RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Massage is a common therapy of nonpharmacological treatments, particularly in Tuina (Chinese massage) as its most common style, detailed guidance in reporting the intervention is warranted for its evaluation and replication. Based on the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials), we aimed to develop an Extension for Tuina/Massage, namely "The STandards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials Of Tuina/Massage (STRICTOTM)." METHODS: A group of professional clinicians, trialists, methodologists, developers of reporting guidelines, epidemiologists, statisticians, and editors has developed this STRICTOTM checklist through a standard methodology process recommended by the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency of Health Research) Network, including prospective registration, literature review, draft of the initial items, three rounds of the Delphi survey, consensus meeting, pilot test, and finalization of the guideline. RESULTS: A checklist of seven items (namely Tuina/Massage rationale, details of Tuina/Massage, intervention regimen, other components of the intervention, Tuina/Massage provider background, control or comparator interventions, and precaution measures), and 16 subitems were developed. Explanations and examples (E&E) for each item are also provided. CONCLUSIONS: The working group hopes that the STRICTOTM, in conjunction with both the CONSORT statement and extension for nonpharmacologic treatment, can improve the reporting quality and transparency of Tuina/Massage clinical research.
Asunto(s)
Edición , Proyectos de Investigación , Estudios Prospectivos , Lista de Verificación , MasajeRESUMEN
STUDY QUESTION: Does acupuncture improve insulin sensitivity more effectively than metformin or sham acupuncture in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and insulin resistance (IR)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Among women with PCOS and IR, acupuncture was not more effective than metformin or sham acupuncture in improving insulin sensitivity. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Uncontrolled trials have shown that acupuncture improved insulin sensitivity with fewer side effects compared with metformin in women with PCOS and IR. However, data from randomized trials between acupuncture and metformin or sham acupuncture are lacking. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This was a three-armed randomized controlled trial enrolling a total of 342 women with PCOS and IR from three hospitals between November 2015 and February 2018, with a 3-month follow-up until October 2018. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Women aged from 18 to 40 years with PCOS and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) ≥2.14 were randomly assigned (n = 114 per group) to receive true acupuncture plus placebo (true acupuncture), metformin plus sham acupuncture (metformin, 0.5 g three times daily) or sham acupuncture plus placebo (sham acupuncture) for 4 months, with an additional 3-month follow-up. True or sham acupuncture was given three times per week, and 0.5 g metformin or placebo was given three times daily. The primary outcome was change in HOMA-IR from baseline to 4 months after baseline visit. Secondary outcomes included changes in the glucose AUC during an oral glucose tolerance test, BMI and side effects at 4 months after baseline visit. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: After 4 months of treatment, the changes of HOMA-IR were -0.5 (decreased 14.7%) in the true acupuncture group, -1.0 (decreased 25.0%) in the metformin group and -0.3 (decreased 8.6%) in the sham acupuncture group, when compared with baseline. True acupuncture is not as effective as metformin in improving HOMA-IR at 4 months after baseline visit (difference, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.1-1.1). No significant difference was found in change in HOMA-IR between true and sham acupuncture groups at 4 months after baseline visit (difference, -0.2; 95% CI, -0.7 to 0.3). During the 4 months of treatment, gastrointestinal side effects were more frequent in the metformin group, including diarrhea, nausea, loss of appetite, fatigue, vomiting and stomach discomfort (31.6%, 13.2%, 11.4%, 8.8%, 14.0% and 8.8%, respectively). Bruising was more common in the true acupuncture group (14.9%). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This study might have underestimated the sample size in the true acupuncture group with 4 months of treatment to enable detection of statistically significant changes in HOMA-IR with fixed acupuncture (i.e. a non-personalized protocol). Participants who withdrew because of pregnancy did not have further blood tests and this can introduce bias. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: True acupuncture did not improve insulin sensitivity as effectively as metformin in women with PCOS and IR, but it is better than metformin in improving glucose metabolism (which might reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes) and has less side effects. Metformin had a higher incidence of gastrointestinal adverse effects than acupuncture groups, and thus acupuncture might be a non-pharmacological treatment with low risk for women with PCOS. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effect of acupuncture combined with metformin on insulin sensitivity in these women. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This work was supported by grants 2017A020213004 and 2014A020221060 from the Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province. The authors have no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT02491333. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 8 July 2015. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLLMENT: 11 November 2015.
Asunto(s)
Terapia por Acupuntura , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Resistencia a la Insulina , Metformina , Síndrome del Ovario Poliquístico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicaciones , Femenino , Humanos , Insulina , Masculino , Metformina/efectos adversos , Síndrome del Ovario Poliquístico/tratamiento farmacológico , EmbarazoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Ovulatory disturbance is a key diagnostic feature of polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), leading to infertility and correspondingly heavy disease burden. Many therapeutic strategies have been used to induce ovulation for women with PCOS who are infertile. Ultrasound-guided transvaginal ovarian needle drilling (UTND) is a novel surgical method used to induce ovulation for women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS at the outpatient clinic. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of UTND for subfertile women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and other databases to December 2020. We checked conference abstracts, reference lists, and clinical trials registries. We also contacted experts and specialists in the field for any additional trials . SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include randomised controlled trials comparing UTND to laparoscopic ovarian drilling, and UTND combined with gonadotropins to gonadotropins, in women of reproductive age with clomiphene-resistant PCOS and infertility. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the trials identified by the search for inclusion, assessed methodological quality and risk of bias, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were live birth rate and incidence of surgical complications (bleeding and infection). Secondary outcomes included pregnancy rate, ovulation rate, and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. We planned to calculate odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals for dichotomous data. We would assess overall quality of the evidence by applying the GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We did not identify any trials for inclusion in the review. We were unable to assess the benefit or harm of applying UTND for women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS, as no studies could be included in the current review. We moved the previously included trials to studies awaiting classification due to concerns regarding methodology. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Since we did not identify any studies for inclusion, we were unable to assess the benefit or harm of applying UTND for women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS.
Asunto(s)
Infertilidad Femenina , Síndrome del Ovario Poliquístico , Clomifeno/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Fármacos para la Fertilidad Femenina/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Infertilidad Femenina/tratamiento farmacológico , Infertilidad Femenina/etiología , Inducción de la Ovulación , Síndrome del Ovario Poliquístico/complicaciones , Embarazo , Índice de Embarazo , Ultrasonografía IntervencionalRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To assess the reporting quality of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of massage, particularly whether necessary elements related to massage interventions were adequately reported. METHODS: A total of 8 electronic databases were systematically searched for massage RCTs published in English and Chinese from the date of their inception to June 22, 2020. Quality assessment was performed using three instruments, namely the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) 2010 Checklist (37 items), the CONSORT Extension for NPT (Nonpharmacologic Treatments) 2017 checklist (18 items), and a self-designed massage-specific checklist (16 items) which included massage rationale, intervention and control group details. Descriptive statistics were additionally used to analyse the baseline characteristics of included trials. RESULTS: A total of 2,447 massage RCTs were identified, of which most (96.8%) were distributed in China. For the completeness of CONSORT, NPT Extension, and massage-specific checklists, the average reporting percentages were 50%, 10% and 45%, respectively. Of 68 assessed items in total (exclusion of 3 repeated items on intervention), 42 were poorly presented, including 18 CONSORT items, 15 NPT items, and 9 massage-specific items. Although the overall quality of reporting showed slightly improvement in articles published after 2010, the international (English) journals presented a higher score of the CONSORT and NPT items, while the Chinese journals were associated with the increased score of massage-specific items. CONCLUSION: The quality of reporting of published massage RCTs is variable and in need of improvement. Reporting guideline "CONSORT extension for massage" should be developed.
RESUMEN
Importance: Extenuating circumstances can trigger unplanned changes to randomized trials and introduce methodological, ethical, feasibility, and analytical challenges that can potentially compromise the validity of findings. Numerous randomized trials have required changes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, but guidance for reporting such modifications is incomplete. Objective: As a joint extension for the CONSORT and SPIRIT reporting guidelines, CONSERVE (CONSORT and SPIRIT Extension for RCTs Revised in Extenuating Circumstances) aims to improve reporting of trial protocols and completed trials that undergo important modifications in response to extenuating circumstances. Evidence: A panel of 37 international trial investigators, patient representatives, methodologists and statisticians, ethicists, funders, regulators, and journal editors convened to develop the guideline. The panel developed CONSERVE following an accelerated, iterative process between June 2020 and February 2021 involving (1) a rapid literature review of multiple databases (OVID Medline, OVID EMBASE, and EBSCO CINAHL) and gray literature sources from 2003 to March 2021; (2) consensus-based panelist meetings using a modified Delphi process and surveys; and (3) a global survey of trial stakeholders. Findings: The rapid review yielded 41â¯673 citations, of which 38 titles were relevant, including emerging guidance from regulatory and funding agencies for managing the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on trials. However, no generalizable guidance for all circumstances in which trials and trial protocols might face unanticipated modifications were identified. The CONSERVE panel used these findings to develop a consensus reporting guidelines following 4 rounds of meetings and surveys. Responses were received from 198 professionals from 34 countries, of whom 90% (n = 178) indicated that they understood the concept definitions and 85.4% (n = 169) indicated that they understood and could use the implementation tool. Feedback from survey respondents was used to finalize the guideline and confirm that the guideline's core concepts were applicable and had utility for the trial community. CONSERVE incorporates an implementation tool and checklists tailored to trial reports and trial protocols for which extenuating circumstances have resulted in important modifications to the intended study procedures. The checklists include 4 sections capturing extenuating circumstances, important modifications, responsible parties, and interim data analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: CONSERVE offers an extension to CONSORT and SPIRIT that could improve the transparency, quality, and completeness of reporting important modifications to trials in extenuating circumstances such as COVID-19.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Guías como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto/normas , Informe de Investigación/normas , Protocolos Clínicos , Técnica Delphi , Humanos , Edición/normas , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Thrombolytic therapy is usually reserved for people with clinically serious or massive pulmonary embolism (PE). Evidence suggests that thrombolytic agents may dissolve blood clots more rapidly than heparin and may reduce the death rate associated with PE. However, there are still concerns about the possible risk of adverse effects of thrombolytic therapy, such as major or minor haemorrhage. This is the fourth update of the Cochrane review first published in 2006. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of thrombolytic therapy for acute pulmonary embolism. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 17 August 2020. We undertook reference checking to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared thrombolytic therapy followed by heparin versus heparin alone, heparin plus placebo, or surgical intervention for people with acute PE (massive/submassive). We did not include trials comparing two different thrombolytic agents or different doses of the same thrombolytic drug. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (ZZ, QH) assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of trials and extracted data. We calculated effect estimates using the odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) or the mean difference (MD) with a 95% CI. The primary outcomes of interest were death, recurrence of PE and haemorrhagic events. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We identified three new studies for inclusion in this update. We included 21 trials in the review, with a total of 2401 participants. No studies compared thrombolytics versus surgical intervention. We were not able to include one study in the meta-analysis because it provided no extractable data. Most studies carried a high or unclear risk of bias related to randomisation and blinding. Meta-analysis showed that, compared to control (heparin alone or heparin plus placebo), thrombolytics plus heparin probably reduce both the odds of death (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.88; 19 studies, 2319 participants; low-certainty evidence), and recurrence of PE (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.91; 12 studies, 2050 participants; low-certainty evidence). Effects on mortality weakened when six studies at high risk of bias were excluded from analysis (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.13; 13 studies, 2046 participants) and in the analysis of submassive PE participants (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.02; 1993 participants). Effects on recurrence of PE also weakened after removing one study at high risk of bias for sensitivity analysis (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.04; 11 studies, 1949 participants). We downgraded the certainty of evidence to low because of 'Risk of bias' concerns. Major haemorrhagic events were probably more common in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.92 to 4.20; 15 studies, 2101 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), as were minor haemorrhagic events (OR 2.97, 95% CI 1.66 to 5.30; 13 studies,1757 participants; low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate or low because of 'Risk of bias' concerns and inconsistency. Haemorrhagic stroke may occur more often in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 7.59, 95% CI 1.38 to 41.72; 2 studies, 1091 participants). Limited data indicated that thrombolytics may benefit haemodynamic outcomes, perfusion lung scanning, pulmonary angiogram assessment, echocardiograms, pulmonary hypertension, coagulation parameters, composite clinical outcomes, need for escalation and survival time to a greater extent than heparin alone. However, the heterogeneity of the studies and the small number of participants involved warrant caution when interpreting results. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (mean difference (MD) -1.40 days, 95% CI -2.69 to -0.11; 5 studies, 368 participants). Haemodynamic decompensation may occur less in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.66; 3 studies, 1157 participants). Quality of life was similar between the two treatment groups. None of the included studies provided data on post-thrombotic syndrome or on cost comparison. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low-certainty evidence suggests that thrombolytics may reduce death following acute pulmonary embolism compared with heparin (the effectiveness was mainly driven by one trial with massive PE). Thrombolytic therapy may be helpful in reducing the recurrence of pulmonary emboli but may cause more major and minor haemorrhagic events, including haemorrhagic stroke. More studies of high methodological quality are needed to assess safety and cost effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy for people with pulmonary embolism.
Asunto(s)
Fibrinolíticos/uso terapéutico , Heparina/uso terapéutico , Embolia Pulmonar/tratamiento farmacológico , Terapia Trombolítica/métodos , Enfermedad Aguda , Sesgo , Causas de Muerte , Fibrinolíticos/efectos adversos , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Hemorragia/epidemiología , Heparina/efectos adversos , Humanos , Embolia Pulmonar/mortalidad , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Recurrencia , Terapia Trombolítica/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Moxibustion is a common intervention of Chinese medicine (CM). Systematic reviews (SRs) on moxibustion are increasing. Although the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement provides guidelines for SRs, the quality of moxibustion-related SRs is still not satisfactory. In particular, descriptions of the interventions and the rationale for using moxibustion are insufficient. To address these inadequacies, the working group developed this PRISMA extension for reporting SRs of moxibustion (PRISMA-M 2020). METHODS: A group of CM clinical professionals, methodologists of SRs, reporting guideline developers, and journal editors developed this PRISMA-M 2020 through a comprehensive process that includes registration, literature review, consensus meetings, Delphi exercises for soliciting comments, and revision, resulting in this final draft. RESULTS: Seven of the 27 PRISMA checklist items, namely title (1), rationale (3), eligibility criteria (6), data item (11), additional analyses (16), study characteristics (18), and additional analysis (23), were extended, with specific reference to the application of moxibustion. Illustrative examples and explanations for each item are provided. CONCLUSION: The PRISMA-M 2020 will help improve the reporting quality of SRs with moxibustion. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: We have registered it on the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) network, particularly under the item of PRISMA-TCM: http://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/reporting-guidelines-under-development-for-systematic-reviews/#65 .
Asunto(s)
Metaanálisis como Asunto , Moxibustión , Revisiones Sistemáticas como Asunto , Lista de Verificación , Humanos , Informe de Investigación , Revisiones Sistemáticas como Asunto/normasRESUMEN
Chinese Herbal Medicines (CHM) are the most common interventions of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), typically administered as either single herbs or formulas. Systematic reviews (SRs) are essential references for evaluating the efficacy and safety of CHM treatments accurately and reliably. Unfortunately, the reporting quality of SRs with CHM is not optimal, especially the reporting of CHM interventions and the rationale of why these interventions were selected. To address this problem, a group of TCM clinical experts, methodologists, epidemiologists, and editors has developed a PRISMA extension for CHM interventions (PRISMA-CHM) through a comprehensive process, including registration, literature review, consensus meeting, three-round Delphi survey, and finalization. The PRISMA checklist was extended by introducing the concept of TCM Pattern and the characteristics of CHM interventions. A total of twenty-four items (including sub-items) are included in the checklist, relating to title (1), structured summary (2), rationale (3), objectives (4), eligibility criteria (6), data items (11), synthesis of results (14, 21), additional analyses (16, 23), study characteristics (18), summary of evidence (24), and conclusions (26). Illustrative examples and explanations are also provided. The group hopes that PRISMA-CHM 2020 will improve the reporting quality of SRs of CHM.
Asunto(s)
Medicamentos Herbarios Chinos , Medicina Tradicional China , Metaanálisis como Asunto , Revisiones Sistemáticas como Asunto , Humanos , Seguridad , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Although the WHO Trial Registration Data Set (TRDS) has been published for many years, the quality of clinical trial registrations with traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is still not satisfactory, especially about the inadequate reporting on TCM interventions. The development of the WHO TRDS for TCM Extension 2020 (WHO TRDS-TCM 2020) aims to address this inadequacy. METHODS: A group of clinical experts, methodologists, epidemiologists, and editors has developed this WHO TRDS-TCM 2020 through a comprehensive process, including the baseline survey, draft of the initial items, three-round of Delphi survey, solicitation of comments, revision, and finalization. RESULTS: The WHO TRDS-TCM 2020 statement extends the latest version (V.1.3.1) of TRDS published in November 2017. The checklist includes 11 extended items (including subitems), namely Source(s) of Monetary or Material Support (Item 4), Scientific Title (Item 10a and 10b), Countries of Recruitment (Item 11), Health Condition(s) or Problem(s) Studied (Item 12), Intervention(s) (Item 13a, 13b and 13c), Key Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria (Item 14), Primary and Key Secondary Outcomes (Item 19 to 20), and Lay Summary (Item B1). For Item 13 (Interventions), three common TCM interventions--i.e., Chinese herbal medicine formulas, acupuncture and moxibustion-are elaborated. CONCLUSIONS: The group hopes that the WHO TRDS-TCM 2020 can improve the reporting quality and transparency of TCM trial registrations, assist registries in assessing the registration quality of TCM trials, and help readers understand TCM trial design.
Asunto(s)
Medicina Tradicional China , Informe de Investigación , Lista de Verificación , Humanos , Sistema de Registros , Organización Mundial de la SaludRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The standards for reporting interventions in clinical trials of cupping (STRICTOC), in the form of a checklist and explanations for users, were designed to improve reporting of cupping trials, particularly the interventions, and thereby facilitating their interpretation and replication. METHODS: A group of clinical experts, methodologists, epidemiologists, and editors has developed this STRICTOC checklist through a comprehensive process, including registration of this guideline, literature review, solicitation of comments, consensus meeting, revision, and finalization. RESULTS: The STRICTOC checklist includes 6 items and 16 sub-items, namely cupping rationale, details of cupping, treatment regimen, other components of treatment, treatment provider background, and control or comparator interventions. Illustrative examples of each item are also provided. CONCLUSIONS: It is intended that the STRICTOC, in conjunction with both the main Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement and extension for nonpharmacologic treatment, will raise the reporting quality of clinical trials of cupping.Trial registration We have registered this study on the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) Network: http://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/reporting-guidelines-under-development-for-clinical-trials/#STRICTOC.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Acupuncture is widely used worldwide, and systematic reviews on acupuncture are increasingly being published. Although acupuncture systematic reviews share several essential elements with other systematic reviews, some essential information for the application of acupuncture is not covered by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Considering this, we aimed to develop an extension of the PRISMA statement for acupuncture systematic reviews. METHODS: We used the PRISMA statement as a starting point, and conducted this study referring to the development strategy recommended by the EQUATOR network. The initial items were collected through a wide survey among evidence users and a review of relevant studies. We conducted a three-round Delphi survey and one-day face-to-face meeting to select items and formulate the checklist. After the consensus meeting, we drafted the manuscript (including the checklist) and sent it to our advisory experts for comments, following which the checklist was refined and circulated to a group of acupuncture systematic review authors for pilot test. We also selected a sample of acupuncture systematic reviews published in 2017 to test the checklist. RESULTS: A checklist of five new sub-items (including sub items) and six modified items was formulated, involving content related to title, rationale, eligibility criteria, literature search, data extraction, and study characteristics. We clarified the rationales of the items and provided examples for each item for additional guidance. CONCLUSION: The PRISMA for Acupuncture checklist is developed for improving the reporting of systematic reviews of acupuncture interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: We have registered the study on the EQUATOR network ( http://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/#91 ).
Asunto(s)
Terapia por Acupuntura , Lista de Verificación/métodos , Humanos , Metaanálisis como Asunto , Revisiones Sistemáticas como AsuntoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Ovulatory disturbance is a key diagnostic feature of polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), leading to infertility and correspondingly heavy disease burden. Many therapeutic strategies have been used to induce ovulation for women with PCOS who are infertile. Ultrasound-guided transvaginal ovarian needle drilling (UTND) is a novel surgical method used to induce ovulation for women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS at the outpatients clinic. Nevertheless, the quality in most of the studies seemed low, and the safety and efficacy of UTND is still uncertain. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of UTND for subfertile women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGFG) Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and six other databases to November 2018. We checked conference abstracts from the 2018 ESHRE, reference lists, and clinical trials registries. We contacted experts and specialists in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing UTND to laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD), and UTND combined with gonadotropins to gonadotropins alone for women of reproductive age with clomiphene-resistant PCOS and infertility. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened appropriate trials for inclusion, assessed methodological quality and risk of bias, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were live birth rate and incidence of surgical complications (bleeding and infection). We included ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) as a secondary outcome. Meta-analyses could only be conducted for the secondary outcomes pregnancy rate and ovulation rate in the comparison of UTND versus LOD using a random-effect model. We calculated odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence by applying GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We included five trials involving 639 clomiphene-resistant women with PCOS. Three studies compared UTND with LOD, and two compared UTND combined with gonadotropins with gonadotropins alone. The evidence was of low to very low quality. The main limitations were serious risk of bias due to poor reporting of methods, inconsistency resulting from heterogeneity, imprecision induced by limited sample size, and lack of reporting of clinically relevant outcomes such as live birth and surgical complications.UTND versus LODNo studies reported on the main outcome live birth. One study reported on surgical complications; however, the evidence for this outcome was of very low quality because it was based on one study with small sample size and there were no events in either arm. Thus, we are uncertain whether there is any difference in surgical complications between UTND and LOD.We are also uncertain whether there is any difference in pregnancy rate when comparing UTND with LOD (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.03; I2 = 56%; 3 RCTs, n = 473; very-low quality evidence). UTND may lead to a slight decrease in ovulation rate when compared to LOD (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.97; I2 = 0%; 3 RCTs, n = 473; low-quality evidence). This suggests that among clomiphene-resistant women with PCOS using LOD with an expected ovulation rate of 69.5%, the ovulation rate among women using UTND may be between 50.6% and 68.8%No studies reported on the outcomes OHSS and multiple pregnancy. There was also insufficient evidence to reach a conclusion regarding miscarriage as there was only one study of very low quality.UTND combined with gonadotropins versus gonadotropins aloneNo studies reported on the main outcomes live birth and incidence of surgical complications. The evidence for the outcomes OHSS, pregnancy, ovulation, miscarriage, and multiple pregnancy in this comparison was of very low quality. Thus, we are uncertain whether there is any difference in these outcomes for women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS using UTND combined with gonadotropins as compared with gonadotropins. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on very low-quality evidence, It is uncertain whether there is any difference in pregnancy rate, incidence of surgical complications, and miscarriage rate between UTND and LOD in women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS. UTND may lead to a slight decrease in ovulation rate when compared to LOD. No studies reported on the outcomes live birth rate, incidence of OHSS, and multiple pregnancy rate. No studies reported on the main outcomes live birth and surgical complications for the comparison UTND combined with gonadotrophins versus gonadotrophins alone. The evidence for the outcomes OHSS, pregnancy, ovulation, miscarriage, and multiple pregnancy in this comparison was of very low quality. Thus, it is unclear if there is a difference in any of the outcomes between UTND combined with gonadotrophins versus gonadotrophins alone.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the registration quality of clinical trials (CTs) with traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and identify the common problems if any. METHODS: The ICTRP database was searched for all TCM CTs that were registered up to 31 December 2017. Registered information of each trial was collected from specific registry involved in ICTRP through hyperlink. The primary analysis was to assess the reporting quality of registered trials with TCM interventions, which is based on the minimum 20 items of WHO Trial Registration Data Set (TRDS, V.1.2.1) plus optional additional three items recommended by ICTRP, and some specific items for TCM information (including TCM intervention, diagnosis, outcome and rationale). Descriptive statistics were additionally used to analyse the baseline characteristics of TCM trial registrations. RESULTS: A total of 3339 records in 15 registries were examined. The number of TCM registered trials has increased rapidly after the requirement of mandatory trial registration proposed by International Committee of Medical Journal Editors on 1 July 2005, and the top two registries were Chinese Clinical Trial Registry and ClincialTrials.gov. Of 3339 trials, 61% were prospective registration and 12.8% shared resultant publications. There were 2955 interventional trials but none of them had a 100% reporting rate of the minimum 20 items and additional three items. The reporting quality of these 23 items was not optimal due to 11 of them had a lower reporting rate (<65%). For TCM details, 49.2% lacked information on description of TCM intervention(s), 85.9% did not contain TCM diagnosis criteria, 92.6% did not use TCM outcome(s) and 67.1% lacked information on TCM background and rationale. CONCLUSION: The registration quality of TCM CTs should be improved by prospective registration, full completion of WHO TRDS, full reporting of TCM information and results sharing. Further full set of trial registration items for TCM trials should be developed thus to standardise the content of TCM trial registration.
Asunto(s)
Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto/normas , Medicamentos Herbarios Chinos/uso terapéutico , Sistema de Registros/normas , Proyectos de Investigación/normas , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Medicina Tradicional China , Organización Mundial de la SaludRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Thrombolytic therapy is usually reserved for patients with clinically serious or massive pulmonary embolism (PE). Evidence suggests that thrombolytic agents may dissolve blood clots more rapidly than heparin and may reduce the death rate associated with PE. However, there are still concerns about the possible risk of adverse effects of thrombolytic therapy, such as major or minor haemorrhage. This is the third update of the Cochrane review first published in 2006. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of thrombolytic therapy for acute pulmonary embolism. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 16 April 2018. We undertook reference checking to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared thrombolytic therapy followed by heparin versus heparin alone, heparin plus placebo, or surgical intervention for patients with acute PE. We did not include trials comparing two different thrombolytic agents or different doses of the same thrombolytic drug. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (JY, QH) assessed the eligibility and quality of trials and extracted data. We calculated effect estimates using the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) or the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We identified no new studies for inclusion in this 2018 update. We included in the review 18 trials with a total of 2197 participants. We were not able to include one study in the meta-analysis because it provided no data that we could extract. Most of the studies carried a high risk of bias because of high or unclear risk related to randomisation and blinding. Meta-analysis showed that, compared with heparin alone, or heparin plus placebo, thrombolytics plus heparin can reduce the odds of death (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.87, 2167 participants, P = 0.01, low-quality evidence) and recurrence of PE (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.89, 1898 participants, P = 0.02, low-quality evidence). Effects on mortality weakened when we excluded from analysis four studies at high risk of bias (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.06, 2054 participants, P = 0.08). The incidence of major and minor haemorrhagic events was higher in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.95 to 4.31, 1897 participants, P < 0.001, low-quality evidence; OR 3.09, 95% CI 1.58 to 6.06, 1553 participants, P = 0.001, very low-quality evidence, respectively). We downgraded the quality of the evidence to low or very low because of design limitations, potential influence of pharmaceutical companies, and small sample sizes. Length of hospital stay (mean difference (MD) -0.89, 95% CI -3.13 to 1.34) and quality of life were similar between the two treatment groups. Limited information from a small number of trials indicated that thrombolytics may improve haemodynamic outcomes, perfusion lung scanning, pulmonary angiogram assessment, echocardiograms, pulmonary hypertension, coagulation parameters, clinical outcomes, and survival time to a greater extent than heparin alone. However, the heterogeneity of the studies and the small number of participants involved warrant caution when results are interpreted. Similarily, fewer participants from the thrombolytics group required escalation of treatment. None of the included studies reported on post-thrombotic syndrome or compared the costs of different treatments. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low-quality evidence suggests that thrombolytics reduce death following acute pulmonary embolism compared with heparin. The included studies used a variety of thrombolytic drugs. Thrombolytic therapy may be helpful in reducing the recurrence of pulmonary emboli but may cause major and minor haemorrhagic events and stroke. More high-quality, blinded randomised controlled trials assessing safety and cost-effectiveness of therapies for pulmonary embolism are required.
Asunto(s)
Fibrinolíticos/uso terapéutico , Heparina/uso terapéutico , Embolia Pulmonar/tratamiento farmacológico , Terapia Trombolítica/métodos , Causas de Muerte , Fibrinolíticos/efectos adversos , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Hemorragia/epidemiología , Heparina/efectos adversos , Humanos , Embolia Pulmonar/mortalidad , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Recurrencia , Terapia Trombolítica/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Chronic fatigue is increasingly common. Conventional medical care is limited in treating chronic fatigue, leading some patients to use traditional Chinese medicine therapies, including herbal medicine. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of traditional Chinese medicine herbal products in treating idiopathic chronic fatigue and chronic fatigue syndrome. SEARCH METHODS: The following databases were searched for terms related to traditional Chinese medicine, chronic fatigue, and clinical trials: CCDAN Controlled Trials Register (July 2009), MEDLINE (1966-2008), EMBASE (1980-2008), AMED (1985-2008), CINAHL (1982-2008), PSYCHINFO (1985-2008), CENTRAL (Issue 2 2008), the Chalmers Research Group PedCAM Database (2004), VIP Information (1989-2008), CNKI (1976-2008), OCLC Proceedings First (1992-2008), Conference Papers Index (1982-2008), and Dissertation Abstracts (1980-2008). Reference lists of included studies and review articles were examined and experts in the field were contacted for knowledge of additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Selection criteria included published or unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of participants diagnosed with idiopathic chronic fatigue or chronic fatigue syndrome comparing traditional Chinese medicinal herbs with placebo, conventional standard of care (SOC), or no treatment/wait lists. The outcome of interest was fatigue. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: 13 databases were searched for RCTs investigating TCM herbal products for the treatment of chronic fatigue. Over 2400 references were located. Studies were screened and assessed for inclusion criteria by two authors. MAIN RESULTS: No studies that met all inclusion criteria were identified. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Although studies examining the use of TCM herbal products for chronic fatigue were located, methodologic limitations resulted in the exclusion of all studies. Of note, many of the studies labelled as RCTs and conducted in China did not utilize rigorous randomization procedures. Improvements in methodology in future studies is required for meaningful synthesis of data.
Asunto(s)
Medicamentos Herbarios Chinos/uso terapéutico , Síndrome de Fatiga Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Fatiga/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedad Crónica , HumanosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To learn about the overall quality of clinical anaesthesia study protocols from the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry and to discuss the way to improve study protocol quality. METHODS: We defined completeness of each sub-item in SPIRIT as N/A (not applicable) or with a score of 0, 1, or 2. For each protocol, we calculated the proportion of adequately reported items (score = 2 and N/A) and unreported items (score = 0). Protocol quality was determined according to the proportion of reported items, with values >50% indicating high quality. Protocol quality was determined according to the proportion of reported items. For each sub-item in SPIRIT, we calculated the adequately reported rate (percentage of all protocols with score 2 and NA on one sub-item) as well as the unreported rate (percentage of all protocols with score 0 on one sub-item). RESULTS: Total 126 study protocols were available for assessment. Among these, 88.1% were assessed as being of low quality. By comparison, the percentage of low-quality protocols was 88.9% after the publication of the SPIRIT statement. Among the 51 SPIRIT sub-items, 18 sub-items had an unreported rate above 90% while 16 had a higher adequately reported rate than an unreported rate. CONCLUSIONS: The overall quality of clinical anaesthesia study protocols registered in the ChiCTR was poor. A mandatory protocol upload and self-check based on the SPIRIT statement during the trial registration process may improve protocol quality in the future.
RESUMEN
With the introduction and development of evidence-based medicine in China, it has been spread rapidly in the area of integrative medicine (IM) and has become a new unique discipline. During almost 20 years, as one of the most important parts of evidence-based IM, systematic review (SR)/meta-analysis (MA) of IM have shown a good development momentum in the aspects of quantity, depth, breadth and influence, but also face the harsh situation of the uncontrolled quantity and quality, especially for SRs in Chinese. Therefore, how to supervise and standardize this area effectively becomes a problem to be solved. Based on the experience both at home and abroad, the authors put forward several kinds of solutions for laying the foundation for further development such as promoting the registration system of SR/MA of IM, effectively setting up the regulatory platform of quality and quantity, launching professional training for SR/MA reviewers, forming qualification registration, developing the data transfer and sharing platform to realize the transparency of evidence process.
Asunto(s)
Medicina Integrativa , Medicina Tradicional China , China , HumanosRESUMEN
As a kind of intervention measures of traditional Chinese medicine, acupuncture-moxibustion is highly adopted on global clinical practice. Even though the global clinical trial registration system was established more than 10 years ago, the proportion of acupuncture-moxibustion clinical trial registration is still very low; and it is very problematic on the methodological quality and report quality in the published acupuncture-moxibustion clinical trials. In order to manage particularly the acupuncture-moxibustion clinical trials, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, collaborated with China Association of Acupuncture and Moxibustion and World Federation of Acupuncture Societies, established the Acupuncture-Moxibustion Clinical Trail Registry (AMCTR). AMCTR is a secondary registry platform affiliated to the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), specifically for the acceptance and management of clinical trials in the field of acupuncture and moxibustion. It is a nonprofit academic organization, located in China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences.
Asunto(s)
Terapia por Acupuntura/normas , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto/normas , Sistema de Registros , China , Humanos , Moxibustión/normasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This is an update of the original Cochrane Review published in Cochrane Library, Issue 10, 2012.Hydatidiform mole (HM), also called a molar pregnancy, is characterised by an overgrowth of foetal chorionic tissue within the uterus. HMs may be partial (PM) or complete (CM) depending on their gross appearance, histopathology and karyotype. PMs usually have a triploid karyotype, derived from maternal and paternal origins, whereas CMs are diploid and have paternal origins only. Most women with HM can be cured by evacuation of retained products of conception (ERPC) and their fertility preserved. However, in some women the growth persists and develops into gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN), a malignant form of the disease that requires treatment with chemotherapy. CMs have a higher rate of malignant transformation than PMs. It may be possible to reduce the risk of GTN in women with HM by administering prophylactic chemotherapy (P-Chem). However, P-Chem given before or after evacuation of HM to prevent malignant sequelae remains controversial, as the risks and benefits of this practice are unclear. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of P-Chem to prevent GTN in women with a molar pregnancy. To investigate whether any subgroup of women with HM may benefit more from P-Chem than others. SEARCH METHODS: For the original review we performed electronic searches in the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 2, 2012), MEDLINE (1946 to February week 4, 2012) and Embase (1980 to 2012, week 9). We developed the search strategy using free text and MeSH. For this update we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 5, 2017), MEDLINE (February 2012 to June week 1, 2017) and Embase (February 2012 to 2017, week 23). We also handsearched reference lists of relevant literature to identify additional studies and searched trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of P-Chem for HM. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion in the review and extracted data using a specifically designed data collection form. Meta-analyses were performed by pooling data from individual trials using Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5) software in line with standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane methodology. MAIN RESULTS: The searches identified 161 records; after de-duplication and title and abstract screening 90 full-text articles were retrieved. From these we included three RCTs with a combined total of 613 participants. One study compared prophylactic dactinomycin to no prophylaxis (60 participants); the other two studies compared prophylactic methotrexate to no prophylaxis (420 and 133 participants). All participants were diagnosed with CMs. We considered the latter two studies to be of poor methodological quality.P-Chem reduced the risk of GTN occurring in women following a CM (3 studies, 550 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24 to 0.57; I² = 0%; P < 0.00001; low-quality evidence). However, owing to the poor quality (high risk of bias) of two of the included studies, we performed sensitivity analyses excluding these two studies. This left only one small study of high-risk women to contribute data for this primary outcome (59 participants; RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.73; P = 0.01); therefore we consider this evidence to be of low quality.The time to diagnosis was longer in the P-Chem group than the control group (2 studies, 33 participants; mean difference (MD) 28.72, 95% CI 13.19 to 44.24; P = 0.0003; low-quality evidence); and the P-Chem group required more courses to cure subsequent GTN (1 poor-quality study, 14 participants; MD 1.10, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.68; P = 0.0002; very low quality evidence).There were insufficient data to perform meta-analyses for toxicity, overall survival, drug resistance and reproductive outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: P-Chem may reduce the risk of progression to GTN in women with CMs who are at a high risk of malignant transformation; however, current evidence in favour of P-Chem is limited by the poor methodological quality and small size of the included studies. As P-Chem may increase drug resistance, delays treatment of GTN and may expose women toxic side effects, this practice cannot currently be recommended.