ABSTRACT
A review of systematic reviews (SRs) and a critical appraisal study was conducted at Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp). The objectives of this review are (1) to identify all published SRs comparing the effectiveness and safety of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) versus carotid artery stenting (CAS) for carotid artery stenosis, (2) to assess their methodological quality and (3) to compare the primary studies contained in each SR. We included 17 SRs published between 2005 and 2017. None of the SRs fulfilled all items of AMSTAR-2. The overall confidence in the results was graded as critically low for 16 SRs (94%) and low for 1 SR (6%). Five items were judged inadequate in all SRs: reference to a published protocol, explanation to the selection of study design, comprehensive search of the literature, methods for statistical combination of findings and consideration of the risk of bias on the results of meta-analysis. In total, 15 randomised clinical trials (RCTs) were included at least in one SR. The number of included RCTs in each SR was inconsistent (4 to 15) and was not related to the year of publication of the SR. Our study found redundant and low methodological quality SR comparing CAS versus CEA for carotid stenosis.
Subject(s)
Carotid Stenosis , Endarterectomy, Carotid , Brazil , Carotid Stenosis/surgery , Humans , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
ABSTRACT CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Insomnia is a frequent complaint that generates more than five million visits to doctors per year in the United States. This study summarizes all Cochrane systematic reviews (SRs) that evaluated interventions to treat insomnia. DESIGN AND SETTING: Review of SRs, conducted in the Discipline of Evidence-Based Medicine, Escola Paulista de Medicina (EPM), Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP). METHODS: A sensitive search was carried out in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify Cochrane SRs that assessed the effects of any type of intervention for people with insomnia. The results, main characteristics of the SRs and the certainty of the evidence obtained from them were synthesized and discussed. RESULTS: Seven SRs were included. They addressed the benefits and harm of acupuncture (n = 1), behavioral interventions (n = 1), music (n = 1), pharmacotherapy (n = 2), phototherapy (n = 1) and physical exercise (n = 1). The certainty of the evidence ranged from moderate to very low. CONCLUSION: Acupuncture, music, physical exercise, paroxetine, doxepin, trimipramine and trazodone seem to present some benefit for patients with insomnia. However, the uncertainty around these results means that no robust and definitive recommendations for clinical practice can be made until the benefits and harms from each intervention for patients with insomnia have been confirmed through further studies.
Subject(s)
Humans , Evidence-Based Medicine , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders/therapy , Sleep/physiology , Exercise , Acupuncture Therapy/standards , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders/drug therapy , Music Therapy/standards , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic useABSTRACT
CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Insomnia is a frequent complaint that generates more than five million visits to doctors per year in the United States. This study summarizes all Cochrane systematic reviews (SRs) that evaluated interventions to treat insomnia. DESIGN AND SETTING: Review of SRs, conducted in the Discipline of Evidence-Based Medicine, Escola Paulista de Medicina (EPM), Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP). METHODS: A sensitive search was carried out in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify Cochrane SRs that assessed the effects of any type of intervention for people with insomnia. The results, main characteristics of the SRs and the certainty of the evidence obtained from them were synthesized and discussed. RESULTS: Seven SRs were included. They addressed the benefits and harm of acupuncture (n = 1), behavioral interventions (n = 1), music (n = 1), pharmacotherapy (n = 2), phototherapy (n = 1) and physical exercise (n = 1). The certainty of the evidence ranged from moderate to very low. CONCLUSION: Acupuncture, music, physical exercise, paroxetine, doxepin, trimipramine and trazodone seem to present some benefit for patients with insomnia. However, the uncertainty around these results means that no robust and definitive recommendations for clinical practice can be made until the benefits and harms from each intervention for patients with insomnia have been confirmed through further studies.
