Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Can J Ophthalmol ; 58(2): 150-155, 2023 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34678173

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the quality and readability of online resources on keratoconus treatment. METHODS: A Google.com search was conducted on August 9, 2020; 32 web sites were selected for analysis. Popularity was assessed by Google and Alexa rank. The quality of web sites was analyzed using the quality criteria for consumer health information (DISCERN) tool, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark, and the Health On the Net Code of Conduct Certification (HONcode). The readability of the web sites was assessed using the Fleschwebr hea Reading Ease, the Automated Readability Index, and the Fleschted Readability RESULTS: The JAMA benchmark scores, unlike the DISCERN scores, were correlated with the Google and Alexa rank. One web site (3.1%) met all the JAMA benchmark criteria, and 3 (9.3%) others had HONcode certification. The median DISCERN score was 33 (range, 29.6-43.1; maximum possible, 80). Rnib.org.uk scored the highest at 57 (71.0%). The mean Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease score (52.9 ± 7.1) corresponded to uk" n DIdifficult to read." Thirty-one web sites (96.8%) had a Flesch-Kincaid Grade higher than the American Medical Association recommendation of sixth grade level. The median Automated Readability Index score was 7 (range, 6.2-7.3). CONCLUSION: The majority of online information currently available on keratoconus treatment is complex and highly variable. Rnib.org.uk is the best currently available source. Clinicians should inform patients on how to assess the credibility of online information and recommend suitable information sources.


Assuntos
Informação de Saúde ao Consumidor , Ceratocone , Estados Unidos , Humanos , Compreensão , Ceratocone/terapia , Fonte de Informação , Leitura , Internet
2.
J Gastrointest Cancer ; 52(1): 41-56, 2021 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32959118

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Many patients with gastric cancer present with late stage disease. Palliative gastrectomy remains a contentious intervention aiming to debulk tumour and prevent or treat complications such as gastric outlet obstruction, perforation and bleeding. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature for all papers describing palliative resections for gastric cancer and reporting peri-operative or survival outcomes. Data from peri-operative and survival outcomes were meta-analysed using random effects modelling. Survival data from patients undergoing palliative resections, non-resective surgery and palliative chemotherapy were also combined. This study was registered with the PROSPERO database (CRD42019159136). RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-eight papers which included 58,675 patients contributed data. At 1 year, there was a significantly improved survival in patients who underwent palliative gastrectomy when compared to non-resectional surgery and no treatment. At 2 years following treatment, palliative gastrectomy was associated with significantly improved survival compared to chemotherapy only; however, there was no significant improvement in survival compared to patients who underwent non-resectional surgery after 1 year. Palliative resections were associated with higher rates of overall complications versus non-resectional surgery (OR 2.14; 95% CI, 1.34, 3.46; p < 0.001). However, palliative resections were associated with similar peri-operative mortality rates to non-resectional surgery. CONCLUSION: Palliative gastrectomy is associated with a small improvement in survival at 1 year when compared to non-resectional surgery and chemotherapy. However, at 2 and 3 years following treatment, survival benefits are less clear. Any survival benefits come at the expense of increased major and overall complications.


Assuntos
Procedimentos Cirúrgicos de Citorredução/efeitos adversos , Gastrectomia/efeitos adversos , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/epidemiologia , Cuidados Paliativos/métodos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Gástricas/terapia , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Quimioterapia Adjuvante/métodos , Quimioterapia Adjuvante/estatística & dados numéricos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos de Citorredução/métodos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos de Citorredução/estatística & dados numéricos , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Gastrectomia/métodos , Gastrectomia/estatística & dados numéricos , Obstrução da Saída Gástrica/etiologia , Obstrução da Saída Gástrica/cirurgia , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/etiologia , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/cirurgia , Humanos , Terapia Neoadjuvante/métodos , Terapia Neoadjuvante/estatística & dados numéricos , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/prevenção & controle , Cuidados Paliativos/estatística & dados numéricos , Período Perioperatório , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Qualidade de Vida , Perfuração Espontânea/etiologia , Perfuração Espontânea/cirurgia , Neoplasias Gástricas/complicações , Neoplasias Gástricas/mortalidade , Taxa de Sobrevida
3.
Clin Med (Lond) ; 20(6): e262-e263, 2020 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33199333

RESUMO

Why we only infrequently detect or report two or more respiratory viruses co-infecting an adult host is poorly understood. We report a rare case where influenza B and SARS-CoV-2 caused viral pneumonia in a 74-year-old man diagnosed during the UK winter epidemic/pandemic for these organisms and discuss concepts of co-infection.


Assuntos
Coinfecção , Infecções por Coronavirus , Vírus da Influenza B , Influenza Humana , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Idoso , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Infecções Comunitárias Adquiridas , Pressão Positiva Contínua nas Vias Aéreas , Humanos , Pulmão/diagnóstico por imagem , Pulmão/patologia , Masculino , SARS-CoV-2
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...