GEM/cochrane-simplification huggingface dataset:
Abstract: Two small randomised controlled trials were located, one with higher dose NaHCO3 and alternating allocation, the other with lower dose NaHCO3 was presented in abstract form only. In the higher dose study, the RR of death in patients receiving NaHCO3 compared to controls was 0.52 (95% CI 0.05 to 5.39) and the WMD for total dose of atropine was -36.1 (95% CI -68.43 to -3.77). No clinical benefits from lower dose NaHCO3 were noted. Six other studies were identified but none satisfied inclusion criteria; three studies were uncontrolled and three were controlled. NaHCO3 was used in each study to induce alkalinisation. Marked heterogeneity between subjects and treatments was noted - for example, varying regimens of NaHCO3. Preliminary studies suggest benefit from blood alkalinisation with NaHCO3 in OP poisoning, but there is insufficient evidence to support its routine clinical use. Further research is required to determine the method of alkalinisation that will optimise outcomes, and the regimen which will produce the target arterial pH of 7.50 (range 7.45 to 7.55). This should be followed by a well-designed randomised controlled trial to determine efficacy.

Plain-language summary: The review authors looked for studies in which such chemicals were given to OP poisoned patients, to see how effective the treatment is. They sought randomised controlled trials, a type of research study in which one group of patients is given one treatment, while a similar group (the control group) is given a different treatment. The authors found eight studies but only two small randomised controlled trials, one using higher dose sodium bicarbonate and the other a lower dose. Only the trial using higher dose sodium bicarbonate, which included 53 participants, showed a slight benefit from using sodium bicarbonate in conjunction with standard treatment for OP poisoning. This study does not provide enough evidence to recommend routine clinical use of sodium bicarbonate. There are hundreds of different kinds of OPs so treatment may vary based on the type of poisoning as well as the severity of the poisoning. More research needs to be done to determine the best treatment for poisoning with OPs in various situations.
Abstract: We included only one small pilot study (involving 30 women). The study, which we considered to be at low risk of bias, was conducted in a tertiary referral hospital in Australia, and involved women with cephalic, singleton pregnancies. The primary outcome was operative delivery (instrumental delivery or caesarean section). In the manual rotation group, 13/15 women went on to have an instrumental delivery or caesarean section, whereas in the control group, 12/15 women had an operative delivery. The estimated risk ratio was 1.08 (95% confidence interval 0.79 to 1.49). There were no maternal or fetal mortalities in either group There were no clear differences for any of the secondary maternal or neonatal outcomes reported (e.g. perineal trauma, analgesia use duration of labour). In terms of adverse events, there were no reported cases of umbilical cord prolapse or cervical laceration and a single case of a non-reassuring or pathological cardiotocograph during the procedure. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to determine the efficacy of prophylactic manual rotation early in the second stage of labour for prevention of operative delivery. One additional study is ongoing. Further appropriately designed trials are required to determine the efficacy of manual rotation.

Plain-language summary: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register and other databases for clinical trials comparing manual rotation with expectant management (waiting), speeding up of labour or operation. The women were at term (at least 37 weeks of pregnancy). The results are current to October 2014. We found only one small pilot trial involving 30 women that assessed the feasibility of manual rotation versus routine care (no manual rotation). The study reported no clear difference for the review's primary outcomes of operative delivery (vacuum-assisted delivery or forceps delivery (or both), or caesarean section) and no mother or baby deaths. In terms of adverse events, there were no reported cases of umbilical cord prolapse or cervical laceration and a single case of a non-reassuring or pathological cardiotocograph during the procedure. Further research is needed to assess the effect of manual rotation in second stage of labour to reduce operative delivery rates. We considered the study at low risk of bias but it did not have sufficient participants to detect important clinical benefits or harms of manual rotation to correct the baby's position in second stage of labour.
Abstract: A single study of 21 patients compared SIRT and systemic chemotherapy (fluorouracil and leucovorin) with chemotherapy alone. There was a significant improvement in progression free survival and median survival associated with SIRT, both for the total studied population and for those disease limited to the liver. There was an increase in toxicity with the use of SIRT. A second study of 63 eligible patients compared SIRT and regional chemotherapy (floxuridine) with regional chemotherapy alone. There was no significant difference in progression free survival and median survival seen with SIRT, in either the total patient group or in the 22 patients with disease limited to the liver. There was no significant increase in toxicity with the addition of SIRT to regional chemotherapy. There were no randomised studies comparing SIRT with best supportive care in patients with refractory disease, and no randomised studies assessing the effect of SIRT in patients with resectable liver metastases. There is a need for well designed, adequately powered phase III trials assessing the effect of SIRT when used with modern combination chemotherapy regimens. Further studies are also needed for patients with refractory disease with a particular focus on the impact on quality of life.

Plain-language summary: In one study that had 21 participants, radioactive beads (injected into the blood vessels of the liver) given with chemotherapy (into the veins of the arm) was more effective at controlling the cancer and improving how long people lived than chemotherapy given on it's own. However, in this study more people who received the radioactive beads suffered from side effects and this study used an older type of chemotherapy that is less effective than the newer treatments that are now available. In a second study with 63 participants, radioactive beads were given with chemotherapy that was injected directly into the blood vessels of the liver. In this study there was no extra benefit in the control of cancer growth or survival for those participants who received radioactive beads in addition to the chemotherapy. More studies are needed with a particular focus on whether radioactive beads provides extra benefit when given with newer chemotherapy treatments, and if radioactive beads provide benefit when given on their own.
Abstract: We included five RCTs evaluating the effects of social skills groups in 196 participants with ASD aged 6 to 21 years old. The results show there is some evidence that social skills groups improve overall social competence (ES = 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16 to 0.78, P = 0.003) and friendship quality (ES = 0.41, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.81, P = 0.04) for this population. No differences were found between treatment and control groups in relation to emotional recognition (ES = 0.34, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.88, P = 0.21) assessed in two studies or social communication as related to the understanding of idioms (ES = 0.05, 95% CI -0.63 to 0.72, P = 0.89), which was assessed in only one study. Two additional quality of life outcomes were evaluated, with results of single studies suggesting decreases in loneliness (ES = -0.66, 95% CI -1.15 to -0.17) but no effect on child or parental depression. No adverse events were reported. Given the nature of the intervention and the selected outcome measures, the risk of performance and detection bias are high. There is limited generalizability from the studies as they were all conducted in the US; they focused mainly on children aged 7 to 12, and the participants were all of average or above average intelligence. There is some evidence that social skills groups can improve social competence for some children and adolescents with ASD. More research is needed to draw more robust conclusions, especially with respect to improvements in quality of life.

Plain-language summary: This review synthesized the results of five randomized controlled trials of social skills groups including 196 individuals with autism spectrum disorders (aged 6 to 21 years). We found individuals receiving treatment showed some indications of improved social competence and better friendships when compared with those not receiving treatment. Participants receiving treatment also showed indications of less loneliness. The ability to recognize different emotions was measured in two studies and there was no evidence that it was improved by taking part in a social skills group. Social communication as it relates to idiomatic expressions was only reported in one study and no significant differences between treatment and control group were found. Nor was there evidence of a beneficial effect of social skills groups on parental or child depression. No adverse effects were reported in the studies. Limitations of this review include a small number of studies and participants, and a high risk of bias due to parents knowing whether their child was in the intervention group or not. The studies focused mainly on children with ASD aged 7 to 12 with average or above average intelligence, and they were all carried out in the US.
Abstract: Nineteen studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria.  Most patients in the studies had neurogenic OAB, but some included patients with idiopathic OAB.  All studies demonstrated superiority of botulinum toxin to placebo.  Lower doses of botulinum toxin (100 to 150 U) appeared to have beneficial effects, but larger doses (300 U) may have been more effective and longer lasting, but with more side effects.  Suburothelial injection had comparable efficacy to intradetrusor injection. The effect of botulinum toxin may last for a number of months and is dependent upon dose and type of toxin used. Patients receiving repeated doses do not seem to become refractory to botulinum toxin. Botulinum toxin appeared to have beneficial effects in OAB that quantitatively exceeded the effects of intravesical resiniferatoxin. Intravesical botulinum toxin appeared to be reasonably safe; however, one study was halted due to a perceived unacceptable rate of urinary retention. Intravesical botulinum toxin appears to be an effective therapy for refractory OAB symptoms, but as yet little controlled trial data exist on benefits and safety compared with other interventions, or with placebo. Further robust data are required on long term outcomes, safety, and optimal dose of botulinum toxin for OAB.

Plain-language summary: We found that there were several comparative studies, but these involved a relatively small number of patients. There was evidence that botulinum toxin improves the symptoms of OAB. It was unclear what the best dose of botulinum toxin was. Botulinum toxin injections into the bladder appeared to give few side effects or complications, but there were no long-term follow-up studies, and there could be rare side effects that have not been discovered yet.
Abstract: In total, the search identified 2102 records, of which we reviewed 144 in full text. We included eight studies. Four interventions focused on patient–caregiver dyads and four were aimed specifically at the caregiver. Heterogeneity of populations and methodologies precluded meta-analysis. Risk of bias varied, and all studies included only small numbers of neuro-oncology caregivers (13 to 56 participants). There was some evidence for positive effects of caregiver support on psychological distress, mastery, and quality of life (low to very low certainty of evidence). No studies reported significant effects on caregiver burden or quality of patient–caregiver relationship (low to very low certainty of evidence). None of the studies assessed caregiver physical functioning. For secondary outcomes (patient emotional or physical well-being; health economic effects), we found very little to no evidence for the effectiveness of caregiver support. We identified five ongoing trials. The eight small-scale studies included employed different methodologies across different populations, with low certainty of evidence overall. It is not currently possible to draw reliable conclusions regarding the effectiveness of supportive interventions aimed at improving neuro-oncology caregiver well-being. More high-quality research is needed on support for family caregivers of people diagnosed, and living, with a brain or spinal cord tumour.

Plain-language summary: We included eight clinical studies. Four studies reported on interventions for patient–caregiver relationship and four studies were aimed specifically at improving caregiver well-being. We found five ongoing studies. The interventions tested were diverse in nature (e.g. cognitive behavioural therapy (talking therapy); psychoeducation (providing education and information to people seeking or receiving mental health services); coping skills training; self-management; social network intervention); and delivery (e.g. face-to-face; web-based), and all studies were relatively small (included between 13 and 56 neuro-oncology caregivers). We found some evidence for positive effects of caregiver support on psychological distress, feelings of mastery (i.e. the feeling of being in control of the caregiving situation), and quality of life. None of the studies reported effects on caregiver burden or quality of patient–caregiver relationship. None of the studies measured caregiver physical well-being. Overall, the certainty of the evidence was low to very low, which means the true effect of caregiver support may be substantially different. Our findings suggest it is not currently possible to draw definitive conclusions about the effectiveness of supportive interventions to improve neuro-oncology caregiver well-being. More high-quality research is needed on support for family caregivers of patients diagnosed, and living, with a brain or spinal cord tumour.
Abstract: Only seven studies were included. Major methodological limitations such as small trial size and large confidence intervals decreased the power of the studies to detect differences between treatments, and meta-analysis of data was not possible for the majority of outcomes. Four placebo-controlled trials did not find evidence that antidepressants improved weight gain, eating disorder or associated psychopathology. Isolated findings, favouring amineptine and nortriptyline, emerged from the antidepressant versus antidepressant comparisons, but cannot be conceived as evidence of efficacy of a specific drug or class of antidepressant in light of the findings from the placebo comparisons. Non-completion rates were similar between the compared groups. A lack of quality information precludes us from drawing definite conclusions or recommendations on the use of antidepressants in acute AN. Future studies testing safer and more tolerable antidepressants in larger, well designed trials are needed to provide guidance for clinical practice.

Plain-language summary: The aim of the present review was to evaluate the evidence from randomised controlled trials for the efficacy and acceptability of antidepressant treatment in acute AN. Seven small studies were identified; four placebo-controlled trials did not find evidence of efficacy of antidepressants in improving weight gain, eating disorder or associated symptoms, as well as differences in completion rates. Meta-analysis of data was not possible for most outcomes. However, major methodological limitations of these studies (e.g. insufficient power to detect differences) prevent from drawing definite conclusions or recommendations for antidepressant use in acute AN. Further studies testing safer antidepressants in larger and well designed trials are needed to guide clinical practice.
Abstract: From 71 papers describing IQCODE test accuracy, we included 1 paper, representing data from 230 individuals (n=16 [7%] with dementia). The paper described those patients consulting a primary care service who self-identified as Japanese-American. Dementia diagnosis was made using Benson & Cummings criteria and the IQCODE was recorded as part of a longer interview with the informant. IQCODE accuracy was assessed at various test thresholds, with a "trade-off" between sensitivity and specificity across these cutpoints. At an IQCODE threshold of 3.2 sensitivity: 100%, specificity: 76%; for IQCODE 3.7 sensitivity: 75%, specificity: 98%. Applying the QUADAS-2 assessments, the study was at high risk of bias in all categories. In particular degree of blinding was unclear and not all participants were included in the final analysis. It is not possible to give definitive guidance on the test accuracy of IQCODE for the diagnosis of dementia in a primary care setting based on the single study identified. We are surprised by the lack of research using the IQCODE in primary care as this is, arguably, the most appropriate setting for targeted case finding of those with undiagnosed dementia in order to maximise opportunities to intervene and provide support for the individual and their carers.

Plain-language summary: We searched differing databases of published research for all papers relating to the accuracy of IQCODE for detecting dementia. We found only one study that tested diagnostic accuracy of IQCODE in a primary care/general practice setting. The study was of a select population (Japanese Americans) and the results may not be applicable to patients in other countries. We also noted issues in the study methods used and the reported results. Based on this single study we are unable to give guidance on how well IQCODE may function as a dementia assessment in primary care. More research is needed in this area as many patients with memory or thinking problems will first consult their general practitioner / family doctor.
Abstract: One randomised trial involving 14 preterm infants was included. There was no evidence of a clear difference between the fat-supplemented and unsupplemented groups in in-hospital rates of growth in weight (MD 0.6 g/kg/day, 95% CI −2.4 to 3.6; 1 RCT, n = 14 infants, very low-quality evidence), length (MD 0.1 cm/week, 95% CI −0.08 to 0.3; 1 RCT, n = 14 infants, very low-quality evidence) and head circumference (MD 0.2 cm/week, 95% CI −0.07 to 0.4; 1 RCT n = 14 infants, very low-quality evidence). There was no clear evidence that fat supplementation increased the risk of feeding intolerance (RR 3.0, 95% CI 0.1 to 64.3; 1 RCT, n = 16 infants, very low-quality evidence). No data were available regarding the effects of fat supplementation on long-term growth, body mass index, body composition, neurodevelopmental, or cardio-metabolic outcomes. The one included trial suggests no evidence of an effect of fat supplementation of human milk on short-term growth and feeding intolerance in preterm infants. However, the very low-quality evidence, small sample size, few events, and low precision diminishes our confidence that these results reflect the true effect of fat supplementation of human milk in preterm infants, and no long-term outcomes were reported. Further high-quality research should evaluate the effect on short and long-term growth, neurodevelopmental and cardio-metabolic outcomes in the context of the development of multicomponent fortifiers. Optimal dosage, adverse effects, and delivery practices should also be evaluated.

Plain-language summary: We included one trial with very low-quality evidence and involving 14 preterm infants. The search is up to date as of February 2018. Addition of extra fat to human milk for preterm infants showed no clear benefits with regards to short-term rates of weight gain, length gain, and head growth. There was no evidence that the extra fat increased the risk of feeding intolerance. No data were available regarding the effects of addition of extra fat on long-term growth, body fat, obesity, high blood sugar, or brain development. There were also limited data to assess side effects. There was insufficient high-quality evidence on the benefits and harms of the addition of extra fat to human milk in preterm infants, and no long-term outcomes have been reported. Since addition of extra fat to human milk is currently done as part of multi-nutrient fortification, future trials should evaluate the effect of the fat component on short- and long-term growth, body fat, obesity, high blood sugar, or brain development. The right amount and composition of extra fat needed, side effects, and delivery practices should also be evaluated.
Abstract: Four studies were included involving 640 primary care physicians and more than 6400 patients. There was considerable variation in study setting and the range of outcomes measured. FFS resulted in more primary care visits/contacts, visits to specialists and diagnostic and curative services but fewer hospital referrals and repeat prescriptions compared with capitation. Compliance with a recommended number of visits was higher under FFS compared with capitation payment. FFS resulted in more patient visits, greater continuity of care, higher compliance with a recommended number of visits, but patients were less satisfied with access to their physician compared with salaried payment. It is noteworthy that so few studies met the inclusion criteria. There is some evidence to suggest that the method of payment of primary care physicians affects their behaviour, but the findings' generalisability is unknown. More evaluations of the effect of payment systems on PCP behaviour are needed, especially in terms of the relative impact of salary versus capitation payments.

Plain-language summary: This review examined the impact of different payment systems on primary care physician behaviour. Three payment systems were included: capitation (payment is made for every patient for whom care is provided), salary, and fee for service (payment is made for every item of care provided). There was some evidence that primary care physicians provide a greater quantity of primary care services under fee for service payment compared with capitation and salary, although long-term effects are unclear. There was no evidence, however, concerning other important outcomes such as patient health status, or comparing the relative impact of salary versus capitation payment.