Protocol for systematic reviews of determinants/correlates of obesity-related dietary and physical activity behaviors in young children (preschool 0 to 6 years): evidence mapping and syntheses How Quickly Do Systematic Reviews Go Out of Date? A Survival Analysis Users identified challenges in applying GRADE to complex interventions and suggested an extension to GRADE. The effectiveness of exercise on recovery and clinical outcomes of soft tissue injuries of the leg, ankle, and foot: A systematic review by the Ontario Protocol for Traffic Injury Management (OPTIMa) Collaboration. Wasted research when systematic reviews fail to provide a complete and up-to-date evidence synthesis: the example of lung cancer Are Electronic Cigarettes an Effective Aid to Smoking Cessation or Reduction Among Vulnerable Groups? A Systematic Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Evidence.
Background The aim of these review s is to inform the design and content of interventions to reduce obesity in young children . The behaviors that are associated with obesity/overweight have been studied extensively ; however , the factors associated with these behaviors in young children ( 0 to 6 years ) have not been systematic ally review ed . Over the past few years the focus of obesity prevention has shifted to preschool children because of the high prevalence of obesity at school entry and recognition that habits formed in early life could track into adulthood . In order to develop effective interventions and change behavior , it is important to underst and the factors that are associated with those behaviors . For example , we need to underst and whether it would be more important to target the family , childcare setting s or the wider environment and identify the most effective way of changing these energy balance related behaviors . Methods / Design Quantitative ( intervention and observational ) and qualitative literature on determinants/correlates of fruit and vegetable intake , sugar sweetened beverage and other unhealthy diet intake , and physical activity and sedentary behaviors in young children will be systematic ally identified , mapped and review ed . A common search strategy ( no language or period restrictions ) will be used to identify papers from eight electronic data bases and this will be supplemented by h and - search ing . Next , studies in developed countries that examine the factors associated with these behaviors in children aged 0 to 6 years ( at baseline ) will be screened and mapped descriptively followed by in-depth data extraction , quality assessment and synthesis . Data from quantitative studies will be summarized using either forest plots or harvest plots and narrative synthesis , and qualitative studies using thematic analysis . Qualitative evidence will be integrated with the quantitative evidence , using a parallel synthesis approach , to provide a deeper underst and ing of effective strategies to influence these energy balance related behaviors . Discussion In addition to updating and mapping current research , these review s will be the first to comprehensively synthesize and integrate both the quantitative and qualitative evidence pertaining to determinants/correlates/barriers/facilitators of obesity related behaviors in this young age group ( 0 to 6 years ) with the aim of informing future interventions . Systematic review registration International Prospect i ve Register for Systematic Review s ( PROSPERO ) Registration number : Context Clinicians rely on systematic review s for current , evidence -based information . Contribution This survival analysis of 100 meta-analyses indexed in ACP Journal Club from 1995 to 2005 found that new evidence that substantively changed conclusions about the effectiveness or harms of therapies arose frequently and within relatively short time periods . The median survival time without substantive new evidence for the meta-analyses was 5.5 years . Significant new evidence was already available for 7 % of the review s at the time of publication and became available for 23 % within 2 years . Implication Clinical ly important evidence that alters conclusions about the effectiveness and harms of treatments can accumulate rapidly . The Editors Systematic review s have become increasingly common in recent years ( 1 ) and are recommended by many as the best sources of evidence to guide both clinical decisions ( 2 ) and health care policy ( 3 ) . For systematic review s to fulfill these roles , their findings must remain relatively stable for at least several years or effective mechanisms must exist for alerting end users to important changes in evidence . Yet , surprisingly little research has assessed the extent to which systematic review s become out of date or the rate at which this occurs ( 47 ) . Some organizations , such as the Cochrane Collaboration , recommend updating systematic review s every 2 years , but few empirical data guide this or other recommendations about updating . We sought to determine how quickly systematic review s meet explicitly defined criteria for changes in evidence of sufficient importance to warrant updating . We also sought to identify predictors of survival time , the time to such important changes in evidence . Survival time might vary depending on many factors , including the type of question posed by the original review ( for example , therapeutic or diagnostic ) , the types of studies included ( for example , r and omized trials or observational studies ) , and whether the systematic review provided quantitative synthesis . To limit such variation , we focused on systematic review s of r and omized , controlled trials that evaluated therapeutic benefit or harm by providing quantitative synthesis ( meta- analysis ) for at least 1 outcome . Methods Study Design and Sample We used a quasi-r and om process ( alphabetical sort order by author ) to select 100 systematic review s that were indexed in ACP Journal Club with an accompanying commentary between January 1995 and December 2005 ( with a search date no later than 31 December 2004 to ensure at least 1 full year for new evidence to appear ) . We chose this sampling frame because ACP Journal Club selects systematic review s that meet explicit quality st and ards and are deemed directly relevant to clinical practice ( 8) . We regarded the sample size of 100 as sufficiently large to achieve suitably narrow confidence intervals and to permit evaluation of up to 5 potential predictors of survival . Eligibility Criteria Eligible review s evaluated the benefit or harm of a specific drug , class of drug , device , or procedure ( invasive procedure or surgery ) and included r and omized or quasi-r and omized , controlled trials . We excluded evaluations of alternative and complementary medicines because the stability of review s of such therapies might differ substantially from review s of conventional therapies . We required that review s provide a point estimate and 95 % confidence interval for at least 1 outcome in the form of a relative risk , odds ratio , or absolute risk difference for binary outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes . We excluded meta-analyses of individual-patient data , meta-regressions , and indirect meta-analyses because of the difficulty of determining whether new data would alter previous quantitative results . Two team members independently assessed eligibility , with disagreements resolved by consensus involving a third review er . When more than 1 review on the same topic was identified , only the earliest was included . Search ing For each review , search es for new trials included identifying new systematic review s on the same topic , su bmi tting relevant content terms to the Clinical Queries function in Ovid , applying the Related Articles function in PubMed to the 3 largest and the 3 most recent trials in the original review ( up to 6 trials in total ) , and using Scopus ( www . scopus .com/ scopus /home.url ) to identify new r and omized trials that cited the original review . When these search strategies yielded no eligible new trials , we conducted more comprehensive electronic search es and review ed relevant chapters in such sources as Clinical Evidence and UpTo Date to ensure that we had not missed new trials . Team members who had background s in both medicine and clinical research screened citations retrieved by the preceding methods to identify trials that would have met the inclusion criteria in the original review . Retrieved articles were screened in chronological order to ascertain quantitative or qualitative signals for the need for updating . The review protocol stopped when any criteria for updating were met . Each systematic review was discussed in detail , with the final statussignal for updating was or was not detectedadjudicated by consensus ( Figure 1 ) . Figure 1 . Overall process for determining updating status . ACP Journal Club Signals for the Need to Up date Systematic Review s In design ing criteria for comparing new findings with those in a previous review , we adapted methods used by other investigators to address similar problems with comparing 2 sets of results relating to the same question ( 913 ) , such as r and omized and nonr and omized studies of the same intervention . These investigators identified conflicting findings among different publications using a combination of quantitative thresholds for differences in effect magnitude and qualitative judgments about the language used to describe the results . We have similarly conceptualized quantitative and qualitative signals of potential changes in evidence that are sufficiently important to warrant updating previous systematic review s. Quantitative Signals Quantitative signals consisted of a change in statistical significance or relative change in effect magnitude of at least 50 % . We restricted these changes to those involving 1 of the primary outcomes of the original review or any mortality outcome . We also ignored trivial changes in statistical significance when the original and up date d meta-analytic results both had P values between 0.04 and 0.06so that quantitative signals of changes in evidence would represent robust indicators of the need to up date previous review s. Quantitative signals were detected by combining data from eligible new trials with the previous results using a fixed-effects approach . Use of fixed-effect models allowed pooling of the new trials with the previous meta-analytic result , as opposed to having to obtain original data from all of the included trials in each of 100 systematic review s. Although r and om-effects models are usually preferred to avoid spurious precision in the face of heterogeneity , our goal was to detect potential changes in evidence that would warrant a formal up date , not produce exact estimates of the up date d results . Qualitative Signals Qualitative signals included new information about harm sufficient to affect clinical decision making , important caveats to the original results , emergence of a superior alternate therapy , and important changes in certainty or direction of effect . Qualitative signals were detected by using explicit criteria for comparing the language in the original review with descriptions of findings in new systematic review s that addressed the same topic , pivotal trials , clinical practice guidelines , or recent editions of major textbooks ( for example , UpTo Date ) . Pivotal trials were defined as trials that had a sample size at least 3 times larger than that of the previous largest trial or were published in 1 of the 5 highest-impact general medical journals ( The New Engl and Journal of Medicine , Lancet , Journal of the American Medical Association , Annals of Internal Medicine , and the British Medical Journal ) . We defined 2 levels of importance for qualitative signals : potentially invalidating changes in evidence , which would make one no longer want clinicians or policymakers to base decisions on the original findings ( such as a pivotal trial that characterized treatment effectiveness in terms opposite of those in the original systematic review ) , and major changes in evidence , which would affect clinical decision making in important ways without invalidating the previous results ( such as the identification of patient population s for whom treatment is more or less beneficial ) . Major changes also included differing characterizations of effectiveness that were less extreme than those for potentially invalidating signals but that would still affect clinical decision making ( for example , a change from possibly beneficial to definitely beneficial ) . Of importance , such characterizations as possibly effective , probably effective , and promising , were all categorized as possibly effective . Thus , qualitative signals for changes in evidence captured substantive differences in the characterization of treatment effects , not merely semantic differences . Full definitions for each of the specific signals can be found at www.ohri.ca/UpdatingSystRevs . Data Collection For each review , we characterized the clinical content area , eligibility criteria for included trials , definitions of reported outcomes , number of included trials and participants , meta-analytic result for each outcome , identification of statistical heterogeneity , and excerpted quotations of the authors ' characterizations of the main results . We also abstract ed whether a given outcome was explicitly identified as 1 of the primary or main outcomes . We discounted identification of more than 3 such outcomes as inconsistent with the OBJECTIVES To explore user perspectives on applying the Grading of Recommendations Assessment , Development and Evaluation ( GRADE ) to systematic review s of complex interventions . STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING Thirty-three authors of recent ( 2013 onward ) systematic review s were contacted regarding their perspectives on using  GRADE from three Cochrane review groups : Cochrane Developmental , Psychosocial , and Learning Problems Group ; Cochrane Public Health Group ; and Cochrane Depression , Anxiety , and Neurosis Group . Framework Analysis was applied to the data to identify the challenges in applying GRADE and suggestions for its extension , that is , adaptation . These two themes were cross-compared between the groups of answers from " simple " vs. " complex " intervention review authors to identify the specific perspectives on using GRADE in review s of complex interventions . RESULTS Specific challenges were identified in applying GRADE to review s of complex interventions . These were related to the assessment of nonr and omized studies and performance bias in GRADE . Authors perceived these challenges to contribute to frequent downgrading of the " best evidence possible " for complex interventions . Meanwhile , GRADE was found to lack an analytic approach to enable adequate evidence synthesis and assessment of intervention implementation elements . CONCLUSION Users suggest that the GRADE guidance be extended to address-specific considerations for complex interventions INTRODUCTION Soft tissue injuries of the leg , ankle , or foot are common and often treated by exercise . The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of  exercise  for the management of soft tissue injuries of the leg , ankle , or foot . METHODS A systematic review of the literature was conducted . We search ed five data bases from 1990 to 2015 . Relevant articles were critically appraised using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network ( SIGN ) criteria . The evidence from studies with low risk of bias was synthesized using the best- evidence synthesis methodology . RESULTS We screened 7946 articles . We critically appraised ten r and omized trials and six had a low risk of bias . The evidence suggests that for recent lateral ankle sprain : 1 ) rehabilitation exercises initiated immediately post-injury are as effective as a similar program initiated one week post-injury ; and 2 ) supervised progressive exercise plus education/advice and home exercise lead to similar outcomes as education/advice and home exercise . Eccentric exercises may be more effective than an AirHeel brace but less effective than acupuncture for Achilles tendinopathy of more than two months duration . Finally , for plantar heel pain , static stretching of the calf muscles and sham ultrasound lead to similar outcomes , while static plantar fascia stretching provides short-term benefits compared to shockwave therapy . CONCLUSIONS We found little evidence to support the use of early or supervised exercise interventions for lateral ankle sprains . Eccentric exercises may provide short-term benefits over a brace for persistent Achilles tendinopathy and plantar fascia stretching provides short-term benefits for plantar heel pain Background Multiple treatments are frequently available for a given condition , and clinicians and patients need a comprehensive , up-to- date synthesis of evidence for all competing treatments . We aim ed to quantify the waste of research related to the failure of systematic review s to provide a complete and up-to- date evidence synthesis over time . Methods We performed a series of systematic overviews and networks of r and omized trials assessing the gap between evidence covered by systematic review s and available trials of second-line treatments for advanced non-small cell lung cancer . We search ed the Cochrane Data base of Systematic Review s , Data base of Abstract s of Review s of Effects , MEDLINE , EMBASE , and other re sources sequentially by year from 2009 to March 2 , 2015 . We sequentially compared the amount of evidence missing from systematic review s to the r and omized evidence available for inclusion each year . We constructed cumulative networks of r and omized evidence over time and evaluated the proportion of trials , patients , treatments , and treatment comparisons not covered by systematic review s on December 31 each year from 2009 to 2015 . Results We identified 77 trials ( 28,636 patients ) assessing 47 treatments with 54 comparisons and 29 systematic review s ( 13 published after 2013 ) . From 2009 to 2015 , the evidence covered by existing systematic review s was consistently incomplete : 45 % to 70 % of trials ; 30 % to 58 % of patients ; 40 % to 66 % of treatments ; and 38 % to 71 % of comparisons were missing . In the cumulative networks of r and omized evidence , 10 % to 17 % of treatment comparisons were partially covered by systematic review s and 55 % to 85 % were partially or not covered . Conclusions We illustrate how systematic review s of a given condition provide a fragmented , out-of- date panorama of the evidence for all treatments . This waste of research might be reduced by the development of live cumulative network meta-analyses INTRODUCTION Smoking prevalence remains high in some vulnerable groups , including those who misuse substances , have a mental illness , are homeless , or are involved with the criminal justice system .  E-cigarette use is increasing and may support smoking cessation/reduction . METHODS Systematic review of quantitative and qualitative data on the effectiveness of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation/reduction among vulnerable groups . Data bases search ed were MEDLINE , EMBASE , PsychINFO , CINAHL , ASSIA , ProQuest Dissertations and Theses , and Open Grey . Narrative synthesis of quantitative data and thematic synthesis of qualitative data . RESULTS 2628 records and 46 full texts were screened ; 9 studies were identified for inclusion . Due to low quality of evidence , it is uncertain whether e-cigarettes are effective for smoking cessation in vulnerable population s. A moderate quality study suggested that e-cigarettes were as effective as nicotine replacement therapy . Four studies suggested significant smoking reduction ; however , three were uncontrolled and had sample sizes below 30 . A prospect i ve cohort study found no differences between e-cigarette users and nonusers . No significant adverse events and minimal side effects were identified . Qualitative thematic synthesis revealed barriers and facilitators associated with each component of the COM-B ( capability , opportunity , motivation , and behavior ) model , including practical barriers ; perceptions of effectiveness for cessation/reduction ; design features contributing to automatic and reflective motivation ; smoking bans facilitating practical opportunity ; and social connectedness increasing social opportunity . CONCLUSION Further research is needed to identify the most appropriate device types for practicality and safety , level of support required in e-cigarette interventions , and to compare e-cigarettes with current best practice smoking cessation support among vulnerable groups . IMPLICATION S Smoking prevalence among people with mental illness , substance misuse , homelessness , or criminal justice system involvement remains high . E-cigarettes could support cessation . This systematic review found limited quantitative evidence assessing effectiveness . No serious adverse events were identified . Qualitative thematic synthesis revealed barriers and facilitators mapping to each component of the COM-B ( capability , opportunity , motivation , and behavior ) model , including practical barriers ; perceived effectiveness ; design features contributing to automatic and reflective motivation ; smoking bans facilitating practical opportunity ; and social connectedness increasing social opportunity . Further research should consider appropriate devices for practicality and safety , concurrent support , and comparison with best practice smoking cessation support
No adverse events were reported .
Kinesiotape may produce different effects in healthy and injured ankles .
In healthy ankles , kinesiotape may increase postural control , whereas in injured ankles it may improve proprioception , plantarflexor endurance and the performance of activities .
CONCLUSIONS It is recommended that kinesiotape may be used in clinical practice to prevent lateral ankle injuries ( through its effects on postural control ) and manage lateral ankle injuries due to its positive effects on proprioception , muscle endurance and activity performance .
It appears that kinesiotape may not provide sufficient mechanical support to improve postural control in unstable ankles .
OBJECTIVE To identify , evaluate and synthesis e evidence on the effect of kinesiotape applied to the lateral aspect of the ankle , through a systematic review of quantitative studies .