BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine最新文献

Objectives: To assess the relative benefits of various non-pharmacological interventions on treating primary dysmenorrhoea within a network meta-analysis.

Study design: Systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Inclusion criteria: Randomised controlled trial involving patient with primary dysmenorrhoea and received non-pharmacological interventions.

Data sources: Four databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science) were searched from inception to October first, 2022.

Risk-of-bias rob assessment: RoB 2.0 assessment tools was used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies.

Synthesis of results: Conventional meta-analysis was conducted by pairwise comparison between non-pharmacological therapy and control treatment. The Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted by the Aggregate Data Drug Information System Software based on the consistency or inconsistency model, and rank probability was used to indicate the priority of non-pharmacological therapy.

Results: 33 studies involving eight non-pharmacological interventions were included. With regard to conventional meta-analysis, we selected Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) as primary outcome to evaluate the pain intensity. The result showed that eight interventions (Exercise, Herb, Acupuncture, Aromatherapy, Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation, Topical heat, Acupressure, Yoga) displayed positive effect on reduction of menstrual pain compared with placebo or no treatment. A Bayesian network meta-analysis revealed that exercise -3.20 (95% CI -4.01 to -2.34), acupuncture -2.90 (95% CI -3.97 to -2.85) and topical heat -2.97 (95% CI -4.66 to -1.29) probably resulted in a reduction in pain intensity (VAS) .

Conclusions: Non-pharmacological interventions may result in a reduction or slight reduction in pain intensity compared with no treatment or placebo. Specifically, exercise and acupuncture are considered as potentially effective non-pharmacological treatments in short-term treatment. Indeed, larger and better methodological quality research is needed.

Trial registration number: CRD42022351021.

Incorporating clinical data held by national health product regulatory authorities into secondary analyses such as systematic reviews can help combat publication bias and selective outcome reporting, in turn, supporting more evidence-based decisions regarding the prescribing of drugs, biologics and vaccines. Owing to recent changes in Canadian law, Health Canada has begun to make clinical information-whether it has been previously published or not-publicly available through its 'Public Release of Clinical Information' (PRCI) online database. We provide guidance about how to access and use regulatory data obtained through the PRCI database for the purpose of conducting drug and biologic secondary analyses.

Objectives: To quantify the proportion of melanoma diagnoses (invasive and in situ) in the USA that might be overdiagnosed.

Design: In this ecological study, incidence and mortality data were collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results 9 registries database. DevCan software was used to calculate the cumulative lifetime risk of being diagnosed with melanoma between 1975 and 2018, with adjustments made for changes in longevity and risk factors over the study period.

Setting: USA.

Participants: White American men and women (1975-2018).

Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was excess lifetime risk of melanoma diagnosis between 1976 and 2018 (adjusted for year 2018 competing mortality and changes in risk factors), which was inferred as likely overdiagnosis. The secondary outcome was an excess lifetime risk of melanoma diagnosis in each year between 1976 and 2018 (adjusted and unadjusted).

Results: Between 1975 and 2018 the adjusted lifetime risk of being diagnosed with melanoma (invasive and in situ) increased from 3.2% (1 in 31) to 6.4% (1 in 16) among white men, and from 1.6% (1 in 63) to 4.5% (1 in 22) among white women. Over the same period, the adjusted lifetime risk of being diagnosed with melanoma in situ increased from 0.17% (1 in 588) to 2.7% (1 in 37) in white men and 0.08% (1 in 1250) to 2.0% (1 in 50) in white women. An estimated 49.7% of melanomas diagnosed in white men and 64.6% in white women were overdiagnosed in 2018. Among people diagnosed with melanomas in situ, 89.4% of white men and 85.4% of white women were likely overdiagnosed in 2018.

Conclusions: Melanoma overdiagnosis among white Americans is significant and increasing over time with an estimated 44 000 overdiagnosed in men and 39 000 in women in 2018. A large proportion of overdiagnosed melanomas are in situ cancers, pointing to a potential focus for intervention.