GEM/cochrane-simplification huggingface dataset:
Abstract: We included seventeen trials with overall 2134 participants. We performed two separate meta-analyses: one that evaluated the use of systemic prophylactic antibiotics and another that evaluated the use of antibiotic-impregnated systems. All studies included shunt infection in their primary outcome. We could not analyse all-cause mortality regarding systemic antibiotics due to lack of data. No significant differences were found (odds ratio (OR): 1.47, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.83 to 2.62) for this outcome regarding the use of antibiotic-impregnated catheters compared with standard ones. The use of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis and the use of antibiotic-impregnated catheters were associated with a decrease in shunt infection (OR: 0.52, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.74 and OR: 0.21, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.55 respectively). We found no significant benefit for shunt revision in both meta-analyses that evaluated systemic antibiotics and impregnated-shunt systems. We found no significant differences between the subgroups evaluated: type of shunt (internal/external, ventriculoperitoneal/ventriculoatrial), age and duration of the administration of antibiotics. We could demonstrate a benefit of systemic prophylactic antibiotics for the first 24 hours postoperatively to prevent shunt infection, regardless of the patient's age and the type of internal shunt used. The benefit of its use after this period remains uncertain. However this data derives from the rate of shunt infection, which is an intermediary outcome. Future trials should evaluate the effectiveness of different regimens of systemic antibiotics rather than placebo, and should include all-cause mortality, shunt revision and adverse events as additional outcomes. Evidence suggests that antibiotic-impregnated catheters reduce the incidence of shunt infection although more well-designed clinical trials testing the effect of antibiotic-impregnated shunts are required to confirm their net benefit.

Plain-language summary: Our review included randomized controlled trials that compared the incidence of shunt infection in patients who were given preventive antibiotic therapy with those who did not receive these drugs. We also included trials comparing antibiotic-impregnated shunt systems with those who received non-antibiotic impregnated shunts. We included seventeen trials in our review. Although the available data does not provide much detail on mortality or the adverse events caused by antibiotics (an adverse event is an incident in which harm resulted to a person receiving the health care) it does support the use of preventative systemic prophylactic antibiotics for the first 24 hours postoperatively following an intracranial ventricular shunt operation or the use of antibiotic-impregnated catheters. However this data was obtained from an intermediary outcome which is the rate of shunt infections. Therefore although the evidence suggests that the use of antibiotics is beneficial in reducing the incidence of shunt infection more research is needed to confirm their benefit.
Abstract: Sixteen trials, with a combined total of 3299 participants fulfilled our inclusion criteria. According to GRADE, the quality of evidence was moderate for recurrent VTE, low for major bleeding, and moderate for mortality. We downgraded the quality of the evidence for imprecision (recurrent VTE, mortality) and for risk of bias and inconsistency (major bleeding). We found no clear differences in recurrent VTE between LMWH and VKA (Peto OR 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60 to 1.15; P = 0.27; 3299 participants; 16 studies; moderate-quality evidence). We found less bleeding with LMWH than with VKA (Peto OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.80; P = 0.004; 3299 participants; 16 studies; low-quality evidence). However, when comparing only high-quality studies for bleeding, we observed no clear differences between LMWH and VKA (Peto OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.07; P = 0.08; 1872 participants; seven studies). We found no clear differences between LMWH and VKA in terms of mortality (Peto OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.56; P = 0.68; 3299 participants; 16 studies; moderate-quality evidence). Moderate-quality evidence shows no clear differences between LMWH and VKA in preventing symptomatic VTE and death after an episode of symptomatic DVT. Low-quality evidence suggests fewer cases of major bleeding with LMWH than with VKA. However, comparison of only high-quality studies for bleeding shows no clear differences between LMWH and VKA. LMWH may represent an alternative for some patients, for example, those residing in geographically inaccessible areas, those who are unable or reluctant to visit the thrombosis service regularly, and those with contraindications to VKA.

Plain-language summary: The quality of evidence for the outcomes recurrent blood clots and death was moderate. The quality of this evidence was downgraded because of the small number of events reported, leading to imprecision. For the outcome bleeding, the quality of evidence was low because of inconsistency between studies and risk of bias. Continued research into long term treatment of blood clots in the veins with LMWH and VKA is needed. This review found no clear differences in recurrent blood clots and death between LMWH and VKA, and fewer bleeding episodes with LMWH than with VKA. However, when only high-quality studies were compared for bleeding, no clear differences were observed between LMWH and VKA. LMWH may offer an alternative for some patients, for example, those in geographically inaccessible areas, those unable or reluctant to visit the thrombosis service regularly, and those for whom taking VKA may be harmful.
Abstract: Fifteen trials met the inclusion criteria. The overall methodology of all the trials assessed was either low or very low GRADE level. None of the trials were of strong to moderate GRADE level. The results showed very low level evidence that certain massage techniques (traditional Chinese massage, classical and modified strain/counterstrain technique) may have been more effective than control or placebo treatment in improving function and tenderness. There was very low level evidence that massage may have been more beneficial than education in the short term for pain bothersomeness. Along with that, there was low level evidence that ischaemic compression and passive stretch may have been more effective in combination rather than individually for pain reduction. The clinical applicability assessment showed that only 4/15 trials adequately described the massage technique. The majority of the trials assessed outcomes at immediate post-treatment, which is not an adequate time to assess clinical change. Due to the limitations in the quality of existing studies, we were unable to make any firm statement to guide clinical practice. We noted that only five of the 15 studies reported side effects. All five studies reported post-treatment pain, discomfort and soreness as a side effect and one study (Irnich 2001) showed that 22% of the participants experienced low blood pressure following treatment. No recommendations for practice can be made at this time because the effectiveness of massage for neck pain remains uncertain. As a stand-alone treatment, massage for MND was found to provide an immediate or short-term effectiveness or both in pain and tenderness. Additionally, future research is needed in order to assess the long-term effects of treatment and treatments provided on more than one occasion.

Plain-language summary: We included 15 trials in this review that assessed whether massage could help reduce neck pain and improve function. Results showed that massage is safe, and any side effects were temporary and benign. However, massage did not show a significant advantage over other comparison groups. Massage was compared with no treatment, hot packs, active range-of-movement exercises, acupuncture, exercises, sham laser, manual traction, mobilization, and education. There were a number of challenges with this review. Overall, the quality of the studies was poor and the number of participants in most trials was small. Most studies lacked a clear definition, description, or rationale for the massage technique used. Details on the credentials or experience of the person giving the massage were often missing. There was such a range of massage techniques and comparison treatments in the studies that we could not combine the results to get an overall picture of the effectiveness of massage. Therefore, no firm conclusions could be drawn and the effectiveness of massage for improving neck pain and function remains unclear.
Abstract: We included two RCTs in this review, in which 2343 participants with AMD were randomised to receive either omega 3 fatty acid supplements or a placebo. The trials, which had a low risk of bias, were conducted in the USA and France. Overall, there was no evidence that people who took omega 3 fatty acid supplements were at decreased (or increased risk) of progression to advanced AMD (pooled hazard ratio (HR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.10, high quality evidence). Similarly, people taking these supplements were no more (or less) likely to lose 15 or more letters of visual acuity (USA study HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.10; French study at 36 months risk ratio (RR) 1.25, 95% CI 0.69 to 2.26, participants = 230). The number of adverse events was similar in the intervention and placebo groups (USA study participants with one or more serious adverse event RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.09, participants = 2080; French study total adverse events RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.13, participants = 263). This review found that omega 3 LCPUFA supplementation in people with AMD for periods up to five years does not reduce the risk of progression to advanced AMD or the development of moderate to severe visual loss. No published randomised trials were identified on dietary omega 3 fatty acids for primary prevention of AMD. Currently available evidence does not support increasing dietary intake of omega 3 LCPUFA for the explicit purpose of preventing or slowing the progression of AMD.

Plain-language summary: We searched for studies up to 2 February 2015. We identified two trials with a total of 2343 participants. The trials were conducted in the USA and France and investigated the use of fish oil supplements in people with AMD who were at high risk of progressing to advanced disease. We judged the studies to be at low risk of bias. One study was funded by government grants and the other study was funded by the manufacturer of the dietary supplement. These studies found that omega 3 supplementation for periods up to five years did not reduce the rate of progression to advanced AMD or reduce significant visual loss compared to a placebo. The incidence of adverse effects was similar in the intervention and placebo groups. We judged the quality of the evidence on rate of progression to AMD to be high, and the quality of the evidence for other outcomes to be moderate because the estimates were imprecise.
Abstract: Two studies have been added for this update, which now includes six (2 adults and 4 children/adolescent) studies; these studies differed in a variety of ways including definition of asthma exacerbations, FeNO cut off levels, the way in which FeNO was used to adjust therapy and duration of study. Of 1053 participants randomised, 1010 completed the trials. In the meta-analysis, there was no significant difference between groups for the primary outcome of asthma exacerbations or for other outcomes (clinical symptoms, FeNO level and spirometry). In post-hoc analysis, a significant reduction in mean final daily dose inhaled corticosteroid per adult was found in the group where treatment was based on FeNO in comparison to clinical symptoms, (mean difference -450 mcg; 95% CI -677 to -223 mcg budesonide equivalent/day). However, the total amount of inhaled corticosteroid used in one of the adult studies was 11% greater in the FeNO arm. In contrast, in the paediatric studies, there was a significant increase in inhaled corticosteroid dose in the FeNO strategy arm (mean difference of 140 mcg; 95% CI 29 to 251, mcg budesonide equivalent/day). Tailoring the dose of inhaled corticosteroids based on exhaled nitric oxide in comparison to clinical symptoms was carried out in different ways in the six studies and found only modest benefit at best and potentially higher doses of inhaled corticosteroids in children. The role of utilising exhaled nitric oxide to tailor the dose of inhaled corticosteroids cannot be routinely recommended for clinical practice at this stage and remains uncertain.

Plain-language summary: In this review involving 1010 adults and children with asthma, we found that tailoring the dose of inhaled corticosteroids based on exhaled nitric oxide (compared to clinical symptoms with or without spirometry/peak flow) was beneficial in reducing the final (but not the overall) daily inhaled corticosteroid doses in adults. However in children inhaled corticosteroid dose was increased when exhaled nitric oxide guided strategy was used. There was no difference between groups in other asthma outcomes (exacerbations, spirometry, FeNO or symptom control). Thus tailoring the dose of inhaled corticosteroids based on exhaled nitric oxide cannot be routinely advocated.
Abstract: We included two RCTs and one non-randomized study, involving a total of 181 participants. Both RCTs were cross-over studies, one involving 19 participants with diverse neuropathic pain syndromes, the other involving 76 participants with postherpetic neuralgia. Study phases were 20 days and approximately eight weeks, respectively. The non-randomized study retrospectively evaluated 86 outpatients over an average of 8.8 ± 6.3 months. One RCT reported average pain intensity and pain relief, and found statistically significant improvements versus placebo for both outcomes, with 10 mg and 20 mg daily doses of methadone. The second RCT reported differences in pain reduction between methadone and morphine and found morphine to be statistically superior. The non-randomized study found that in patients initially prescribed methadone it was effective in fewer participants than in those initially prescribed other long-acting opioids (28% versus 42%, 33% and 50% for morphine, oxycodone and transdermal fentanyl, respectively). One RCT compared incidences for several individual adverse events, but found a difference between methadone and placebo for only one event, dizziness (P = 0.041). The three studies provide very limited evidence of the efficacy of methadone for CNCP, and there were too few data for pooled analysis of efficacy or harm, or to have confidence in the results of the individual studies. No conclusions can be made regarding differences in efficacy or safety between methadone and placebo, other opioids, or other treatments.

Plain-language summary: The three studies included in our review provide very limited evidence of the effectiveness of methadone for chronic non-cancer pain. We were unable to combine results statistically, and there were too few participants in each study to be confident in their results. No conclusions can be made regarding differences in effectiveness or side effects between methadone and placebo, other opioids, or other treatments.
Abstract: The search yielded 19 trials including 5256 patients. The addition of CSFs to chemotherapy yielded no difference in all-cause mortality at 30 days and at the end of follow up (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.18 and RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.05, respectively) or in overall survival (HR 1.00; 95% 0.93 to 1.08). There was no difference in complete remission rates (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.07), relapse rates (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.05) and disease-free survival (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.13). CSFs did not decrease the occurrence of bacteremias (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.12), nor the occurrence of invasive fungal infections (RR 1.40; 95% CI 0.90 to 2.19). CSFs marginally increased adverse events requiring discontinuation of CSFs as compared to the control arm (RR 1.33; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.56). In summary, colony-stimulating factors should not be given routinely to acute myelogenous leukemia patients post-chemotherapy since they do not affect overall survival or infectious parameters including the rate of bacteremias and invasive fungal infections.

Plain-language summary: Therefore, we conducted a systematic review assessing the influence of CSFs on disease and infection-related outcomes. Our review showed that the addition of CSFs to chemotherapy in AML patients affected neither overall survival, nor the achievement of disease remission or the rate of relapse. Importantly, they did not affect the rate of infections in this population. We concluded that CSFs post-chemotherapy should not be given routinely in AML patients. However, their administration could be considered on an individual basis.
Abstract: Over 4600 women were recruited into the 15 trials included in the review, however two trials did not contribute any outcome data to the review. The trials had a moderate risk of bias. Overall, prenatal TRH, in addition to corticosteroids, did not reduce the risk of death prior to hospital discharge (risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.27, six trials, 3694 infants), neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (average RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.22, nine trials, 3833 infants), or chronic lung disease (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.19, five trials, 2511 infants), and did not improve any of the secondary fetal, neonatal or childhood outcomes assessed by intention-to-treat analyses. Indeed, the data showed prenatal TRH to have adverse effects for women and their infants. All side effects reported (nausea, vomiting, light headedness, urgency of micturition, facial flushing) were significantly more likely to occur in women receiving TRH. In the infants, prenatal TRH increased the risk of needing respiratory support (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.29, three trials, 1969 infants), and of having a low Apgar score at five minutes (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.92, three trials, 1969 infants). Only three trials provided data on childhood follow-up, and while one trial suggested poorer outcomes for infants who were exposed to prenatal TRH, the other two trials, that assessed infants using an established developmental instrument, showed no clear differences between groups in follow-up outcomes. Sensitivity analyses by trial quality, or subgroups with differing times from entry to birth, or different dose regimens of TRH, did not change these findings. Prenatal TRH in addition to corticosteroids, given to women at risk of preterm birth, does not improve infant outcomes and can cause maternal side effects.

Plain-language summary: This review included 15 trials, of a moderate risk of bias, that involved over 4600 women and their babies. In this review, TRH, given with corticosteroids to women at risk of early birth, was not shown to further reduce the breathing difficulties for the babies. Babies born to mothers who had received TRH with corticosteroids, were more likely to require support for breathing than babies born to mothers who received only corticosteroids. Women receiving TRH were more likely to experience adverse side effects, such as nausea, vomiting and flushing than women who only received corticosteroids. Therefore, based on the current available evidence, TRH is not recommended to be given to women at risk of preterm birth for preventing neonatal respiratory disease.
Abstract: We included four trials published between 1996 to 2000 that randomized 563 children (465 evaluable) aged five months to 15 years to intermittent twice-weekly versus daily anti-TB treatment. Two trials were from India, one from South Africa, and one from Turkey. All trials used rifampicin and isoniazid, three trials used pyrazinamide, and one trial used streptomycin. The drug combination, and the duration of intermittent and daily treatments differed between trials, and no trials used drug combinations and schedules currently recommended for childhood TB. No trial reported if any child was HIV-positive. In comparisons of twice-weekly versus daily anti-TB treatment regimens, the trials did not detect differences in the number of patients cured, but trials were small, and the comparator regimens were not standard (four trials, 465 children; very low quality evidence). Trials were underpowered to provide estimates for death (two trials, 213 participants, very low quality evidence), relapse (one trial, 214 participants,very low quality evidence), and treatment limiting adverse events (four trials, 441 participants, very low quality evidence) Reported adherence to treatment was similar (87% versus 84%; four trials, 458 children, very low quality evidence) We did not find trials comparing the commonly used thrice-weekly anti-TB short-course regimen with the daily treatment regimen. Trials conducted to date are insufficient to support or refute the use of intermittent twice- or thrice-weekly, short-course treatment regimens over daily short-course treatment in children with TB. Further randomized trials conducted in high TB-transmission settings will help inform policy and practice.

Plain-language summary: In this Cochrane review, the review authors compared children given intermittent anti-TB treatment to those given daily treatment. They examined the evidence up to 30 May 2013 and included four randomized trials that compared twice-weekly treatment with daily doses of anti-TB drugs, but none evaluated thrice-weekly dosing. The four trials included 563 children aged five months to 15 years, not known to be resistant to TB drugs. The trials were published over 12 years ago and the regimens used are not those currently recommended. The trials were small, and did not detect a difference between twice-weekly or daily treatment in the number of children who were cured, died, relapsed, reported taking most or all of the drugs, or had adverse effects. Whether regimens of drugs two or three times a week are as good as regimens with daily doses remains unclear, as the evidence base to date is small, and the regimens tested are not the same as currently currently recommended drug combinations.