Evidence synthesis is the process of systematically gathering, analyzing, and integrating available research evidence. The quality of evidence synthesis depends on the quality of the original studies included. Validity assessment, also known as risk of bias assessment, is an essential method for assessing the quality of these original studies. Currently, there are numerous validity assessment tools available, but some of them lack a rigorous development process and evaluation. The application of inappropriate validity assessment tools to assessing the quality of the original studies during the evidence synthesis process may compromise the accuracy of study conclusions and mislead the clinical practice. To address this dilemma, the LATITUDES Network, a one-stop resource website for validity assessment tools, was established in September 2023, led by academics at the University of Bristol, U.K. This Network is dedicated to collecting, sorting and promoting validity assessment tools to improve the accuracy of original study validity assessments and increase the robustness and reliability of the results of evidence synthesis. This study introduces the background of the establishment of the LATITUDES Network, the included validity assessment tools, and the training resources for the use of validity assessment tools, in order to provide a reference for domestic scholars to learn more about the LATITUDES Network, to better use the appropriate validity assessment tools to conduct study quality assessments, and to provide references for the development of validity assessment tools.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy of different nucleosides (acids) in preventing hepatitis B virus reactivation after chemotherapy in cancer patients. MethodsThe Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data, and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of different nucleosides (acids) to prevent HBV reactivation after chemotherapy in cancer patients from inception to June 7th, 2021. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Network meta-analysis was then performed by using Stata 16.0 software. ResultsA total of 43 RCTs involving 3 269 patients were included. There were 7 interventions, namely entecavir (ETV), lamivudine (LAM), adefovir dipivoxil (ADV), telbivudine (LdT), tenofovir dipivoxil (TDF), lamivudine combined with entecavir (LAM+ETV), and lamivudine combined with adefovir dipivoxil (LAM+ADV). The results of network meta-analysis showed that the efficacy of reducing the reactivation rate of ETV, LAM, ADV, LdT, TDF, LAM+ETV, LAM+ADV were superior than the control group. The ETV, LAM and ADV were not as effective as LAM+ETV. The leading drug combinations were LAM+ETV (94.8%), LdT (81.5%) and LA+ADV (58.0%). ConclusionsCurrent evidence shows that LAM+ETV, LdT, and LA+ADV are more effective in preventing hepatitis B virus reactivation after chemotherapy in cancer patients. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high-quality studies are required to verify the above conclusions.
Objective To systematically review the effect of different nutrient interventions on the physical function of elderly people with frailty through network meta-analysis. Methods The PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMbase and Web of Science were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials of different nutrient interventions on physical function of the elderly with frailty, from database inception to June 30, 2022. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Network meta-analysis was then performed using ADDIS 1.16.8, GeMTC 14.3, and Stata 15.0 software. Results A total of 13 studies involving 1 144 patients were included. There was no statistically significant difference in handgrip strength, time up to go test, gait speed, and short physical performance battery (SPPB) among different nutrient interventions. Significant differences were not found in vitamin D+ whey protein (VDWP) vs. placebo and Leu vs. placebo in handgrip strength, or VDWP vs. placebo in SPPB. The probability ranking diagram showed that the most effective of handgrip strength, time up to go test, gait speed, and SPPB were milk protein concentrate (MPC80), L-carnitime (L-Car), leucine (Leu), and MPC80, respectively. Conclusion The current evidence suggests that nutritional intervention did not significantly improve physical function in the frail elderly. MPC80, Leu, L-Car, and VDVEWP may play a role in improving the physical function of frail elderly people. Nutritional support programs that increase the above nutrients, combined with exercise training may become a better way to improve the physical function of frail elderly.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of second-line medications for status epilepticus (SE). MethodsThe Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, CNKI, CBM, and WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of second-line medications for SE from inception to May, 2021. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Network meta-analysis was then performed using Stata 15.1 software and R 4.1.0 software. ResultsA total of 23 RCTs were included and 4 regimens were involved: levetiracetam (LEV), phenytoin/fosphenytoin (PHT), valproate (VPA), and phenobarbital (PHB). The results of network meta-analysis showed SE control rate validity sorting to be PHB>LEV>VPA>PHT, the epilepsy recurrence rate in 24 hour validity sorting to be VPA>PHB>LEV>PHT, those requiring further antiepileptic drug treatment rate validity sorting to be LEV>PHT>VPA, and drug safety security sorting to be VPA>LEV>PHT>PHB. Subgroup analysis showed PHB was optimal for SE control in children and adults, VPA had the optimal effect on other efficacy indicators in children, LEV was the safest in children and elderly patients, and VPA was the safest in adults. ConclusionsCurrent evidence suggests that PHB is the optimal for SE control, however, the safety is unsatisfactory; VPA and LEV have their own advantages in the treatment of SE, and their safety is satisfactory. VPA is recommended for adult patients, and LEV is recommended for children and elderly patients.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy of different stimulation modalities of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) combined with SSRI in improving depressed mood after stroke using network meta-analysis. MethodsThe PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, CBM and WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to the objectives from inception to October 1, 2022. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Network meta-analysis was then performed by using R 4.2.1software. ResultsA total of 25 RCTs involving 2 152 patients were included. Four types of rTMS stimulation combined with SSRIs were included: high-frequency stimulation of the left dorsolateral prefrontal (l-DLPFC), low-frequency stimulation of l-DLPFC, low-frequency stimulation of the right dorsolateral prefrontal (r-DLPFC), and low-frequency stimulation of the bilateral DLPFC. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that the effect of combining four stimulation methods with SSRI in treating depression was better than that of SSRI alone (P<0.05). Probability sorting results showed that low-frequency stimulated bilateral DLPFC (88.9%) > low-frequency stimulated l-DLPFC (63.1%) > high-frequency stimulation l-DLPFC (57.1%) > low-frequency stimulation r-DLPFC (40.4%). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the four stimulation methods combined with SSRI and the use of SSRI alone (P>0.05). Conclusion rTMS combined with SSRIs is better than SSRIs alone in improving depressed mood after stroke. Low-frequency rTMS stimulation of bilateral DLPFC may be the best. Meanwhile, the safety of different stimulation methods is good.
Objective To systematically review the efficacy and safety of different SGLT2 inhibitors in the treatment of heart failure. Methods The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed and EMbase databases were searched for randomized controlled trials on the efficacy and safety of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure from inception to July 2, 2021. Two researchers independently screened literature, extracted data and evaluated the risk of bias of the included studies. Network meta-analysis was then performed using Stata 16.0 software. Results A total of 16 randomized controlled trials, including 15 312 patients, involving 5 interventions, namely dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, canagliflozin, sotagliflozin and ertugliflozin were included. Results of network meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in the compound outcome of hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular death, hospitalization for heart failure, all-cause mortality, risk of cardiovascular mortality and serious adverse reactions among patients with heart failure among 5 different SGLT2 inhibitors (P>0.05). Compared with placebo, both selective and non-selective SGLT2 inhibitors improved the risk of hospitalization for heart failure, hospitalization for heart failure, or compound cardiovascular mortality (P<0.05), while only selective SGLT2 inhibitors improved the risk of cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, and serious adverse events (P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference between them (P>0.05). The area under the cumulative ordering probability curve of selective and non-selective SGLT2 inhibitors ranked first and second, except for the combined outcome of heart failure or cardiovascular death. Conclusion The current evidence indicates that there is no significant difference in the efficacy and safety of the 5 different SGLT2 inhibitors in the treatment of heart failure, and there is no significant difference between selective SGLT2 inhibitors and non-selective SGLT2 inhibitors. Due to the limited quantity and quality of included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusion.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the diagnostic performance of different screening tools for sarcopenia in the community for the elderly with sarcopenia, and to provide evidence-based support for the accurate screening of elderly patients with sarcopenia. MethodsThe PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, VIP, CBM, and WanFang Data databases were searched by computer, and the relevant research on the diagnosis of sarcopenia in the elderly by publicly published risk screening tools was found. The retrieval time was from inception to June 2023. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of the included studies, and then data analysis was performed by using Stata 15.1 and Meta Disc 1.4 software. ResultsA total of 24 studies were included, including 10 961 patients, involving 8 risk screening tools for sarcopenia in the elderly: leg circumference, MSRA-5, MSRA-7, upper arm circumference, ring test, Ishii score, SARC-CalF and SARC-F. Meta-analysis showed that the combined sensitivities of eight screening tools were 0.84 (95% CI 0.61 to 1.15), 0.82 (95% CI 0.48 to 1.38), 0.80 (95% CI 0.47 to 1.36) and 0.72 (95%CI 0.33 to 1.55), 0.67 (95%CI 0.37 to 1.21), 0.63 (95%CI 0.33 to 1.19), 0.49 (95%CI 0.38 to 0.63), 0.24 (95%CI 0.18 to 0.30), and the combined specificities were 0.39 (95%CI 0.18 to 0.82)、0.52 (95%CI 0.29 to 0.93)、0.54 (95%CI 0.29 to 1.03)、0.62 (95%CI 0.49 to 0.79)、0.63 (95%CI 0.50 to 0.78).The results of reticular meta-analysis showed that the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) of the eight screening tools ranked from high to low according to the cumulative sensitivity: calf circumference (67.4%) > MSRA-5 (65.3%) > MSRA-7 (64.1%) > upper arm circumference (54.5%) > ring test (46.5%) > Ishii score. The values of specificity SUCRA from highest to lowest were as follows: SARC-F (72.2%) > SARC-CALF (71.3%) > Ishii score (60.2%) > ring test (57.1%) > upper arm circumference (40.1%) > lower leg circumference (36.2%) > MSRA-5. ConclusionThe simple screening tool for common sarcopenia has high sensitivity and high specificity, so medical staff can give priority to the combination of the two screening tools, namely SARC-CalF. Due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusion.
ObjectivesTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of oral drugs for treating women with uncomplicated lower urinary tract infection.MethodsPubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, CBM, WanFang Data, CNKI and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of oral drugs for treating females with uncomplicated lower urinary tract infection from inception to November, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies, then, network meta-analysis was performed by using " gemtc” packages in R 3.5.1 software.ResultsA total of 38 RCTs were included. The results of network meta-analysis showed that: quinolones (RR=1.24, 95%CI 1.11 to 1.37), furantoin (RR=1.21, 95%CI 1.06 to 1.37), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMZ) (RR=1.20, 95%CI 1.06 to 1.35), fosfomycin (RR=1.17, 95%CI 1.04 to 1.31) and penicillin (RR=1.18, 95%CI 1.05 to 1.33) were superior to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS) in clinical cure. Quinolones were better than fosfomycin (RR=1.07, 95%CI 1.03 to 1.12), penicillin (RR=1.18, 95%CI 1.13 to 1.23) and cephalosporin (RR=1.13, 95%CI 1.08 to 1.19); furantoin was better than penicillin (RR=1.15, 95%CI 1.08 to 1.21) and cephalosporin (RR=1.10, 95%CI 1.04 to 1.17); TMP-SMZ was better than penicillin (RR=1.15, 95%CI 1.09 to 1.21) and cephalosporin (RR=1.11, 95%CI 1.04 to 1.16); fosfomycin was better than penicillin (RR=1.10, 95%CI 1.04 to 1.16) in bacteriological cure. The adverse effect rates of quinolones were lower than furantoin (RR=0.83, 95%CI 0.70 to 0.98), TMP-SMZ (RR=0.88, 95%CI 0.78 to 0.99) and fosfomycin (RR=0.74, 95%CI 0.59 to 0.93), and which of fosfomycin was higher than penicillin (RR=1.33, 95%CI 1.01 to 1.74) and NSAIDS (RR=1.46, 95%CI 1.11 to 1.92). All differences were statistically significant.ConclusionsCurrent evidence shows that uncomplicated lower urinary tract infection should be recommended to therapy containing quinolones. Due to limited quality and quantity of included studies, more high-quality studies are required to verify the above conclusion.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions to reduce fear of childbirth. MethodsThe Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP, and CBM databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions to reduce fear of childbirth from inception to December 2021. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies; then, a network meta-analysis was performed using Stata 15.0 software. ResultsA total of 19 RCTs involving 3 409 patients were included. Ten non-pharmacological interventions (prenatal education, scenario-based health education, psychological guidance, yoga training, hypnosis, mobile learning education, cognitive behavioral therapy, physical relaxation guidance, breathing guidance, and usual care) were included. The results of the reticulated meta-analysis of the Wijma Delivery Expectancy Questionnaire (W-DEQ-A) showed that the rankings of the interventions were as follows: prenatal education > yoga training > cognitive behavioral therapy > situational simulation health education > psychological guidance > physical relaxation guidance > conventional care. The results of the Wijma Experience of Childbirth Questionnaire (W-DEQ-B) mesh meta-analysis showed that the rankings of the interventions were as follows: mobile learning education > prenatal education > scenario-based health education > cognitive behavioral therapy > breathing instruction > hypnosis > psychological instruction > physical relaxation instruction > usual care. ConclusionThe current evidence suggests that prenatal education, mobile learning education, situational simulation health education, and yoga training may be effective interventions in improving maternal fear of childbirth. Due to the limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusion.
With the publication of a vast amount of clinical research on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), and the National Health Commission of China have all updated their diagnostic and treatment guidelines for HCC. There are no differences in the definition of HCC risk populations among the AASLD 2023, NCCN 2024, and China Liver Cancer Staging and Treatment Guideline (CNLC) 2024. Notably, CNLC 2024 has updated its guidance on high-risk factors and prospective surveillance for HCC based on the characteristics of HCC patients in China. The four guidelines have seen significant updates in the areas of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies, local treatments, and systemic treatments for HCC. CNLC 2024 refines the indications for local treatment, improves systemic treatment, and introduces new first-line therapy, including camrelizumab combined with rivoceranib or tislelizumab. The second-line therapy nivolumab plus ipilimumab for advanced HCC are recommended by AASLD 2023, NCCN 2024, and ASCO 2024, which may become a new first-line therapeutic option for patients with advanced HCC. We compare and interpret these four guidelines in this paper.