GEM/cochrane-simplification huggingface dataset:
Abstract: Two studies enrolled preterm infants with respiratory distress. Amato (1988) allocated infants to L-thyroxine 50 μg/dose at 1 and at 24 hours or no treatment. Amato (1989) allocated infants to L-triiodothyronine 50 μg/day in two divided doses for two days or no treatment. Both studies had methodological concerns including quasi-random methods of patient allocation, no blinding of treatment or measurement and substantial post allocation losses. Neither study reported any significant benefits in neonatal morbidity or mortality from use of thyroid hormones. Meta-analysis of two studies (80 infants) found no significant difference in mortality to discharge (typical RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.47, 2.14). Amato 1988 reported no significant difference in use of mechanical ventilation (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.38, 1.09). No significant effects were found in use of mechanical ventilation, duration of mechanical ventilation, air leak, CLD at 28 days in survivors, patent ductus arteriosus, intraventricular haemorrhage or necrotising enterocolitis. Neurodevelopment was not reported. There is no evidence from controlled clinical trials that postnatal thyroid hormone treatment reduces the severity of respiratory distress syndrome, neonatal morbidity or mortality in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome.

Plain-language summary: This review found two small trials that compared the use of thyroid hormones to no treatment in infants with breathing problems in the first hours after birth. No benefit was found from use of these hormones on severity of breathing problems or complications that occurred as a result of these breathing problems. The effect on longer term development was not reported.
Abstract: Four trials involving 317 people met the inclusion criteria. Three trials studied oral magnesium, with doses ranging from 12.5 mmol/day to 20 mmol/day. One trial studied parenteral magnesium (16.24 mEq q6h for 24 hours). Each trial demonstrated a high risk of bias in at least one domain. There was significant clinical and methodological variation between trials. We found no study that measured all of the identified primary outcomes and met the objectives of this review. Only one trial measured clinical symptoms of seizure, delirium tremens or components of the Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment for Alcohol (CIWA) score. A single outcome (handgrip strength) in three trials (113 people), was amenable to meta-analysis. There was no significant increase in handgrip strength in the magnesium group (SMD 0.04; 95% CI -0.22 to 0.30). No clinically important changes in adverse events were reported. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether magnesium is beneficial or harmful for the treatment or prevention of alcohol withdrawal syndrome.

Plain-language summary: Alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) is a set of symptoms experienced when one reduces or stops alcohol consumption after prolonged periods of alcohol intake. Some studies show that AWS coincides with low levels of magnesium in the blood. Since magnesium may play a role in dampening the excitability of the central nervous system, some researchers believe that low levels of magnesium may make the central nervous system 'hyper-excitable' and may cause AWS symptoms, which include sleeplessness, tremors, anxiety, headache, excessive sweating and reduced appetite. Many AWS treatment protocols therefore recommend magnesium supplementation. The goal of our review was to determine whether magnesium supplementation prevents or treats AWS in adults. Our review of four trials covering 317 participants determined that there is not enough evidence about the benefits or harms of using magnesium supplements to prevent or treat AWS in adults.
Abstract: Eight RCTs (enrolling 2515 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Three RCTs (all performed in Asian countries) compared D3 with D2 lymphadenectomy: data suggested no significant difference in OS between these two types of lymph node dissection (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.21), with no significant difference in postoperative mortality (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.41 to 6.73). Data for DFS were available only from one trial and for no trial were DSS data available. Five RCTs (n = 3 European; n = 2 Asian) compared D2 to D1 lymphadenectomy: OS (n = 5; HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.17) and DFS (n=3; HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.07) findings suggested no significant difference between these two types of lymph node dissection. In contrast, D2 lymphadenectomy was associated with a significantly better DSS compared to D1 lymphadenectomy (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.92), the quality of the body of evidence being moderate; however, D2 lymphadenectomy was also associated with a higher postoperative mortality rate (RR 2.02, 95% CI 1.34 to 3.04). D2 lymphadenectomy can improve DSS in patients with resectable carcinoma of the stomach, although the increased incidence of postoperative mortality reduces its therapeutic benefit.

Plain-language summary: We collected data from eight randomized controlled trials addressing this issue and enrolling a total of 2515 patients. We found that D2 lymphadenectomy can reduce the number of deaths due to disease progression as compared to D1 lymphadenectomy. However, D2 lymphadenectomy was also associated with a higher rate of postoperative mortality. In addition, available evidence does not support the superiority of D3 versus D2 lymphadenectomy. In conclusion, our findings support the use of D2 lymphadenectomy in patients with resectable carcinoma of the stomach, although the increased incidence of postoperative mortality reduces its therapeutic effect. The quality of the evidence was moderate due to an intermediate level of result heterogeneity across the included trials.
Abstract: Thirteen studies, 1158 participants, met the criteria for inclusion in this review. Comparing naltrexone versus placebo or no pharmacological treatments, no statistically significant difference were noted for all the primary outcomes considered. The only outcome statistically significant in favour of naltrexone is re incarceration, RR 0.47 (95%CI 0.26-0.84), but results come only from two studies. Considering only studies were patients were forced to adherence a statistical significant difference in favour of naltrexone was found for retention and abstinence, RR 2.93 (95%CI 1.66-5.18). Comparing naltrexone versus psychotherapy, in the two considered outcomes, no statistically significant difference was found in the single study considered. Naltrexone was not superior to benzodiazepines and to buprenorphine for retention and abstinence and side effects. Results come from single studies. The findings of this review suggest that oral naltrexone did not perform better than treatment with placebo or no pharmacological agent with respect to the number of participants re-incarcerated during the study period. If oral naltrexone is compared with other pharmacological treatments such as benzodiazepine and buprenorphine, no statistically significant difference was found. The percentage of people retained in treatment in the included studies is however low (28%). The conclusion of this review is that the studies conducted have not allowed an adequate evaluation of oral naltrexone treatment in the field of opioid dependence. Consequently, maintenance therapy with naltrexone cannot yet be considered a treatment which has been scientifically proved to be superior to other kinds of treatment.

Plain-language summary: In this review of the medical literature oral naltrexone, with or without psychotherapy, was no better than placebo or no pharmacological treatments with regard to retention in treatment, use of the primary substance of abuse or side effects. The only outcome that was clearly in favour of naltrexone was a reduction of re incarcerations by about a half but these results were from only two studies. In single studies naltrexone was not superior to benzodiazepines or buprenorphine for retention, abstinence or side effects. The review authors identified a total of 13 randomised controlled studies that involved 1158 opioid addicts treated as outpatients following detoxification. Less than a third of participants were retained in treatment over the duration of the included studies. The mean duration was six months (range one to 10 months). None of included studies considered deaths from fatal overdoses in people treated with naltrexone.