GEM/cochrane-simplification huggingface dataset:
Abstract: We included 29 trials involving 2612 participants. Twenty-eight trials involved patients undergoing surgery and one trial involved patients with epistaxis (nosebleed). Tranexamic acid (TXA) reduced blood loss by 29% (pooled ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 0.72; P < 0.0001). There was uncertainty regarding the effect on death (risk ratio (RR) 0.28, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.34; P = 0.11), myocardial infarction (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.08; P = 0.33), stroke (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.96; P = 0.49), deep vein thrombosis (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.57; P = 0.38) and pulmonary embolism (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.09 to 3.15; P = 0.48). TXA reduced the risk of receiving a blood transfusion by a relative 45% (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.46; P < 0.0001). There was substantial statistical heterogeneity between trials for the blood loss and blood transfusion outcomes. There is reliable evidence that topical application of tranexamic acid reduces bleeding and blood transfusion in surgical patients, however the effect on the risk of thromboembolic events is uncertain. The effects of topical tranexamic acid in patients with bleeding from non-surgical causes has yet to be reliably assessed. Further high-quality trials are warranted to resolve these uncertainties before topical tranexamic acid can be recommended for routine use.

Plain-language summary: This review looked at trials assessing the effects of topical tranexamic acid in patients who are bleeding. Twenty-nine trials were found; 28 involved patients bleeding during operations and one involved people with nosebleeds. When the results of these trials were gathered together they showed that when tranexamic acid was given topically, it reduced the amount of blood that patients lost and made it less likely that they had a blood transfusion. The authors of this review concluded that topical tranexamic acid reduces bleeding in patients who are having an operation. But because there are no trials, we are not sure if it also reduces bleeding from other causes, such as childbirth or bleeding from stomach ulcers.
Abstract: Nineteen trials, of which two were newly included in this update, involving 3044 participants, were included. There was considerable variation in the types of implants and techniques used for both internal fixation and arthroplasty in the included trials. The risk of selection bias was low in just three trials, unclear in 13 trials and high in the three quasi-randomised trials. Just three trials reported assessor blinding of functional outcomes. Length of surgery, operative blood loss, need for blood transfusion and risk of deep wound infection were significantly less for internal fixation compared with arthroplasty. Fixation had a significantly higher re-operation rate in comparison with arthroplasty (40% versus 11%; risk ratio 3.22, 95% CI 2.31 to 4.47, 19 trials). No definite differences for hospital stay, mortality, or regain of pre-injury residential state were found. Limited information from some studies suggested pain was less and function was better for a cemented arthroplasty in comparison with fixation. Internal fixation is associated with less initial operative trauma but has an increased risk of re-operation on the hip. Definite conclusions cannot be made for differences in pain and residual disability between the two groups. Future studies should concentrate on better reporting of final outcome measures and function. There is still a need for studies to define which patient groups are better served by the different treatment methods.

Plain-language summary: Nineteen trials, of which two were newly included in this update, involving 3044 participants, were included in this review. Some trials had weak methods, which required a more cautious interpretation of their results. There were many different types of devices and methods used to place these devices for both treatments in the included trials. We found that each treatment has its own specific complications. Realigning the bones and fixing the fracture (reduction and internal fixation) is a shorter operation with less blood loss. However, people having internal fixation are more likely to need another operation than those treated with joint replacement (40% versus 11%). The reason for this is mainly from a failure of the bone to heal in those cases treated with fixation. No definite differences were found between the two treatment groups in the numbers of patients who had died by various follow-up times. People who had a replacement with an artificial hip joint that was fixed in place with cement seemed to have less residual pain and better function related to using the hip than those whose fracture was fixed. There is not enough evidence to be sure whether fixation of the bone or replacement with an artificial hip is best for treating fractures of the thigh bone near the hip joint.
Abstract: We included 13 studies evaluating 19 interventions from high-income countries (HICs). At update stage (from our 2015 search), one previously included study was removed and three new studies added (since our 2012 search). We found no sufficiently robust evaluations conducted in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Study quality overall was low and measurements used by studies variable. Participants were classified as drop-in and shelter-based. No studies measured the primary outcome of reintegration and none reported on adverse effects.We found no consistent results on a range of relevant outcomes within domains of psychosocial health, substance misuse and sexually risky behaviours . Interventions evaluated consisted of time-limited therapeutically based programmes that proved no more effective than standard shelter or drop-in services and other control interventions used for most outcomes in most studies. Favourable changes from baseline were reported for outcomes for most participants following therapy interventions and standard services. We noted considerable heterogeneity between studies and inconsistent reporting of equity data. No studies measured the primary outcome of reintegration or reported on adverse effects. Analysis revealed no consistently significant benefit for focused therapeutic interventions compared with standard services such as drop-in centres, case management and other comparable interventions for street-connected children and young people. Commonly available services, however, were not rigorously evaluated. Robust evaluation of interventions, including comparison with no intervention, would establish a more reliable evidence base to inform service implementation. More robust research is needed in LMICs to examine interventions for street-connected children and young people with different backgrounds and service needs.

Plain-language summary: Thirteen studies have rigorously evaluated 19 interventions such as services to support street-connected children and youth - all in high-income countries. Most have compared therapy-based services versus usual shelter and drop-in services, or versus other therapeutic/health interventions. We found mixed results among these studies but overall findings suggesting that participants receiving therapy and those provided usual services benefited to a similar level. Future research should consider the benefits of usual drop-in and shelter services, most particularly in low- and middle-income countries, and should focus on street-connected children and young people. None of the studies included participants comparable with street children in low-income countries, who may be on the street primarily to earn a living, or as a result of war, migration or urbanisation. Overall we assessed the quality of the evidence included in this review as low/moderate.
Abstract: Six trials involving 1740 children were included. There was no significant reduction in mortality associated with pneumonia in children treated with vitamin A compared to those who were not (pooled odds ratio (OR) 1.29; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 2.66). Also, there was no statistically significant difference in duration of hospital stay (mean difference (MD) 0.08; 95% CI -0.43 to 0.59). Disease severity after supplementary high-dose vitamin A was significantly worse compared with placebo. However, low-dose vitamin A significantly reduced the recurrence rate of bronchopneumonia (OR 0.12; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.46). Moderate vitamin A significantly reduced the time to remission of signs in children with normal serum retinol (> 200 ug/L). The evidence does not suggest a significant reduction in mortality, measures of morbidity, nor an effect on the clinical course of pneumonia with vitamin A adjunctive treatment in children with non-measles pneumonia. However, not all studies measured all outcomes, which limited the number of studies that could be incorporated into the meta-analyses, so that there may have been a lack of statistical power to detect statistically significant differences.

Plain-language summary: We found six trials (1740 participants) that used vitamin A adjunctive therapy in children with non-measles pneumonia. There was no significant reduction in mortality or duration of hospital stay. Supplementary high-dose vitamin A may result in a worsening of the disease, and low-dose vitamin A significantly reduces the recurrence of bronchopneumonia. Moderate-dose vitamin A significantly reduces the time to remission of signs in children with normal serum retinol. The possible reason of the lack of benefit of vitamin A in non-measles pneumonia is that the effects of vitamin A may be disease-specific, with vitamin A only being effective when pneumonia is complicated with measles. Further high-quality research is required.
Abstract: We included nine RCTs with 1069 participants, describing 37 comparisons: six were NSAIDs versus placebo and three were NSAIDs versus NSAIDs. The overall risk of bias in the included studies was mixed. In a pooled analysis, NSAIDs did not significantly reduce the total symptom score (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -1.03 to 0.24, three studies, random-effects model), or duration of colds (MD -0.23, 95% CI -1.75 to 1.29, two studies, random-effects model). For respiratory symptoms, cough did not improve (SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.66 to 0.56, two studies, random-effects model) but the sneezing score significantly improved (SMD -0.44, 95% CI -0.75 to -0.12, two studies, random-effects model). For outcomes related to the analgesic effects of NSAIDs (headache, ear pain, and muscle and joint pain) the treatment produced significant benefits. The risk of adverse effects was not high with NSAIDs (RR 2.94, 95% CI 0.51 to 17.03, two studies, random-effects model) but it is difficult to conclude that such drugs are no different from placebo. The quality of the evidence may be estimated as 'moderate' because of imprecision. The major limitations of this review are that the results of the studies are quite diverse and the number of studies for one result is quite small. NSAIDs are somewhat effective in relieving the discomfort caused by a cold but there is no clear evidence of their effect in easing respiratory symptoms. The balance of benefit and harms needs to be considered when using NSAIDs for colds.

Plain-language summary: The evidence is current to April 2015. This review found nine studies (1069 participants of both genders, including children, adults and older people from the USA, Japan, Belgium and Denmark) that compared various NSAIDs either with each other or with an inactive substance that has no treatment value (placebo). Our findings suggest that NSAIDs may improve most analgesia-related symptoms caused by the common cold (headache, ear pain, and muscle and joint pain), but there is no clear evidence that NSAIDs are effective in improving coughs and runny noses caused by the common cold. Some of the included trials reported gastrointestinal complaints, rash and oedema (fluid retention) in the NSAIDs group. The quality of the evidence may be estimated as 'moderate' because of imprecision. The major limitations of this review are that the results of the studies are quite diverse and the number of studies for each outcome is quite small. NSAIDs are somewhat effective in relieving the discomfort caused by a cold but there is no clear evidence of their effect in easing respiratory symptoms. The balance of benefit and harms needs to be considered when using NSAIDs for colds.
Abstract: A comprehensive search of the literature yielded the following results: CENTRAL (1022 references), MEDLINE (2874 references), and Embase (2820 references). After de-duplication, we screened titles and abstracts of 4880 references and excluded 4864 that did not meet the review inclusion criteria. Of the 16 references that potentially met the review inclusion, we excluded all 16 reports after reviewing the full texts. We did not identify any ongoing trials. There is currently an absence of evidence to indicate the effectiveness of health education interventions involving healthcare providers or individuals or both to promote early presentation and referral for women with endometrial cancer symptoms. High-quality RCTs are needed to assess whether health education interventions enhance early presentation and referral. If health education interventions can be shown to reduce treatment delays in endometrial cancer, further studies would be required to determine which interventions are most effective.

Plain-language summary: We planned to include randomised controlled trials (studies in which people or groups of people are allocated by chance to two or more groups, treating them differently). In the absence of randomised controlled trials, we planned to include studies where participants were not randomised but that included an assessment of the benefits of health education compared to no health education. We searched scientific databases and checked the titles and abstracts of 4880 possibly relevant articles and assessed the full text of 16 of these references. However, we found no studies that met our inclusion criteria. There is currently an absence of evidence to indicate whether providing health education to healthcare providers, or individuals or both, promotes early presentation and referral for women with symptoms of endometrial cancer.
Abstract: We included one trial, which was judged to be at high risk of performance, detection and attrition bias. The 117 participants with a root-filled, premolar tooth restored with a carbon fibre post, were randomised to either a full coverage metal-ceramic crown or direct adhesive composite restoration. None experienced a catastrophic failure (i.e. when the restoration cannot be repaired), although only 104 teeth were included in the final, three-year assessment. There was no clear difference between the crown and composite group and the composite only group for non-catastrophic failures of the restoration (1/54 versus 3/53; RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.04 to 3.05) or failures of the post (2/54 versus 1/53; RR 1.96; 95% CI 0.18 to 21.01) at three years. The quality of the evidence for these outcomes is very low. There was no evidence available for any of our secondary outcomes: patient satisfaction and quality of life, incidence or recurrence of caries, periodontal health status, and costs. There is insufficient evidence to assess the effects of crowns compared to conventional fillings for the restoration of root-filled teeth. Until more evidence becomes available, clinicians should continue to base decisions about how to restore root-filled teeth on their own clinical experience, whilst taking into consideration the individual circumstances and preferences of their patients.

Plain-language summary: We searched the medical literature until 26 March 2015. This review includes one study with 117 participants in which a tooth (117 premolars) received a carbon fibre post, and was restored with either a fused porcelain to metal crown or a routine white filling. The study was of short duration (three years), included a relatively small number of participants, and was assessed to be at a high risk of bias due to missing results for people who dropped out of the study. The evidence produced from one study concluded that none of the 117 root-filled premolars experienced a catastrophic failure (i.e. one that cannot be repaired) after three years, although only 104 teeth were included in the final, three-year assessment. The study concluded there was no difference between treatments for the risk of non-catastrophic failure. There was no evidence available for any of our secondary outcomes: patient satisfaction and quality of life, incidence or recurrence of decay, periodontal health status, and costs. The quality of the evidence is very low. As there is only a single study, which is at high risk of bias, there is insufficient reliable evidence to determine whether single crowns are better than routine fillings. Future research should aim to provide more reliable information that can help clinicians to decide on appropriate treatment whilst taking into consideration the individual circumstances and preferences of their patients.
Abstract: In total 437 eligible women were randomised to receive high dose chemotherapy with autograft and 413 were randomised to receive conventional treatment. There were fifteen treatment-related deaths among the high dose group and two in the control (conventional dose) group (RR 4.08, 95% CI 1.40 to 11.93). There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival between the high dose and control groups at three years or five years. At five years of follow up, there was a statistically significant difference in event-free survival, favouring the high dose group (RR 2.84, 95% CI 1.07 to 7.50). Toxicity was more severe in the high dose group. Only one of the trials has followed up all women for five years. Although there is evidence that high dose chemotherapy and autograft significantly improves event-free survival compared to conventional chemotherapy in women with metastatic breast cancer there is no significant evidence of benefit in overall survival. High dose chemotherapy with bone marrow or stem cell transplantation should not be given to women with metastatic breast cancer outside of clinical trials.

Plain-language summary: This review identified six randomised trials including 437 women receiving high dose chemotherapy with autograft and 413 women receiving conventional chemotherapy treatment. In the group receiving the high dose chemotherapy, there were 15 treatment-related deaths as opposed to two in the conventional chemotherapy arm. Although the high-dose treatment did not increase overall survival at 5 years compared with conventional treatment, women on the high-dose treatment survived significantly longer before experiencing recurrence of cancer. Treatment side-effects were worse in the high-dose group. On the basis of this review, the authors conclude that high dose chemotherapy with bone marrow or stem cell transplantation should not be given to women with metastatic breast cancer outside of clinical trials.
Abstract: We included five randomized trials (208 participants, 104 in the intervention group and 104 in the control group). Interventions ranged from three to six months. Four trials reported results in non-Asian populations published in English. One trial reported results in Chinese people published in Chinese. Overall, the risk of bias of included trials was high or unclear. There were no outcome data on death from any cause, morbidity, complications, health-related quality of life and costs. Two trials reported adverse effects, including gastrointestinal discomfort (bloating and constipation) and an increased number of hot flushes. None of the trials found serious adverse events. There was a slight significant effect on triglycerides in favour of isoflavones when compared with placebo (mean difference (MD) -0.46 mmol/L (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.84 to -0.09; P = 0.02; 52 participants; 2 trials). No statistically significant effects on total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol were shown in favour of isoflavones. We found no evidence for effects of isoflavones on patient-important outcomes or lowering of cholesterol levels in people with hypercholesterolaemia. Our findings have to be interpreted with caution due to high or unclear risk of bias in several risk of bias domains, and low number of participants in trials.

Plain-language summary: To assess the effects of isoflavones for the treatment of hypercholesterolaemia, we examined five randomized controlled trials of isoflavones or soy protein containing isoflavones. The trials lasted three to six months and involved 208 participants. There were no outcome data on death from any cause, cardiovascular events such as heart attack or stroke, morbidity, complications, health-related quality of life and costs. Two trials reported adverse effects, including gastrointestinal discomfort (bloating and constipation) and an increased number of hot flushes. They observed no serious adverse events. In our included studies, we found no cholesterol-lowering effect of isoflavones. However, the quality of the included trials had some considerable limitations and the number of the participants was low. Further higher-quality and rigorously performed studies on patient-important outcome measures such as cardiovascular diseases and health-related quality of life are required.
Abstract: We included 24 trials involving 23,748 participants. The quality of the trials varied considerably. The anticoagulants tested were standard unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparins, heparinoids, oral anticoagulants, and thrombin inhibitors. Over 90% of the evidence relates to the effects of anticoagulant therapy initiated within the first 48 hours of onset. Based on 11 trials (22,776 participants) there was no evidence that anticoagulant therapy started within the first 14 days of stroke onset reduced the odds of death from all causes (odds ratio (OR) 1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98 to 1.12) at the end of follow-up. Similarly, based on eight trials (22,125 participants), there was no evidence that early anticoagulation reduced the odds of being dead or dependent at the end of follow-up (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.04). Although early anticoagulant therapy was associated with fewer recurrent ischaemic strokes (OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.65 to 0.88), it was also associated with an increase in symptomatic intracranial haemorrhages (OR 2.55; 95% CI 1.95 to 3.33). Similarly, early anticoagulation reduced the frequency of symptomatic pulmonary emboli (OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.44 to 0.81), but this benefit was offset by an increase in extracranial haemorrhages (OR 2.99; 95% CI 2.24 to 3.99). Since the last version of the review, no new relevant studies have been published and so there is no additional information to change the conclusions. Early anticoagulant therapy is not associated with net short- or long-term benefit in people with acute ischaemic stroke. Treatment with anticoagulants reduced recurrent stroke, deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, but increased bleeding risk. The data do not support the routine use of any of the currently available anticoagulants in acute ischaemic stroke.

Plain-language summary: This systematic review was designed to find out whether people treated with anticoagulants soon after having a stroke got better or not, and whether they had problems with bleeding. There is a lot of information in this systematic review - 23,748 people with stroke have been involved in 24 included randomised trials to answer this question. People treated with anticoagulants did not have less long-term disability, and experienced more bleeding. Anticoagulant treated patients had less chance of developing blood clots in their legs and in their lungs following their stroke, but these benefits were offset by the increased number of bleeds. This review did not provide any evidence that the early use of anticoagulants is of overall benefit to people with strokes caused by blood clots. More research is needed to find out if there are ways to select the people with stroke who will benefit from anticoagulants without suffering the bleeding complications.