomly sample 100 systematic reviews of the quantitative effects of public health and health systems interventions published in 2018 and indexed in the Health Evidence and Health Systems Evidence databases. Two authors will independently screen citations for eligibility. Two authors will confirm eligibility based on full text, then extract data for 20% of reviews on the specification and use of PICO for synthesis, and the presentation and synthesis methods used (e.g. statistical synthesis methods, tabulation, visual displays, structured summary). The remaining reviews will be confirmed as eligible and data extracted by a single author. We will use descriptive statistics to summarise the specification of methods and their use in practice. We will compare how clearly the PICO for synthesis is specified in reviews that primarily use meta-analysis and those that do not.

Conclusion: This study will provide an understanding of current practice in two important aspects of the synthesis process, enabling future research to test the feasibility and impact of different approaches.

Prevalence and risk factors of posttraumatic stress disorder among Chinese shidu parents: A systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Losing the only child is an extremely distressful life event for parents. Previous studies indicated that shidu parents were more vulnerable to develop posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This study aims to calculate the pooled prevalence of PTSD and identify its risk factors.

METHOD

We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang databases, Vip databases. We performed a meta-analysis using random effects models to calculate the pooled PTSD in shidu parents. Associated factors for PTSD was evaluated by determining standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% CIs. All analyses were performed using the Stata 16.0.

RESULTS

Eight articles (covering 2,722 shidu parents) were included in this study. The pooled prevalence of PTSD was 46.8% (95%CI: 33.2%-60.3%) among Chinese shidu parents. Female (SMD[95%CI]: 0.41[0.20, 0.62]), higher education level (SMD[95%CI]: 0.15[0.03, 0.28]), lower income (SMD[95%CI]: 0.33[0.13, 0.53]), losing a daughter (SMD[95%CI]: 0.16[0.03, 0.28]) and shorter time since loss (SMD[95%CI]: 0.24[0.07, 0.40]) were significantly associated with a higher PTSD prevalence. Registered residence, cause of death, age of the child, and having a grandchild were not associated with PTSD.

LIMITATIONS

Some variables included in this meta-analysis were only measured twice, which limited the conclusions to some extent.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis indicated that nearly half of shidu parents experienced PTSD and provided evidence of risk factors for PTSD in shidu parents. Further research is suggested to determine how these factors interact. Effective interventions should be conducted to shidu parents with PTSD.

Research Trends of Systematic Review/Meta-Analysis on Acupuncture Therapy: A Bibliometric Analysis

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to explore the hotspots and frontiers of systematic review/meta-analysis on acupuncture therapy according to bibliometric methods.

METHODS

Systematic review/meta-analysis articles on acupuncture therapy were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. We used CiteSpace 5.6.R5 to analyze annual publication, categories, countries, institutions, journals, authors, cited references, and keywords through visual maps to explore the research hotspots and trends.

RESULTS

An analysis of 1189 articles in English showed that the total number of publications continually increased in the last 12 years. General medicine was the most used category, and the country and institution ranking highest in this field were China and Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, respectively. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine was the most prolific journal, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was the most cited journal. Myeong Soo Lee was the most productive author, and J.P.T. Higgins ranked first in frequency among the cited authors. In the cited references, the top two were Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA). As for keywords, there were 6 main frontiers including interventions, disease, patient, comparisons, study types, and outcomes. The first disease was pain, while the intervention was electroacupuncture (EA).

CONCLUSION

The present study examined the research trends in systematic reviews and meta-analysis on acupuncture therapy through bibliometric methods and revealed potential future hotspots of research in this field.

Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in Mainland China: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Influenza endangers human health but can be prevented in part by vaccination. Assessing influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) provides scientific evidence for developing influenza vaccination policy. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that evaluated influenza VE in mainland China. We searched six relevant databases as of 30 August 2019 to identify studies and used Review Manager 5.3 software to analyze the included studies. The Newcastle–Ottawa scale was used to assess the risk of publication bias. We identified 1408 publications, and after removing duplicates and screening full texts, we included 21 studies in the analyses. Studies were conducted in Beijing, Guangzhou, Suzhou, and Zhejiang province from the 2010/11 influenza season through the 2017/18 influenza season. Overall influenza VE for laboratory confirmed influenza was 36% (95% CI: 25–46%). In the subgroup analysis, VE was 45% (95% CI: 18–64%) for children 6–35 months who received one dose of influenza vaccine, and 57% (95% CI: 50–64%) who received two doses. VE was 47% (95% CI: 39–54%) for children 6 months to 8 years, and 18% (95% CI: 0–33%) for adults ≥60 years. For inpatients, VE was 21% (95% CI: −11–44%). We conclude that influenza vaccines that were used in mainland China had a moderate effectiveness, with VE being higher among children than the elderly. Influenza VE should be continuously monitored in mainland China to provide evidence for policy making and improving uptake of the influenza vaccine.

A review of the removal of microplastics in global wastewater treatment plants: Characteristics and mechanisms

Wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) are considered to be the main sources of microplastic contaminants in the aquatic environment, and an in-depth understanding of the behavior of microplastics among the critical treatment technologies in WWTPs is urgently needed. In this paper, the characteristics and removal of microplastics in 38 WWTPs in 11 countries worldwide were reviewed. The abundance of microplastics in the influent, effluent, and sludge was compared. Then, based on existing data, the removal efficiency of microplastics in critical treatment technologies were compared by quantitative analysis. Particularly, detailed mechanisms of critical treatment technologies including primary settling treatment with flocculation, bioreactor system, advanced oxidation and membrane filtration were discussed. Thereafter, the abundance load and ecological hazard of the microplastics discharged from WWTPs into the aquatic and soil environments were summarized. The abundance of microplastics in the influent ranged from 0.28 particles L^-1 to 3.14 × 10⁴ particles L^-1, while that in the effluent ranged from 0.01 particles L^-1 to 2.97 × 10² particles L^-1. The microplastic abundance in the sludge within the range of 4.40 × 10³-2.40 × 10⁵ particles kg^-1. In addition, there are still 5.00 × 10⁵-1.39 × 10¹⁰ microplastic particles discharged into the aquatic environment each day Moreover, among the critical treatment technologies, the quantitative analysis revealed that filter-based treatment technologies exhibited the best microplastics removal efficiency. Fibers and microplastics with large particle sizes (0.5-5 mm) were easily separated by primary settling. Polyethene and small-particle size microplastics (<0.5 mm) were easily trapped by bacteria in the activated sludge of bioreactor system. The negative impact of microplastics from wastewater treatment plant was worthy of attention. Moreover, unknown transformation products of microplastics and their corresponding toxicity need in-depth research.

Methods used to meta-analyse results from interrupted time series studies: A methodological systematic review protocol

Background: Systematic reviews are used to inform healthcare decision making. In reviews that aim to examine the effects of organisational, policy change or public health interventions, or exposures, evidence from interrupted time series (ITS) studies may be included. A core component of many systematic reviews is meta-analysis, which is the statistical synthesis of results across studies. There is currently a lack of guidance informing the choice of meta-analysis methods for combining results from ITS studies, and there have been no studies examining the meta-analysis methods used in practice. This study therefore aims to describe current meta-analysis methods used in a cohort of reviews of ITS studies.

Methods: We will identify the 100 most recent reviews (published between 1 January 2000 and 11 October 2019) that include meta-analyses of ITS studies from a search of eight electronic databases covering several disciplines (public health, psychology, education, economics). Study selection will be undertaken independently by two authors. Data extraction will be undertaken by one author, and for a random sample of the reviews, two authors. From eligible reviews we will extract details at the review level including discipline, type of interruption and any tools used to assess the risk of bias / methodological quality of included ITS studies; at the meta-analytic level we will extract type of outcome, effect measure(s), meta-analytic methods, and any methods used to re-analyse the individual ITS studies. Descriptive statistics will be used to summarise the data.

Conclusions: This review will describe the methods used to meta-analyse results from ITS studies. Results from this review will inform future methods research examining how different meta-analysis methods perform, and ultimately, the development of guidance.

Breast Implants for Mammaplasty: An Umbrella Review of Meta-analyses of Multiple Complications

BACKGROUND

The association of breast implants and complications after mammaplasty has been extensively researched. The aim of this study is to summarize all available results in meta-analysis investigating the association between implants and the incidence of various complications.

METHODS

An umbrella review for breast implants and associated complications was performed by searching related reviews from electronic databases including Pubmed, Ovid and CINAHL. We collected and reviewed evidence across meta-analyses of observational and interventional studies of implants and any health outcome. The quality of the reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR tool (A measurement tool to assess systematic reviews).

RESULTS

The research included 92 meta-analyses of 609 studies concerning various areas. Capsular contracture was the most investigated outcome. Radiotherapy, human acellular dermal matrix application, direct-to-implant reconstruction, smooth implant, silicone-filled implant and periareolar incision were significantly associated with higher rates of some of the complications.

CONCLUSIONS

This umbrella review provides surgeons with summarized evidence of the association between the complications and implant-related factors in mammaplasty surgery to help surgeons make informed choices in the future.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

When is refraction stable following routine cataract surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

We systematically reviewed the literature to investigate when refraction is stable following routine cataract surgery implanting monofocal intraocular lenses. Current advice recommends obtaining new spectacles 4-6 weeks following surgery. Due to advancements in surgical techniques, we hypothesised that refractive stability would be achieved earlier, which could have major short-term improvements in quality of life for patients.

METHODS

Medline, CINAHL, AMED, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched with key words chosen to find articles, which assessed refraction following uncomplicated cataract surgery. Citation chains and the reference lists of all included papers were searched. Unpublished literature was identified using OpenGrey (www.opengrey.eu). The review considered studies that measured refraction at regular intervals following surgery until stability was achieved.

RESULTS

The search identified 6,680 papers. Two reviewers independently screened the abstracts and nine papers were found to fit the criteria, of which five were included in the meta-analysis. The quality of the papers was evaluated using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies (MINORS) instrument. Meta-analysis of 301 patients' data of spherical, cylindrical and spherical equivalent correction were performed using Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5.3) (https://revman.cochrane.org/). Refraction at 1-week versus the gold standard of 4-weeks showed no significant difference for sphere data (effect size and 95% confidence interval of; ES = 0.00, 95% CI: -0.17, 0.17; p = 1.00), cylindrical data (ES = +0.06; 95% CI: -0.05, 0.17; p = 0.31), and spherical equivalent (ES = -0.01; 95% CI: -0.12, 0.10; p = 0.90). Heterogeneity was non-significant (I²  < 25%) for all refractive elements. Data were similar for 2- versus 4-weeks post-surgery. Acquired data from one study highlighted a small number of patients with very unstable cylindrical corrections at 1-week post-operatively.

CONCLUSIONS

No statistical difference was found when comparing sphere, cylindrical and spherical equivalent values at 1- and 4-weeks post cataract surgery. This suggests that new glasses could be provided 1-week after surgery. However, from a clinical perspective, a small number of patients (~7%) from an acquired dataset (N = 72) showed very unstable cylindrical corrections at 1-week. Further work is needed to determine why this is the case and how these patients can be detected.

The use of 'PICO for synthesis' and methods for synthesis without meta-analysis: protocol for a survey of current practice in systematic reviews of health interventions

Introduction: Systematic reviews involve synthesis of research to inform decision making by clinicians, consumers, policy makers and researchers. While guidance for synthesis often focuses on meta-analysis, synthesis begins with specifying the 'PICO for each synthesis' (i.e. the criteria for deciding which populations, interventions, comparators and outcomes are eligible for each analysis). Synthesis may also involve the use of statistical methods other than meta-analysis (e.g. vote counting based on the direction of effect, presenting the range of effects, combining P values) augmented by visual display, tables and text-based summaries. This study examines these two aspects of synthesis. Objectives: To identify and describe current practice in systematic reviews of health interventions in relation to: (i) approaches to grouping and definition of PICO characteristics for synthesis; and (ii) methods of summary and synthesis when meta-analysis is not used. Methods: We will randomly sample 100 systematic reviews of the quantitative effects of public health and health systems interventions published in 2018 and indexed in the Health Evidence and Health Systems Evidence databases. Two authors will independently screen citations for eligibility. Two authors will confirm eligibility based on full text, then extract data for 20% of reviews on the specification and use of PICO for synthesis, and the presentation and synthesis methods used (e.g. statistical synthesis methods, tabulation, visual displays, structured summary). The remaining reviews will be confirmed as eligible and data extracted by a single author. We will use descriptive statistics to summarise the specification of methods and their use in practice. We will compare how clearly the PICO for synthesis is specified in reviews that primarily use meta-analysis and those that do not. Conclusion: This study will provide an understanding of current practice in two important aspects of the synthesis process, enabling future research to test the feasibility and impact of different approaches.

Risk Factors for the Relapse of Graves' Disease Treated With Antithyroid Drugs: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Antithyroid drugs (ATDs) are the first-line treatment for Graves' disease (GD). A common problem with ATD treatment is the high relapse rate after drug withdrawal. The goal of this study was to analyze the influencing factors for the relapse of GD patients treated with ATD by using a systematic review and meta-analysis, provide some predictive indexes for the susceptibility of GD recurrence, and then further explore some useful methods to decrease the GD relapse rate after ATD treatment.

METHODS

Articles published in PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wan Fang, and Chinese Biomedical Literature databases before January 2019 were collected. Patients newly diagnosed with GD, who were aged >16 years, were treated with ATD. Follow-up was then conducted for at least 12 months after ATD withdrawal. Only prospective or retrospective studies were eligible. The primary end point was the recurrence of GD during follow-up. All the data from the trials were analyzed via meta-analysis and meta-regression. p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant, and statistical heterogeneity was assessed by using I² statistics.

FINDINGS

A total of 20 studies and 3242 patients were involved in this meta-analysis, with 1681 patients relapsed (incidence rate, 51.9%) during the follow-up time. Analysis of risk factors suggested that younger age (weighted raw mean difference [RMD], -3.51; 95% CI, -5.74 to -1.29), larger thyroid volume (RMD, 4.38; 95% CI, 1.68 to 7.08), bigger goiter size (1.94% risk; 95% CI, 0.43 to 3.46), higher free triiodothyronine level (RMD, 5.09; 95% CI, 4.42 to 5.77), and higher free thyroxine level (RMD, 4.21; 95% CI, 0.54 to 7.89) were associated with the higher relapse rate of GD. The block-replace ATD regimen (a fixed high dose of an ATD with levothyroxine supplementation to maintain euthyroidism) (risk ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.78) exhibits a lower relapse rate than the titration regimen (an ATD used alone and dose adjusted according to thyroid function tests).

IMPLICATIONS

This analysis revealed that certain risk factors were associated with GD relapses such as younger age, larger goiter size or thyroid volume, and the higher free triiodothyronine or free thyroxine level in the diagnosing phase of GD. For patients with these clinical characteristics, early definitive treatment with radioactive iodine or surgery should be offered to those who are unlikely to achieve remission with ATDs only. In addition, more prospective cohort studies with different ATD regimens would help to determine the optimum ATD treatment for patients with GD. PROSPERO identifier: CRD 42019146825.

A novel estimator of between-study variance in random-effects models

BACKGROUND

With the rapid development of high-throughput sequencing technologies, many datasets on the same biological subject are generated. A meta-analysis is an approach that combines results from different studies on the same topic. The random-effects model in a meta-analysis enables the modeling of differences between studies by incorporating the between-study variance.

RESULTS

This paper proposes a moments estimator of the between-study variance that represents the across-study variation. A new random-effects method (DSLD2), which involves two-step estimation starting with the DSL estimate and the [Formula: see text] in the second step, is presented. The DSLD2 method is compared with 6 other meta-analysis methods based on effect sizes across 8 aspects under three hypothesis settings. The results show that DSLD2 is a suitable method for identifying differentially expressed genes under the first hypothesis. The DSLD2 method is also applied to Alzheimer's microarray datasets. The differentially expressed genes detected by the DSLD2 method are significantly enriched in neurological diseases.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from both simulationes and an application show that DSLD2 is a suitable method for detecting differentially expressed genes under the first hypothesis.

Short-Term Effect of Kinesiotaping on Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain and Disability: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is a very common and disabling disorder in modern society. The intervention strategies for LBP include drug therapy, surgery, and physical interventions. Recently, kinesiotaping, as a simple and noninvasive treatment, has been used to treat chronic nonspecific LBP, but its effectiveness and true merit remains unclear.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to summarize the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness of kinesiotaping (KT) for chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNLBP) and disability.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and EmBase were searched from inception to September 1, 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies were included in the review if they met the following criteria: RCTs published in English; patients (>18 years old) diagnosed with CNLBP (pain duration of > 12 weeks), with or without leg pain; KT as a single treatment or as a part of other forms of physical therapy; outcomes measured included pain intensity and disability.

DATA EXTRACTION

Three independent investigators completed data extraction. Methodological quality was appraised using the Cochrane tool for assessing the risk of bias. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) guidelines were applied to assess the confidence of the effect estimates.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Eleven RCT studies involving 785 patients were retained for the meta-analysis.Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs were calculated using a random-effects model. Compared with the control group， the pooled SMD of pain intensity was significantly reduced (SMD = -0.73; 95% CI = -1.12 to -0.35; GRADE: low) and disability was improved (SMD = -0.51; 95% CI = -0.85 to -0.17; GRADE: low) in the KT group. Subgroup analyses showed that, compared with the control, the I strip of KT significantly reduced pain (SMD = -0.48; GRADE: low) but not disability (SMD = -0.26; GRADE: low). Compared with sham/placebo tape, KT provided significant pain reduction (SMD = -0.84; GRADE: low) and disability improvement (SMD = -0.56; GRADE: low). Moreover, compared with the no-tape group, the KT group also showed pain reduction (SMD = -0.74; GRADE: low) and disability improvement (SMD = -0.65; GRADE: low).

LIMITATIONS

Limitations of the review included a lack of homogeneity, different methodologies and treatment duration of KT application, and relatively small sample sizes.

CONCLUSIONS

There is low-quality evidence that KT has a beneficial role in pain reduction and disability improvement for patients with CNLBP. More high-quality studies are required to confirm the effects of KT on CNLBP.

Global variation in prevalence and incidence of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a global disease, which adversely affects the life quality of patients and significantly increases the burden of families and society. We aimed to assess the changing incidence, prevalence of ALS around the world.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane library to identify articles published until September 9, 2018. Each included study was independently reviewed for methodological quality by two reviewers. We used a random-effects model to summarize individual studies and assessed heterogeneity (I²) with the χ² test on Cochrane's Q statistic.

RESULTS

We identified 124 studies that were eligible for final inclusion, including 110 studies of incidence and 58 studies of prevalence. The overall crude worldwide ALS prevalence and incidence were 4.42 (95% CI 3.92-4.96) per 1,00,000 population and 1.59 (95% CI 1.39-1.81) per 1,00,000 person-years, respectively. ALS prevalence and incidence increased by age until the age of 70-79. Since 1957, incidence has been significantly rising year by year, and this upward trend was weakened after standardization. The longest survival time were in Asia (ranging from 3.74 years in South Asia to 9.23 years in West Asia).

CONCLUSIONS

With the aggravation of population aging and the rapid growth of economy, developing regions following the development pattern of the developed regions may suffer rising ALS prevalence and incidence which may increase their disease burden as well. These data highlight the need for research into underlying mechanism and innovations in health-care systems.