Title-plus-abstract versus title-only first-level screening approach: a case study using a systematic review of dietary patterns and sarcopenia risk to compare screening performance.

BACKGROUND: Conducting a systematic review is a time- and resource-intensive multi-step process. Enhancing efficiency without sacrificing accuracy and rigor during the screening phase of a systematic review is of interest among the scientific community. METHODS: This case study compares the screening performance of a title-only (Ti/O) screening approach to the more conventional title-plus-abstract (Ti + Ab) screening approach. Both Ti/O and Ti + Ab screening approaches were performed simultaneously during first-level screening of a systematic review investigating the relationship between dietary patterns and risk factors and incidence of sarcopenia. The qualitative and quantitative performance of each screening approach was compared against the final results of studies included in the systematic review, published elsewhere, which used the standard Ti + Ab approach. A statistical analysis was conducted, and contingency tables were used to compare each screening approach in terms of false inclusions and false exclusions and subsequent sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive predictive power. RESULTS: Thirty-eight citations were included in the final analysis, published elsewhere. The current case study found that the Ti/O first-level screening approach correctly identified 22 citations and falsely excluded 16 citations, most often due to titles lacking a clear indicator of study design or outcomes relevant to the systematic review eligibility criteria. The Ti + Ab approach correctly identified 36 citations and falsely excluded 2 citations due to limited population and intervention descriptions in the abstract. Our analysis revealed that the performance of the Ti + Ab first-level screening was statistically different compared to the average performance of both approaches (Chi-squared: 5.21, p value 0.0225) while the Ti/O approach was not (chi-squared: 2.92, p value 0.0874). The predictive power of the first-level screening was 14.3% and 25.5% for the Ti/O and Ti + Ab approaches, respectively. In terms of sensitivity, 57.9% of studies were correctly identified at the first-level screening stage using the Ti/O approach versus 94.7% by the Ti + Ab approach. CONCLUSIONS: In the current case study comparing two screening approaches, the Ti + Ab screening approach captured more relevant studies compared to the Ti/O approach by including a higher number of accurately eligible citations. Ti/O screening may increase the likelihood of missing evidence leading to evidence selection bias. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO Protocol Number: CRD42020172655.

Dietary Patterns and the Risk of Sarcopenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The purpose of this systematic review is to examine the relationship between dietary patterns and sarcopenia using a protocol developed for use by the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, and to conduct a meta-analysis to summarize the evidence. Multiple electronic databases were searched for studies investigating sarcopenia risk factors or risk of sarcopenia and dietary patterns. Eligible studies were 1) peer-reviewed controlled trials or observational trials, 2) involving adult or older-adult human subjects who were healthy and/or at risk for chronic disease, 3) comparing the effect of consumption or adherence to dietary patterns (measured as an index/score, factor or cluster analysis; reduced rank regression; or a macronutrient distribution), and 4) reported on measures of skeletal muscle mass, muscle strength, muscle performance, and/or risk of sarcopenia. Thirty-eight publications met all inclusion criteria for qualitative synthesis. Thirteen observational studies met inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. Higher adherence to a healthy dietary pattern was associated with a decreased risk of gait speed reduction (OR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.18, 0.97). The association between healthy dietary pattern adherence and other intermediate markers or risk of sarcopenia was not statistically significant. The majority of individual studies were judged as "serious" risk of bias and analysis of the collective evidence base was suggestive of publication bias. Studies suggest a significant association between healthy dietary patterns and maintenance of gait speed with age, an intermediate marker of sarcopenia risk, but the evidence base is limited by serious risk of bias, within and between studies. Further research is needed to understand the association between healthy dietary patterns and risk of sarcopenia.

Cost-benefit analysis of calcium and vitamin D supplements.

If all adults with osteoporosis in the European Union (EU) and United States (US) used calcium and vitamin D supplements, it could prevent more than 500,000 fractures/year in the EU and more than 300,000/year in the US and save approximately €5.7 billion and US $3.3 billion annually. PURPOSE: Evaluate the cost-effectiveness of calcium/vitamin D supplementation for preventing osteoporotic fractures. METHODS: A cost-benefit analysis tool was used to estimate the net cost savings from reduced fracture-related hospital expenses if adults with osteoporosis in the EU and US used calcium/vitamin D supplements. A 14% relative risk reduction of fracture with calcium/vitamin D supplementation from a recent systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials was used as the basis for the benefit estimate. Other model inputs were informed by epidemiologic, clinical, and cost data (2016-2017) obtained via the medical literature or public databases. Analyses estimated the total number of avoided fractures and associated cost savings with supplement use. Net cost benefit was calculated by subtracting the supplements' market costs from those savings. RESULTS: The > 30 million persons in the EU and nearly 11 million in US with osteoporosis experience about 3.9 million and 2.3 million fractures/year and have annual hospital costs exceeding €50 billion and $28 billion. If all persons with osteoporosis used calcium and vitamin D supplements, there would be an estimated 544,687 fewer fractures/year in the EU and 323,566 fewer in the US, saving over €6.9 billion and $3.9 billion; the net cost benefit would be €5,710,277,330 and $3,312,236,252, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Calcium and vitamin D supplements are highly cost-effective, and expanded use could considerably reduce fractures and related costs. Although these analyses included individuals aged ≥ 50 years, the observed effects are likely driven by benefits observed in those aged ≥ 65 years.

From Science to Finance-A Tool for Deriving Economic Implications from the Results of Dietary Supplement Clinical Studies.

This article examines evidence showing that the use of key dietary supplements can reduce overall disease treatment-related hospital utilization costs associated with coronary heart disease (CHD) in the United States among those at a high risk of experiencing a costly, disease-related event. Results show that the potential avoided hospital utilization costs related to the use of omega-3 supplements at preventive intake levels among the target population can be as much as $2.06 billion on average per year from 2013 to 2020. The potential net savings in avoided CHD-related hospital utilization costs after accounting for the cost of omega-3 dietary supplements at preventive daily intake levels would be more than $3.88 billion in cumulative health care cost savings from 2013 to 2020. Furthermore, the use of folic acid, B6, and B12 among the target population at preventive intake levels could yield avoided CHD-related hospital utilization costs savings of an average savings of $1.52 billion per year from 2013 to 2020. The potential net savings in avoided CHD-related health care costs after accounting for the cost of folic acid, B6, and B12 utilization at preventive daily intake levels would be more than $5.23 billion in cumulative health care cost net savings during the same period. Thus, targeted dietary supplement regimens are recommended as a means to help control rising societal health care costs, and as a means for high-risk individuals to minimize the chance of having to deal with potentially costly events and to invest in increased quality of life.