GEM/cochrane-simplification huggingface dataset:
Abstract: Ten RCTs with 1378 women were identified. Of the seven RCTs on group psychological interventions, three were on cognitive behavioural therapy and four were on supportive-expressive group therapy. The remaining three studies were individual based and the types of psychological interventions were not common to either cognitive behavioural or supportive-expressive therapy. A clear pattern of psychological outcomes could not be discerned as a wide variety of outcome measures and durations of follow-up were used in the included studies. The overall effect of the psychological interventions across six studies, on one-year survival, favoured the psychological intervention group with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.46 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.99). Pooled data from four studies did not show any survival benefit at five-years follow-up (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.42 to 2.52). There was evidence of a short-term benefit for some psychological outcomes and improvement in pain scores. Psychological interventions appear to be effective in improving survival at 12 months but not at longer-term follow-up, and they are effective in reducing psychological symptoms only in some of the outcomes assessed in women with metastatic breast cancer. However, findings of the review should be interpreted with caution as there is a relative lack of data in this field, and the included trials had reporting or methodological weaknesses and were heterogeneous in terms of interventions and outcome measures.

Plain-language summary: This review examined the studies to date to see what effect psychological treatments had on women with metastatic breast cancer. We found 10 studies with a total of 1378 women with metastatic breast cancer. Three of the studies used a psychological treatment known as cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), four studies used supportive-expressive group therapy (SEGT), while the remaining three studies used treatments that were delivered on an individual basis and were neither CBT nor SEGT. We performed statistical analysis and found that the odds ratio (a measure of association between an intervention and an outcome) for survival of women with metastatic breast cancer one year after receiving psychological treatment was 1.46, suggesting that there was an association between the psychological treatment and improved survival. This finding was not found when looking at the odds ratio of survival at five years. We also found some evidence that psychological treatments in the short term (for example, one year) may produce a small reduction in pain and improve some psychological symptoms. However, making comparisons across these studies was difficult as they differed in their conduct, treatments and measures used. Moreover, we cannot rule out that the psychological treatments could also cause psychological harm.
Abstract: Eight trials evaluated ursodeoxycholic acid versus placebo or no intervention (592 patients). The eight randomised clinical trials have a high risk of bias. Patients were treated for three months to six years (median three years). The dosage of ursodeoxycholic acid used in the trials ranged from low (10 mg/kg body weight/day) to high (28 to 30 mg/kg body weight/day). Ursodeoxycholic acid did not significantly reduce the risk of death (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.46 to 2.20); treatment failure including liver transplantation, varices, ascites, and encephalopathy (RR 1.22; 95% CI 0.91 to 1.64); liver histological deterioration (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.45 to 1.74); or liver cholangiographic deterioration (RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.23 to 1.57). Ursodeoxycholic acid significantly improved serum bilirubin (MD -14.6 µmol/litre; 95% CI -18.7 to -10.6), alkaline phosphatases (MD -506 IU/litre; 95% CI -583 to -430), aspartate aminotransferase (MD -46 IU/litre; 95% CI -77 to -16), and gamma-glutamyltranspeptidase (MD -260 IU/litre; 95% CI -315 to -205), but not albumin (MD -0.20 g/litre; 95% CI -1.91 to 1.50). Ursodeoxycholic acid was safe and well tolerated by patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. We did not find enough evidence to support or refute the use of bile acids in the treatment of primary sclerosing cholangitis. However, bile acids seem to lead to a significant improvement in liver biochemistry. Therefore, more randomised trials are needed before any of the bile acids can be recommended for this indication.

Plain-language summary: Based on eight randomised clinical trials of high risk of bias, the administration of ursodeoxycholic acid to patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis did not significantly reduce mortality, hepatic decompensation, need for liver transplantation, liver histological deterioration, or radiological deterioration compared with placebo or no intervention. The use of ursodeoxycholic acid showed a statistically significant improvement of liver biochemistry. However, evidence of these beneficial effects is weak as it is produced from trials with high risk of bias and a rather small number of patients. Furthermore, these observations are at risk of outcome measure reporting bias as half or less than half of the trials reported on these outcomes. One trial assessed the self-estimated quality of life of patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis treated with ursodeoxycholic acid. No significant difference was found in any of the studied components, physical as well as mental. Based on an analysis of six of the eight included trials, the use of ursodeoxycholic acid seemed safe and well tolerated, without reports of serious adverse events. We were unable to identify trials evaluating other bile acids for patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Accordingly, the evidence does neither support nor refute bile acids for primary sclerosing cholangitis.
Abstract: Eight controlled trials (seven placebo controlled and one trial against an active treatment) with a total of 664 participants met the inclusion criteria. Three studied adverse effects of radiotherapy, three studied adverse effects of chemotherapy and two studied menopausal symptoms associated with breast cancer treatment. Two studies with low risk of bias demonstrated benefit: one with 254 participants demonstrated superiority of topical calendula over trolamine (a topical agent not containing corticosteroids) for prevention of radiotherapy-induced dermatitis, and another with 32 participants demonstrated superiority of Traumeel S (a proprietary complex homeopathic medicine) over placebo as a mouthwash for chemotherapy-induced stomatitis. Two other studies reported positive results, although the risk of bias was unclear, and four further studies reported negative results. No serious adverse effects or interactions were reported attributable to the homeopathic medicines used. This review found preliminary data in support of the efficacy of topical calendula for prophylaxis of acute dermatitis during radiotherapy and Traumeel S mouthwash in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced stomatitis. These trials need replicating. There is no convincing evidence for the efficacy of homeopathic medicines for other adverse effects of cancer treatments. Further research is required.

Plain-language summary: This review looked at whether these medicines could help patients with problems caused by cancer treatments. Eight studies with a total of 664 participants were included in this review. Three studied adverse effects of radiotherapy, three studied adverse effects of chemotherapy and two studied menopausal symptoms associated with breast cancer treatment. Two studies with low risk of bias demonstrated benefit: one with 254 participants demonstrated benefits from calendula ointment in the prevention of radiotherapy-induced dermatitis, and another with 32 participants demonstrated benefits from Traumeel S (a complex homeopathic medicine) over placebo as a mouthwash for chemotherapy-induced stomatitis. These trials need replicating. Two other studies reported positive results, although the risk of bias was unclear, and four further studies reported negative results. The homeopathic medicines used in all eight studies did not seem to cause any serious adverse effects or interact with conventional treatment. No cancer treatments were modified or stopped because of the homeopathic interventions.
Abstract: We did not identify any new trials from the updated search so the results remain unchanged as follows. We included 13 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a total of 1551 women. We found no differences for admission to the neonatal intensive care unit when betamimetics were compared with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68 to 2.41; two RCTs of terbutaline with 2600 women) or with magnesium (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.46; one RCT of 137 women). The rate of preterm birth (less than 37 weeks) showed no significant difference in six RCTs, four comparing ritodrine with placebo/no treatment and two comparing terbutaline with placebo/no treatment (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.35; 644 women). We observed no differences between betamimetics and placebo, no treatment or other tocolytics for perinatal mortality and morbidity outcomes. Some adverse effects such as tachycardia were more frequent in the betamimetics groups than the groups allocated to placebo, no treatment or another type of tocolytic. Available evidence does not support the use of oral betamimetics for maintenance therapy after threatened preterm labour.

Plain-language summary: Oral betamimetics for maintenance therapy after threatened preterm labour do not prevent preterm labour. This conclusion is based on 13 randomised controlled trials with a total of 1551 women. In this review, the betamimetics ritodrine and terbutaline did not reduce the rate of preterm birth (eight trials), or prevent problems with babies that required admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (two trials), when compared with placebo, no treatment or other tocolytic drugs. Betamimetics may cause pregnant women to have an increased heart rate (palpitations) and rate of breathing, low blood pressure, nausea and vomiting, and high blood sugar concentrations as side effects.
Abstract: Three trials involving two different interventions were included. Two trials involving 680 children compared flushing CVC with urokinase (with or without heparin) versus heparin alone. Neither of these trials reported on the primary outcome of catheter-related blood stream infection (CRBSI). There was a non-significantly decreased rate of catheter-associated infection (CAI) (Rate Ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.12 to 4.41) in the urokinase (with or without heparin) arm compared with the heparin arm. One trial involving 113 children compared frequency of catheter dressing change every 15 days versus every 4 days. It did not report on CRBSI or CAI. There were no premature catheter removals for infection in either of the trial arms. Three RCTs for only two types of interventions to prevent CVC-related infections in children with cancer have been identified. Flushing CVC with urokinase (with or without heparin) compared to heparin alone possibly leads to decrease in CAI rates. Changing catheter dressings every 15 days versus every 4 days does not lead to more premature catheter removals due to infection although data were insufficient to assess if catheter-related infection rates were changed.

Plain-language summary: A total of three research studies were identified. Two studies showed that there may be a decrease in CVC-related blood infections if the space in the CVC was washed and filled at regular intervals with urokinase (a drug which dissolves blood clots) with/without heparin (a drug which prevents the formation of blood clots) compared to heparin alone. One study showed that changing the dressing which covered the skin at the insertion of CVC every 15 days rather than every 4 days did not lead to an increased removal of the CVC because they had become infected. No research studies were identified for several other potential strategies which could reduce CVC-related infections in children with cancer.
Abstract: We included 21 trials involving 4174 participants. Nine trials used a combination of venesection and plasma volume expander. Twelve trials used plasma volume expander alone. The plasma volume expander was plasma alone in one trial, dextran 40 in 12 trials, hydroxyethyl starch (HES) in five trials and albumin in three trials. Two trials tested haemodilution in combination with another therapy. Evaluation was blinded in 14 trials. Five trials probably included some participants with intracerebral haemorrhage. Haemodilution did not significantly reduce deaths within the first four weeks (risk ratio (RR) 1.10; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.34). Similarly, haemodilution did not influence deaths within three to six months (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.20), or death and dependency or institutionalisation (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.07). The results were similar in confounded and unconfounded trials, and in trials of isovolaemic and hypervolaemic haemodilution. No statistically significant benefits were documented for any particular type of haemodiluting agents, but the statistical power to detect effects of HES was weak. Six trials reported venous thromboembolic events. There was a tendency towards reduction in deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism or both at three to six months' follow-up (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.37 to 1.24). There was no statistically significant increased risk of serious cardiac events among haemodiluted participants. The overall results of this review showed no clear evidence of benefit of haemodilution therapy for acute ischaemic stroke. These results are compatible with no persuasive beneficial evidence of haemodilution therapy for acute ischaemic stroke. This therapy has not been proven to improve survival or functional outcome.

Plain-language summary: We identified 21 trials involving 4174 adult, male and female participants with presumed acute ischaemic stroke. The evidence is current to February 2014. Many trials followed participants for at least three to six months. Interventions included isovolaemic regimens (replacing a portion of blood volume with fluid) and hypervolaemic regimens (increasing the total volume of blood by adding fluid) using different types of solutions. This review showed that, when all the studies are taken together, there is no clear evidence of benefit from haemodilution. There is also no clear evidence that any particular mode of haemodilution, with or without blood-letting, using various types of haemodiluting agents, etc, is beneficial. There were no significant serious side effects of this treatment. It is concluded that there is no clear scientific support for the use of haemodilution in the routine treatment of people with acute ischaemic stroke. The overall quality of the evidence was moderate as individual trials were of varying quality. There was little variation among trials.
Abstract: A total of 131 studies with 10,514 randomised participants are now included. Overall only 8% of these studies were assessed as being at low risk of bias. Ten interventions, where there was more than one trial in the meta-analysis, showed some statistically significant evidence of a benefit (albeit sometimes weak) for either preventing or reducing the severity of mucositis, compared to either a placebo or no treatment. These ten interventions were: aloe vera, amifostine, cryotherapy, granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), intravenous glutamine, honey, keratinocyte growth factor, laser, polymixin/tobramycin/amphotericin (PTA) antibiotic pastille/paste and sucralfate. Ten interventions were found to have some benefit with regard to preventing or reducing the severity of mucositis associated with cancer treatment. The strength of the evidence was variable and implications for practice include consideration that benefits may be specific for certain cancer types and treatment. There is a need for further well designed, and conducted trials with sufficient numbers of participants to perform subgroup analyses by type of disease and chemotherapeutic agent.

Plain-language summary: Different strategies are used to try and prevent this condition, and the review of trials found that some of these are effective. Two interventions, cryotherapy (ice chips) and keratinocyte growth factor (palifermin®) showed some benefit in preventing mucositis. Sucralfate is effective in reducing the severity of mucositis, and a further seven interventions, aloe vera, amifostine, intravenous glutamine, granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), honey, laser and antibiotic lozenges containing polymixin/tobramycin/amphotericin (PTA) showed weaker evidence of benefit. These were evaluated in patients with different types of cancer, undergoing different types of cancer treatment. Benefits may be restricted to the disease and treatment combinations evaluated.
Abstract: Six randomized controlled trials were included (total 162 participants, age range 7 to 53 years).  Pimozide was compared with: placebo and haloperidol (two trials), placebo (one trial), haloperidol (one trial), and risperidone (two trials). Methodological quality was rated ‘fair’ for all studies. Studies used different outcome measurement scales for assessing tic severity and adverse effects. Significant clinical heterogeneity made meta-analysis inappropriate. Pimozide was superior to placebo in three studies, though it caused more side effects than placebo in one of these. Pimozide was inferior to haloperidol in one of three studies (the other two showed no significant difference between the drugs), which also showed significantly fewer side effects associated with pimozide. No significant differences between pimozide and risperidone were detected. Pimozide is an effective treatment for tics in Tourette Syndrome, though the number of trials comparing its effect to placebo and other drugs is limited. Trials of longer duration (minimum six months) are needed to investigate the longer-term effects of pimozide compared to atypical neuroleptics.  Future trials should use the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale to assess the main outcome measure, and quantify adverse events with the Extrapyramidal Symptoms Rating Scale.

Plain-language summary: The review authors searched the medical literature for clinical trials that compared pimozide to other drugs, or a dummy drug (placebo), for treating tics in patients with Tourette Syndrome. The trials identified showed that pimozide was more effective at reducing tics than placebo. It was slightly less effective than the drug haloperidol, but showed fewer side effects. There were no important differences between pimozide and risperidone for either reduction of tics or side effects. In future, if trials could be run for longer, it would help the investigation of the nature of side effects caused by these drugs.
Abstract: Nine studies of 3449 participants were included. The rate of exchange transfusion was reduced in one study with liberal transfusion criteria (risk ratio (RR) 0.20; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 to 0.31) but not in the other two more recent studies with stringent criteria (typical RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.19 to 2.28). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of cerebral palsy (typical RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.50 to 1.85; two studies, 756 participants). However, one large study that reported on neurodevelopmental impairment (a composite outcome including cerebral palsy) found a slightly lower rate of neurodevelopmental impairment with prophylactic phototherapy (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.99; 1804 participants). The prophylactic phototherapy group had lower peak bilirubin levels (mean difference (MD) -2.73; 95% CI -2.89 to -2.57; six studies, 2319 participants) and had fewer neonates with peak unconjugated serum bilirubin levels > 10 mg/dl (typical RR 0.27; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.33; three studies, 1090 participants) or peak unconjugated serum bilirubin levels > 15 mg/dl (typical RR 0.13; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.23; four studies, 1116 participants). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of all-cause mortality between the two groups (typical RR 1.08; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.26; four studies, 3044 participants). Prophylactic phototherapy helps to maintain a lower serum bilirubin concentration and may have an effect on the rate of exchange transfusion and the risk of neurodevelopmental impairment. However, further well-designed studies are needed to determine the efficacy and safety of prophylactic phototherapy on long-term outcomes including neurodevelopmental outcomes.

Plain-language summary: In this review we evaluated the efficacy and safety of prophylactic phototherapy in preventing jaundice in preterm or LBW infants. A total of nine clinical trials representing 3449 infants were included. The findings suggest that phototherapy initiated soon after birth (within 36 hours) for preterm or low birth weight infants may prevent the serum bilirubin from reaching a level that would require exchange transfusion and may reduce the risk of impairment of brain and central nervous system development. However, further well-designed studies are needed to evaluate the effects of prophylactic phototherapy on brain and central nervous system development and other long-term outcomes.
Abstract: Eleven trials that involved 3435 patients were identified. Of 3435 patients, 52 patients were randomised more than once for different painful bone metastasis sites. Altogether, 3487 painful sites were randomised. The trials included patients with painful bone metastases of any primary sites, but were mainly prostate, breast and lung. The overall pain response rates for single fraction radiotherapy and multifraction radiotherapy were 60% (1059/1779) and 59% (1038/1769) respectively, giving an odds ratio of 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89 to 1.19) indicating no difference between the two radiotherapy schedules. There was also no difference in complete pain response rates for single fraction radiotherapy (34% [497/1441]) and multifraction radiotherapy (32% [463/1435]) with an odds ratio of 1.11 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.30). Patients treated by single fraction radiotherapy had a higher re-treatment rate with 21.5% (267/1240) requiring re-treatment compared to 7.4% (91/1236) of patients in the multifraction radiotherapy arm (odds ratio 3.44 [95% CI 2.67 to 4.43]). The pathological fracture rate was also higher in single fraction radiotherapy arm patients. Three percent (37/1240) of patients treated by single fraction radiotherapy developed pathological fracture compared to 1.6% (20/1236) for those treated by multifraction radiotherapy (odds ratio 1.82 [95% CI 1.06 to 3.11]). The spinal cord compression rates were similar for both arms (odds ratio 1.41 [95% CI 0.72 to 2.75]). Repeated analyses excluding dropout patients gave similar results. Single fraction radiotherapy was as effective as multifraction radiotherapy in relieving metastatic bone pain. However, the retreatment rate and pathological fracture rates were higher after single fraction radiotherapy. Studies with quality of life and health economic end points are warranted to find out the optimal treatment option.

Plain-language summary: This review compares whether a single fraction of radiotherapy is better than multifractions of radiotherapy for alleviating the symptoms associated with tumours that have spread to the bone. Eleven randomised trials were identified in the published literature that compared single versus multifraction radiotherapy for bone metastases. Pooled analysis of these trials suggested that single fraction radiotherapy was as effective as multifraction radiotherapy in controlling bone pain. However, there were more bone fractures in patients treated by single fraction radiotherapy, and they received further treatment sessions more often than those receiving multifraction radiotherapy.