Tuesday, March 15, 2022

婦人科がん患者に対する手術後の周術期回復強化プログラム 背景 婦人科領域のがんは、罹患率と死亡率が著しく高い。婦人科がんの治療では、腹腔鏡（鍵穴手術）または開腹による手術療法が最も重要な治療法の一つである。手術後の回復には、十分に計画された周術期医療（手術時またはその前後のケア）が不可欠である。 近年、複数の研究者や医師により、従来の周術期医療の多くの側面が不要であり、有害でさえあるのではないかと指摘されている。たとえば、経口下剤や浣腸を使用すると、脱水症状が起きるうえに、術前のナトリウム、カリウム、カルシウム値が異常になる可能性がある。術後の回復強化（ERAS）プログラムは、手術のストレスを軽減し、従来の周術期医療の有害な面を避けることを目的としており、さまざまな分野の手術、特に消化器外科の手術に徐々に導入されている。ERASプログラムは、手術後の回復を助け、入院期間を短縮し、患者本人を大きな危険にさらすことなく病院経費を節約できる可能性がある。しかし、婦人科がんの患者に対するERASプログラムの効果はあまり知られていない。本レビューは、婦人科がん治療での周術期のERASプログラムの有益性と有害性を評価することを目的とする。 研究の特性 中国語および英語のデータベースを検索し（2020年10月現在まで）、子宮頸がん、子宮体がん、卵巣がん、子宮内膜がんを含む婦人科がんの女性747...

腹腔鏡手術時に腹腔内に送気する各種の気体について レビューの論点 腹腔鏡手術（鍵穴手術）で臓器への手術操作を容易にすることを目的とした、腹腔（お腹の中の空間）の気腹（気体で膨らますこと）に用いる各種気体の有益性および有害性は何か。 背景 現在、腹腔鏡手術は広くさまざまな腹部疾患の治療に用いられている。手術に必要な空間や視野を確保するために、腹腔内に送気する理想的な気体は安価で無色、引火性および爆発性がなく、体内から容易に排出され、患者および手術スタッフへの害が皆無のものである。この条件から、現在は二酸化炭素が最も多く使用されている。しかし、二酸化炭素の使用は心臓や肺の合併症を引き起こす可能性がある。そこで、二酸化炭素の代替となる他の気体が提案されている。 研究の特徴 2021年10月までの関連する全研究を検索した。 参加者583人を対象とした臨床試験10件を特定した。そのうちの3件（260人）は亜酸化窒素（笑気ガス）と二酸化炭素の比較、5件（177人）はヘリウムと二酸化炭素の比較、1件（146人）は室内気と二酸化炭素の比較であった。研究は、米国、オーストラリア、中国、フィンランド、イラン、オランダで実施された。試験参加者の平均年齢は19歳から62歳であった。 研究の資金源 対象となった10件の研究のうち、2件は非営利的な助成金による資金提供を受けていた。残りの8件の資金源は明記さ...

Monday, March 14, 2022

The inaugural Harding Prize for Useful and Trustworthy Communication has been jointly won by the ONS Covid Infection Survey and the Cochrane Review of Hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19.

The Winton Centre at the University of Cambridge launched the Harding Prize this year to celebrate individuals or teams who had communicated information in a trustworthy and useful way - that genuinely helped people decide what to do, or help them judge a decision made by others. The award was run in association with Sense About Science and the Science Media Centre, and is supported by Sir David Harding. The organisers wanted to draw attention to the unsung task of 'informing and not persuading' and celebrate those who were doing it well.

The Harding Prize aims to encourage evidence to be presented in a balanced, non-manipulative way, open to talking about pros and cons, and about uncertainties, designed to help the audience make up their own mind on a subject – not to lead them to the conclusions that the communicator wants them to draw.

Dr Bhagteshwar Singh, and his co-authors of the Cochrane Review, published by the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group said:  “We are honoured to receive this award. Our aim was to provide clinicians, policymakers and the public with a balanced, trustworthy, and clear account of the potential benefits and harms of hydroxychloroquine when used for COVID-19. This award confirms that our review was communicated clearly and transparently, which we are thrilled to hear.”

The organisers bought together an illustrious judging panel, comprising:

• Helen Boaden (Chair): previously Director of BBC News.
• Professor Sir Jonathan Van-Tam: Deputy Chief Medical Officer for England
• Baroness Onora O’Neill: philosopher and presenter of 2002 Reith Lectures on ‘A Question of Trust’
• Fraser Nelson: Editor, Spectator
• Helen Jamison: previously Deputy Director of the Science Media Centre.

The judges made the following comments about Cochrane as a joint winner:

As with all its projects, the Cochrane review worked to internationally agreed methodology and prioritised high quality (randomised) evidence. This particular review was a summary of the evidence for the use of hydroxychloroquine in treating Covid-19. Using clear language, it communicated straightforwardly and with balance that that there was no benefit to hydroxychloroquine which outweighed the side effects and that trials of it should be stopped. That decision was then made. 

This subject may seem minor in the UK where treatment by hydroxychloroquine was never a big part of medical discussion. However, many millions of people around the world, especially in the USA and Brazil, were encouraged by their leaders to take this treatment seriously. 

The panel felt that just as the ONS survey was the bedrock of accurate information about Covid-19 infection rates in the UK, the Cochrane approach delivered rigorous, trustworthy and balanced reviews of scientific papers communicated with clarity and directness. Such reviews enabled policy makers, journalists and the public to discuss and make decisions based on the best evidence. 

Helen Boaden, Chair of the judging panel, commented: “It's never been more important for the public and policy makers to have access to the best possible evidence before they make significant decisions for themselves or others. Both our winners set the gold standard  for clearly communicating accurate, trustworthy, transparent data without frills or spin. The panel is delighted to jointly award them the inaugural Harding Prize.”

Professor Sir David Spiegelhalter, Chair of the Winton Centre, said: “The panel considered many fine examples, and we are delighted with the examples that they chose. We had intended to have a booby, ‘weasel words’ prize for untrustworthy communication dressed up as an unbiased source. There were many possible candidates, particularly in social media and in scientific pre-prints that had not gone through any peer review. But we finally decided that it would be inappropriate to highlight, and indeed publicise, such poor practice, and instead chose to focus on the positive efforts people have made. The Royal Society’s recent report makes clear that online misinformation is best tackled, not through censorship, but by encouraging a diverse media, independent fact-checking, careful monitoring, and education.”

Tracey Brown, director of Sense about Science, said: “Statistics are the currency of public life. They are how we can describe the world and debate what is getting worse or better, and never more so than during the pandemic. We are so pleased to support the Harding prize in celebrating the individuals who have sought to equip people with the means to be part of those debates."

Fiona Fox, Chief Executive of the Science Media Centre, said: “These are fantastic winners. The brilliant thing about the ONS survey is that it was communicated independently from the government communications machine so that the media and the public got to see the numbers every week free from government messaging.  And in the middle of an ‘infodemic’ where 1000s of scientific papers of variable quality were circulating, Cochrane’s high quality review summarising where the best evidence lay on a much-hyped treatment undoubtedly saved lives.”

Emma Rourke, Director of health analysis and pandemic insight at ONS, said: :The Covid Infection Survey has required the skill and perseverance of a large and multi-talented team. At our core has been the need to communicate such an important and sensitive issue accurately to a diverse audience, and be trusted to do so. We are delighted with this award, and are gratified that the information we have provided has proved valuable to expert users and influential on policy, but also understood clearly by the public."

• Read the full Cochrane Review Chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine for prevention and treatment of COVID‐19
• Learn more about Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group
• Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine Press Release

Monday, March 14, 2022 Category: The difference we make

A new Cochrane Library editorial has published 'Protecting human health in a time of climate change: how Cochrane should respond.' 

Researchers and methodologists have an important contribution to make to the response to climate change, by producing and synthesizing evidence relevant to climate-health impacts. While Cochrane has identified climate change as a key issue in its strategic plans, this editorial explores how to translate that high-level awareness into action and what work is needed.

This webinar recording  from Denise Thomson, founder and convenor of the Cochrane Climate-Health Working Group, explains the group’s work and why they believe that evidence synthesis and knowledge translation are so important in tackling climate change. 

• Read the  Cochrane Library Editorial
• Visit the Cochrane Climate-Health Working Group

Wednesday, March 30, 2022

Cochrane US and Lifeology hosted an International Women's Day themed #sciart challenge. The two winning designs have been selected and added to the Cochrane Store. 

For International Women’s Day (IWD) on March 8th, Cochrane hosted several free events, including an art and graphic challenge with Cochrane US and Lifeology to illustrate the theme of IWD for 2022: #BreakTheBias. The art or graphic had to be related to healthcare and/or evidence synthesis.

Two amazing designs were selected and we spoke to the artists to learn more about the meaning behind the designs. 

This pen and ink piece has to do with the personal geographies of women navigating their own bodies, health science, and economic access within what seems at times like an ocean wave or radio wave of fluidity. It represents the collaborative of women, building on each other's successes, and rising to higher peaks of understanding.

Shauna Lee Lange is the founder of Steam Creatives. She is an artist, analyst, and advisor with over 30 years experience in creative industries and government regulatory oversight. In 2005, she combined work in both fields to concentrate on a range of activities from self-taught professional artist, curator, and show producer to inside art influencer in the global art market. The digital component of her expert art advisory services known as Metaverse Watchdogs tracks the NFT, NFT art, crypto art, and blockchain art spaces. Steam Creatives was born out of a need to find a home for art that centered on visual communication within science and technology. Lange makes her home on Central California's coast, a place of much untouched natural beauty. You can view more of Shauna's work on the Steam Creatives website:  https://steamcreatives.com/

Three women from diverse backgrounds strike the "Break the Bias pose". Each of the women are stacked on top of one another so their crossed arms form the crossings of a double helix. The rest of the DNA strands are filled with small science-themed doodles coloured in black.

Abbey Morris is a recent graduate from the Master of Science Communication program at Laurentian University in Canada. She loves science communication because it allows her to bridge her interests in art, science, and social justice. Abbey strives to make scicomm a more equitable, diverse, and inclusive space for people to share their passion for science in creative and engaging ways. You can find more of Abbey's work on her website: https://abbeymor.wixsite.com/home 

Lina Cellante is a medical biotechnologist currently cutting her teeth in the medical writing world. In her previous life she was a researcher dealing with drug delivery and nanoparticles to fight brain cancer. During the years spent in the lab, she felt a growing need to better communicate her daily work and to find a way to interact more effectively with other scientists. After her Master's degree, she graduated in Journalism and Science communication and worked at the European Commission as a scientific communication officer. She has always been passionate about writing and her interests are nutrition, its positive influence on body health and mind, and how to make the most out of the technology we have to stimulate curiosity and convey positive messages. You can find more of Lina's work on her Lifeapp space: https://lifeapps.io/author/healthbites/

These designs are now available for a limited time in the Cochrane Store - on totes, t-shirts, and mugs! 

Friday, March 25, 2022

医療機関に通院中のHIV持続感染者の高ウイルス量を検出するベッドサイドの迅速検査 高HIVウイルス量を検出する診断技術を改善することがなぜ重要なのか？ それは、抗レトロウイルス療法（ART）を受けているHIV持続感染者（PLHIV）のHIVウイルス量を監視するのに役立つ。高ウイルス量は薬でウイルスを抑えることができていないことを示し、ART治療無効状態である。この状態では重症化や死亡の危険性がある。患者を診察するベッドサイド（point-of care）で素早くHIVウイルス量を検査できるベッドサイドの迅速診断検査は、必要時にARTの早期変更を可能にする。 レビューの目的 医療機関に通院するPLHIVにおいて、高HIVウイルス量診断のためのベッドサイドの迅速検査（POC）の精度を明らかにする。 検討した内容 ウイルス量を検出するための迅速検査の測定結果と中央検査室における検体検査（基準となる検査）の測定結果を比較した。検査を実施した医療機関にかかわらず、ウイルス量を測定するすべての種類のベッドサイドの迅速検査を対象とした。 主な結果 8,659人の参加者を含む20の比較評価を完遂した14件の研究においては、臨床的に推奨する閾値、1000コピー/mL以上で高ウイルス量陽性と診断する分子学的現場検査を比較していた。 レビューの強みと限界 このレビューには、HIV/AIDSケアセンター...

Wednesday, March 9, 2022

吸入コルチコステロイドは、軽度のCOVID-19の人に有効な治療法なのか？ 要点 経口の吸入経路で投与される吸入コルチコステロイド（抗炎症薬）が新型コロナウイルス感染症（COVID-19）の治療薬として評価されている。 軽症者を対象に実施して、発表された3件の研究を特定した。吸入コルチコステロイドは、おそらく、病院に行く、または死亡（入院や入院前の死亡）に対するリスクを減少させる。吸入コルチコステロイドは、軽度のCOVID-19の症状がある日数を減らす可能性があり、おそらく14日目のCOVID-19の症状を消失させる。あらゆる原因による死亡にはわずかから全く差がない可能性があり、重大な害を引き起こすかどうかを知るには十分なエビデンスがない。 症状のない（無症状）COVID-19患者、中等症から重症のCOVID-19患者のデータは存在しない。 10件の進行中の研究と4件の終了した未発表の研究が特定された。その結果が発表され次第、本レビューを更新する予定である。 吸入コルチコステロイドとは何か？ 吸入コルチコステロイドは、吸入器を使って下気道に吸入することで、肺の炎症を抑える薬である。この薬は、喘息や慢性閉塞性肺疾患などの呼吸器系疾患の治療に通常は使用される。長期間の使用や誤った吸入方法によって、鵞口瘡と呼ばれる口の感染症、声の変化、肺炎のリスク増加などの副作用が発生することがある。...

A statement from Cochrane's Governing Board: 

"Ukraine situation: Cochrane is an independent, diverse, global organization that collaborates to produce trusted synthesized evidence, make it accessible to all, and advocate for its use. Our guiding principles include participation, collaboration and access.   We endorse peace, and share the World Health Organization's concern for the health of those affected.

Cochrane and Wiley provide one-click free access to the Cochrane Library for Ukraine via IP recognition. There is also full text access available through a partnership with Research4Life for Refugee Camps recognized by UNRWA or categorized by UNHCR as 'planned/managed camps.'"

 

Tuesday, March 8, 2022

With the new feature of including PICO terms on review pages, you will be able to find the most relevant Cochrane evidence to answer your research or clinical question.

One way to construct a well-built question is to use the PICO model. PICO stands for Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes. 

• Population (or Patient or Problem) What are the characteristics of the patient or population – for example condition?
• Intervention What is the intervention under consideration for this patient or population – for example a drug or surgical intervention?
• Comparison What is the alternative to the intervention ¬– for example a different drug or a placebo?
• Outcome What are the relevant outcomes – for example quality of life or adverse events?

Cochrane's Information Specialists and Data Curation Specialists have annotated the PICO terms of Cochrane Reviews using the Cochrane Vocabulary.

"Adding PICO summaries to Cochrane reviews will make Cochrane evidence more accessible and increase its use in health and care decisions, which is part of Cochrane’s mission.” says Cochrane’s Editor in Chief, Dr Karla Soares-Weiser.

PICO Search
You can already use PICO Search to find reviews in which the search term is used as a Population, Intervention, Comparison, or Outcome. For example, PICO Search enables you to find reviews which consider Diabetes specifically as a Population component or alternativity as an Outcome component, therefore enabling you to search with precision on the PICO terms which are of specific interest.

PICO at-a-glance
Every Cochrane Review from 2015 onwards will now have the PICO terms listed under the abstract. This PICO overview helps ensure you find the most relevant Cochrane evidence to answer your research or clinical question. You will also be able to click on the individual PICO terms to see search results for all our Reviews tagged with that PICO term. 

“We worked directly with users of the Cochrane Library to learn about what improvements they wanted and how we could improve their journey on the site” said Rachel Craven, Head of Cochrane Library. “Having PICO terms expertly annotated in Cochrane Reviews can help answer your research and clinical questions – we’re excited to see them now prominently placed below each Cochrane Abstract.”

• Explore Cochrane Review on the Cochrane Library 
• How to conduct a PICO Search
• Conduct a PICO Search

Wednesday, March 16, 2022

高齢者の生活の質を向上させるための住宅介護における物理的環境デザイン このレビューの目的は何か 世界的に高齢者の人口が増加し、認知症の患者が増加している。生活空間のデザインを改善することで、高齢者のQOL(生活の質）、気分、日常生活動作の能力が向上する可能性が示唆されている。このレビューは、住宅介護におけるさまざまな物理的環境デザインの変更が、入居者の生活の質（QOL）に及ぼす影響を検討した。この疑問に関連するすべての研究を収集し、分析した結果、20件の研究を特定した。 要点 住宅介護における設計変更による入居者のQOL向上の効果については、より質の高い研究が必要な状況であり、確信が持てない。 レビューでは何が検討されたか？ このレビューでは、QOL（生活の質）向上を目的とした住宅介護における物理的な環境デザインの変更について検討した。それは、大規模な変更である場合もあれば、小規模な変更の場合もある。大規模な変更としては、現在使われている居住区間設計から、少人数で共同生活する家庭的な設計に変更するなどの変更が考えられる。小規模な変更としては、生活空間の改装や、照明など生活空間の一部分を変更することがある。我々は、住宅介護における異なる大規模または小規模の設計変更を比較、あるいは設計変更を現在使われている居住区間設計と比較し、設計変更が入居者のQOL(生活の質）、行動、日常生活動作...

76% of new guidelines issued by WHO referenced Cochrane reviews in 2021.

Cochrane’s status as a non-governmental organization (NGO) in official relations with the World Health Organization (WHO) was recently renewed at WHO’s Executive Board meeting.

The official relation status enables us to join and make statements at key WHO meetings as a non-voting participant. This includes the World Health Assembly (WHA), WHO’s decision-making body, which is attended by representatives of all Member States, and is a key forum to advocate for evidence-informed health policies.

The renewal is also underpinned by a new joint plan of work for the next three years. Activities in the plan include:

• Providing relevant evidence synthesis and methodological support for consideration in the development of new WHO guidelines, the Essential Medicines List and other guidance
• Supporting WHO with training in the interpretation of evidence synthesis
• Contributing to activities which facilitate the use of evidence in policymaking at national, regional and global levels
• Collaboration on areas of mutual interest, including on essential medicines and diagnostics; research integrity; healthy ageing; reproductive health and nutrition

WHO is a key partner for Cochrane. This relationship enables us to provide input on the way research evidence is identified, synthesized, assessed and used by WHO – and ultimately contribute to improved health for all.

Use of Cochrane evidence in WHO guidance: in figures

Cochrane has been in official relations with WHO since 2011. As of 1 February 2022, 732 reviews from 47 Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs) have been used to inform 251 WHO accredited guidelines and other evidence-based recommendations.

In 2021, 76% of new WHO guidelines were informed by evidence from Cochrane reviews. A total of 78 reviews from 16 different CRGs are referenced.

Cochrane reviews have also been used in WHO’s COVID-19 technical guidance. Last year, a total of 13 reviews were used across 20 of WHO’s COVID-19 publications.

Cochrane is proud to be a core partner of the Evidence Collaboration on COVID-19 (ECC-19), coordinated by the WHO Science Division. We were also delighted that WHO was a co-sponsor of Cochrane Convenes and we hope to collaborate further in taking forward some of the recommendations in the resulting Call to Action.

A community effort

The relationship with WHO is supported by the efforts of many members of the Cochrane community. Thank you to everyone who has contributed to this ongoing, impactful work. Particular thanks also go to Emma Carter and Anne Eisinga at Cochrane UK for their work in charting how Cochrane reviews are used in WHO guidelines and other technical guidance.

For more information on the work that Cochrane does with WHO, please get in touch with Emma Thompson, Cochrane’s Advocacy and Partnerships Manager.

Read our statements made at recent major WHO events

• Cochrane makes statement to special session of the World Health Assembly
• Cochrane’s statement to the 74th World Health Assembly
• Cochrane statement to the 148th WHO Executive Board meeting on strengthening global emergency preparedness

Wednesday, March 9, 2022

Friday, March 4, 2022

分娩時の定期的な内診 レビューの論点 このコクラン・レビューの目的は、分娩進行を評価するための定期的な内診が有効で、女性に受け入れられるものなのかを調べることと、これらをその他の分娩進行の評価法と比較することである。 重要性 分娩は通常、予想通りに進行しているか、母体や赤ちゃんに害となるような異常な進行の兆候がないかを確認するために監視される。最も一般的な方法は定期的な（一定の間隔ごとに行う）内診であり、母体の子宮頸管の開き具合や赤ちゃんの位置についての情報が得られる。非常にゆっくりとした進行の分娩は、出産を早めるための介入（分娩促進）が必要であることを示す兆候である可能性がある。しかしながら、ゆっくりな分娩進行が正常な進行のバリエーションである可能性もあり、近年のエビデンスからは母体と赤ちゃんが元気であれば、分娩の所要時間や子宮頸管の開き具合だけで分娩の進行が正常かどうかを決めるべきでないことが示唆されている。 その他の分娩進行の評価法として、超音波の使用、母体の様子、外診による兆候（母体のおしりの間にできてくる紫色の線など）がある。しかしながらこれらの方法は標準的ではない。分娩進行の評価法として最も有効な方法は確立されていない。 内診は不快感や痛み、苦痛を伴うことがある。ゆっくりでも正常な分娩を異常であると誤診した場合、分娩促進や帝王切開といった不必要な介入につながる可能性が...

We are pleased to share the winners of the 2021 Cochrane-REWARD prize.

The Cochrane-REWARD prize recognizes successful local or pilot initiatives that have potential to reduce research waste globally if scaled up. Cochrane has funded the prize since it began in 2017. For this iteration of the prize, submissions related to tackling research waste relevant to COVID-19 were encouraged.

The prize ceremony took place on 1 March virtually (recordings are available below). Two representatives of the prize committee – Matt Westmore, Chief Executive of the UK Health Research Authority, and Lex Bouter, Professor of Methodology and Integrity at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam – joined to announce the winners, who gave short presentations on their initiatives. Lisa Bero, Cochrane’s Senior Research Integrity Editor, also joined the session to give an update on Cochrane’s research integrity agenda.

2021 Cochrane-REWARD prize winners
This year was particularly competitive, with many very strong contenders for the prize committee to consider. Thank you to all who submitted nominations, and congratulations to the winners below:

First prize: COVID-END
The COVID-19 Evidence Network to support Decision-making (COVID-END) was awarded first prize. Jeremy Grimshaw and John Lavis accepted the prize on behalf of the network.

COVID-END is a time-limited network of 58 global evidence synthesis, guidance and decision support partner organizations established to better coordinate the evidence synthesis response to the COVID-19 pandemic and reduce research waste.

Together with its partners, COVID-END has worked to reduce waste in all five stages of research. Selected highlights include:

• Setting up a global horizon scanning panel to proactively identify recurrent and emerging issues requiring evidence syntheses in the coming months.
• Developing interactive flow-diagrams for researchers and guideline developers planning to work on a new review or guideline pointing them to helpful resources, while encouraging them to ensure that they are not duplicating the efforts of another group.
• Creating an inventory of best evidence syntheses highlighting quality up-to-date living syntheses that make it easier for decision makers to find the best evidence.
• Establishing a COVID-END community and living hub of COVID-19 knowledge hubs to link evidence synthesis, guidance and decision-support groups around the world interested in learning from others and sharing best practices.
• Providing the foundation for the Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges, a report which aims to seize on the once-in-a-generation focus on evidence presented by the pandemic, calling for sustained efforts to systematize the successful aspects of using evidence and to address the shortfalls.

The prize committee was particularly impressed with COVID-END’s global reach, which includes participation from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The committee also saw that such an approach could be adapted and deployed for other crises in the future.

Second prize: MRC-NIHR Trials Methodology Research Partnership
The MRC-NIHR Trials Methodology Research Partnership (TMRP) received the second prize. Paula Williamson accepted the prize on behalf of the initiative.

TMRP is a community of practice which draws together several networks, academic institutions and partners engaged in trials and trials methodology research to strengthen links between trialists, methods researchers, clinicians, patients, the public and funders. It includes eight thematic working groups on topics such as adaptive designs, outcomes, statistical analysis and trial conduct.

As well as leading to more impactful research and less duplication of effort, better networking facilitated by TRMP enabled researchers to pivot and respond to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Selected network projects include:

• A priority-setting exercise to develop a trials methodology research agenda, feeding more specific exercises for recruitment and retention research, patient and public involvement in methods research, and priorities for methods research in LMICs.
• Designing clinical trials, including several platform trials of potential COVID-19 treatments, including the RECOVERY, AGILE, and HEAL-COVID trials.
• Developing COVID-19 core outcome sets (COS), including a ‘meta-COS’ for acute COVID-19, a COS for COVID-19 transmission prevention and a COS for Long COVID.
• Producing guidance and tools for researchers to support transparent and complete reporting of research.

The panel was very impressed with TRMP’s large body of work to date. We saw great potential to improve the overall standards of trial design, analysis and reporting if the approach were to be scaled up across further contexts.

Thank you to the Cochrane-REWARD prize committee
Special thanks to the Cochrane-REWARD prize committee for reviewing the entries during what was an especially competitive year for the prize. In 2021, the prize committee was:

• Lex Bouter, Professor of Methodology and Integrity, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
• Sabine Kleinert (chair), Senior Executive Editor, The Lancet
• Joan Marsh, Editor-in-Chief, The Lancet Psychiatry
• Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga, Professor in Evidence-Based Laboratory Animal Science, Radboud University Medical Center
• Kieron Rooney, Associate Professor, University of Sydney
• Matt Westmore, Chief Executive, UK Health Research Authority

Wednesday, March 2, 2022

高ビリルビン血症の満期および早産新生児における光線療法中の周期的な体位変換（一定時間ごとに体の向きを変えること） レビューの論点 黄疸のある満期産新生児および未熟児において、体位を変えた方が光線療法の結果を改善するか？ 要点 この系統的レビューでは、黄疸に対して光線療法を受けている満期産児と未熟児において、計画的な体位変換とそうでない体位変換を比較した研究を評価した。計画的な体位変換の有無では、光治療の持続時間やビリルビン値の低下率にほとんど差が生じなかった。ビリルビンは、皮膚や白目が黄色くなる黄疸の原因となる物質である。 レビューに含まれるどの研究も、新生児の体位変換が乳幼児突然死症候群などの好ましくない事象に及ぼす影響を報告していない。 今後の研究では、超未熟児やあらゆるタイプの黄疸の新生児を含め、光線療法中の新生児の計画的な体位変換を調査する必要がある。 黄疸とは何か？ 黄疸（高ビリルビン血症ともいう）は、新生児によく見られる症状で、血液中のビリルビンが増えすぎて、皮膚や白目が黄色くなるものである。ビリルビンは、赤血球が壊れる時にできる黄色い物質である。新生児の肝臓は血液中のビリルビンを効率よく除去できないため、血中ビリルビン濃度が高くなる。場合によっては、新生児の血液中のビリルビン濃度が非常に高くなり、脳障害を引き起こすこともある。生後2週間くらいになると、肝臓がビリルビ...

心的外傷後ストレス障害に対する薬物療法 このレビューの重要性 心的外傷後ストレス障害（PTSD）は、重大なトラウマにさらされた後に発症し、個人的にも社会的にも多大な犠牲を生じることになる。従来は心理療法で治療されてきたが、PTSDの治療には薬物療法が有効であることが証明されている。 このレビューに関心をもつ人は誰か？ - PTSDの人。 - PTSDに悩む人の家族、友人。 - 開業医、精神科医、心理士、薬剤師。 このレビューでわかることは何か？ - 成人のPTSDの症状軽減に薬物療法は有効か？ どのような研究がレビューに含まれたか？ 成人のPTSDの治療において、薬物療法とプラセボまたは対照薬、あるいはプラセボと対照薬の両方を比較した研究を対象とした。 66件の試験がレビューに含まれ、合計7,442人が参加した。 レビューの結果、どのようなことがわかったのか？ 選択的セロトニン再取り込み阻害薬（SSRI）がプラセボと比較してPTSD症状を改善するという有益な効果が、中等度の確実性のエビデンスに基づいて確認された。また、ノルアドレナリン・特異的セロトニン作動性抗うつ薬（NaSSA）ミルタザピンと三環系抗うつ薬（TCA）アミトリプチリンは、確実性の低いエビデンスに基づき、PTSD症状の改善において有益であることが示された。また、抗精神病薬投与後にプラセボと比較して改善した参加者の数に...

Covidence is a web-based software platform that streamlines the production of systematic reviews, including Cochrane Reviews. They have recently announced the launch of the Covidence Global Scholarship Program to financially support the next generation of superstar evidence researchers around the world.  With a $75,000 funding pool they will be supporting  some of the world’s brightest PhD and Masters students so they can spend more time creating knowledge that will make a big impact in the world. 

 

 Applicants to the Covidence Global Scholarship must meet all of the following criteria:

• Be a current PhD or Master by dissertation student of any nationality
• Be enrolled in any discipline at an accredited university during this academic year (2022)
• Be undertaking or will be starting a systematic review as part of the dissertation in the six months following the award (June-Dec 2022)

Covidence will be awarding 52 scholarships in total. Applications are open until Thursday 31st March 11.59pm EST.

• Learn more about the Covidence Global Scholarship Program and apply

 

To support the Global Scholarship Evidence, Covidence is  seeking Expressions of Interest from qualified individuals to serve on the Scholarship selection panel. To be eligible to participate, panel members must hold a Masters or PhD degree, or have equivalent experience. To ensure balanced representation on the panel, they encourage applications from diverse backgrounds and experience. Panel members will receive a USD$1000 honorarium. 

If you have any questions about submitting an Expression of Interest, please contact Nancy Owens, Head of Community Management at Covidence, at nancy@covidence.org. Expressions of interest for panelists close on Thursday, 31 March 2022, at 5.00 pm GMT. 

• Express your interest in becoming a panel member

 

About Covidence: 
Covidence is a SaaS social enterprise platform used around the world and by some of the world’s leading institutions to accelerate the systematic review workflow, making it easier to  turn the flood of new scientific research into high-quality, trustworthy knowledge summaries. Established in 2014,  Covidence provides free access to users in low-income countries and those participating in COVID-19 research.  To find out more about Covidence go to www.covidence.org

Monday, February 28, 2022