Unclear Insomnia Concept in Randomized Controlled Trials and Systematic Reviews: A Meta-Epidemiological Study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Banno M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9566752 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Unclear Insomnia Concept in Randomized Controlled Trials and Systematic Reviews: A Meta-Epidemiological Study.
Banno Masahiro M Tsujimoto Yasushi Y Kohmura Kunihiro K Dohi Eisuke E Taito Shunsuke S Someko Hidehiro H Kataoka Yuki Y
International journal of environmental research and public health 20220927 19
There are two possible ways to conceptualize the term "insomnia": insomnia disorder and insomnia symptoms, which are often poorly reported. The purpose of this study was to examine the proportion of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews (SRs) that mention insomnia in their abstracts and cannot distinguish between insomnia disorder and insomnia symptoms from the abstract. We included RCT and SR articles that included the word "insomnia" in the methods or results sections of t ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials evaluating suvorexant for primary insomnia.MethodsRelevant studies were identified through searches of PubMed, databases of the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO citations through June 27, 2015. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of suvorexant trial efficacy and safety outcomes. The primary efficacy outcomes were either subjective total sleep time (sTST) or subjective time-to-sleep onset (sTSO) at 1 month. The secondary outcomes were other efficacy outcomes, discontinuation rate, and individual adverse events. The risk ratio, number-needed-to-treat/harm, and weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on a random effects model were calculated.ResultsThe computerized literature database search initially yielded 48 results, from which 37 articles were excluded following a review of titles and abstracts and another eight review articles after full-text review. Thus, we identified 4 trials that included a total of 3,076 patients. Suvorexant was superior to placebo with regard to the two primary efficacy outcomes (sTST: WMD = -20.16, 95% CI = -25.01 to -15.30, 1889 patients, 3 trials, sTSO: WMD = -7.62, 95% CI = -11.03 to -4.21, 1889 patients, 3 trials) and was not different from placebo in trial discontinuations. Suvorexant caused a higher incidence than placebo of at least one side effects, abnormal dreams, somnolence, excessive daytime sleepiness/sedation, fatigue, dry mouth, and rebound insomnia.ConclusionsOur analysis of published trial results suggests that suvorexant is effective in treating primary insomnia and is well-tolerated.
| S-EPMC4552781 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWorldwide, insomnia remains a highly prevalent public health problem. eHealth presents a novel opportunity to deliver effective, accessible, and affordable insomnia treatments on a population-wide scale. However, there is no quantitative integration of evidence regarding the effectiveness of eHealth-based psychosocial interventions on insomnia.ObjectiveWe aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of eHealth-based psychosocial interventions for insomnia and investigate the influence of specific study characteristics and intervention features on these effects.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from database inception to February 16, 2021, for publications investigating eHealth-based psychosocial interventions targeting insomnia and updated the search of PubMed to December 6, 2021. We also screened gray literature for unpublished data. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials of eHealth-based psychosocial interventions targeting adults with insomnia. Random-effects meta-analysis models were used to assess primary and secondary outcomes. Primary outcomes were insomnia severity and sleep quality. Meta-analyses were performed by pooling the effects of eHealth-based psychosocial interventions on insomnia compared with inactive and in-person conditions. We performed subgroup analyses and metaregressions to explore specific factors that affected the effectiveness. Secondary outcomes included sleep diary parameters and mental health-related outcomes.ResultsOf the 19,980 identified records, 37 randomized controlled trials (13,227 participants) were included. eHealth-based psychosocial interventions significantly reduced insomnia severity (Hedges g=-1.01, 95% CI -1.12 to -0.89; P<.001) and improved sleep quality (Hedges g=-0.58, 95% CI -0.75 to -0.41; P<.001) compared with inactive control conditions, with no evidence of publication bias. We found no significant difference compared with in-person treatment in alleviating insomnia severity (Hedges g=0.41, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.85; P=.06) and a significant advantage for in-person treatment in enhancing sleep quality (Hedges g=0.56, 95% CI 0.24-0.88; P<.001). eHealth-based psychosocial interventions had significantly larger effects (P=.01) on alleviating insomnia severity in clinical samples than in subclinical samples. eHealth-based psychosocial interventions that incorporated guidance from trained therapists had a significantly greater effect on insomnia severity (P=.05) and sleep quality (P=.02) than those with guidance from animated therapists or no guidance. Higher baseline insomnia severity and longer intervention duration were associated with a larger reduction in insomnia severity (P=.004). eHealth-based psychosocial interventions significantly improved each secondary outcome.ConclusionseHealth interventions for insomnia are effective in improving sleep and mental health and can be considered a promising treatment for insomnia. Our findings support the wider dissemination of eHealth interventions and their further promotion in a stepped-care model. Offering blended care could improve treatment effectiveness. Future research needs to elucidate which specific intervention components are most important to achieve intervention effectiveness. Blended eHealth interventions may be tailored to benefit people with low socioeconomic status, limited access to health care, or lack of eHealth literacy.
| S-EPMC10131777 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesA Meta-analysis was carried out to evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupoint catgut embedding (ACE), a procedure of embedding sutures made of absorbable materials into the skin tissue of acupoints, on insomnia.MethodsRelevant clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were comprehensively searched from eleven electronic databases (up to 1 March 2020). Two authors independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Stata 12 and RevMan 5.3.0 software were used for meta-analysis. PyCharm 2019 and Gephi software (version 0.9.2) were used for complex network analysis.ResultsThirty-four RCTs involving 2,655 patients were included. The meta-analysis suggested that ACE induced a better clinical efficacy compared with that in the estazolam tablets (EZ) group (RR = 1.22, 95% CI: 1.13, 1.31) or in the acupuncture (ACU) group (RR = 1.21, 95% CI: 1.14, 1.28) and could significantly reduce the score of Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (P < 0.05). ACE resulted in better long-term efficacy compared to that in the EZ group (RR = 1.87, 95% CI: 1.58, 2.22) and ACU group (RR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.14, 1.48). ACE could significantly reduce the incidence of adverse events (RR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.15, 0.60) compared with that in the EZ group. Complex network analysis indicated that acupoints of BL23, SP6, PC6, BL15, BL20, BL18, and HT7 were the core acupoints selected in ACE for insomnia.ConclusionThe clinical efficacy of ACE for insomnia is better than that of other interventions (EZ and ACU) in both short-term and long-term observations. Considering the efficacy and reduced visits to the clinic by ACE, the present study provides a practical and convenient complementary and alternative therapy for insomnia. This trial is registered with PROSPERO CRD 42020169866.
| S-EPMC7665919 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In 2012, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning regarding potential adverse effects of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) on cognition, based on the Adverse Events Reporting System and a review of the medical literature. We aimed to synthesize randomized clinical trial (RCTs) evidence on the association between statin therapy and cognitive outcomes.We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL through December 2012, and reviewed published systematic reviews of statin treatment. We sought RCTs that compared statin treatment versus placebo or standard care, and reported at least one cognitive outcome (frequency of adverse cognitive events or measurements using standard neuropsychological cognitive test scores). Studies reporting sufficient information to calculate effect sizes were included in meta-analyses. Standardized and unstandardized mean differences were calculated for continuous outcomes for global cognition and for pre-specified cognitive domains. The main outcome was change in cognition measured by neuropsychological tests; an outcome of secondary interest was the frequency of adverse cognitive events observed during follow-up.We identified 25 RCTs (all placebo-controlled) reporting cognitive outcomes in 46,836 subjects, of which 23 RCTs reported cognitive test results in 29,012 participants. Adverse cognitive outcomes attributable to statins were rarely reported in trials involving cognitively normal or impaired subjects. Furthermore, meta-analysis of cognitive test data (14 studies; 27,643 participants) failed to show significant adverse effects of statins on all tests of cognition in either cognitively normal subjects (standardized mean difference 0.01, 95% confidence interval, CI, -0.01 to 0.03, p?=?0.42) or Alzheimer's disease subjects (standardized mean difference -0.05, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.10, p?=?0.38).Statin therapy was not associated with cognitive impairment in RCTs. These results raise questions regarding the continued merit of the FDA warning about potential adverse effects of statins on cognition.
| S-EPMC4351273 | biostudies-other
Project description:PurposeThe under-representation of Black people within critical care research limits the generalizability of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This meta-epidemiologic study investigated the proportionate representation of Black people enrolled at USA and Canadian study sites from high impact critical care RCTs.SourceWe searched for critical care RCTs published in general medicine and intensive care unit (ICU) journals between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2020. We included RCTs that enrolled critically ill adults at USA or Canadian sites and provided race-based demographic data by study site. We compared study-based racial demographics with site-level city-based demographics and pooled representation of Black people across studies, cities, and centres using a random effects model. We used meta-regression to explore the impact of the following variables on Black representation in critical care RCTs: country, drug intervention, consent model, number of centres, funding, study site city, and year of publication.Principal findingsWe included 21 eligible RCTs. Of these, 17 enrolled at only USA sites, two at only Canadian sites, and two at both USA and Canadian sites. Black people were under-represented in critical care RCTs by 6% compared with population-based city demographics (95% confidence interval, 1 to 11). Using meta-regression, after controlling for pertinent variables, the country of the study site was the only significant source of heterogeneity (P = 0.02).ConclusionBlack people are under-represented in critical care RCTs compared with site-level city-based demographics. Interventions are required to ensure adequate Black representation in critical care RCTs at both USA and Canadian study sites. Further research is needed to investigate the factors contributing to Black under-representation in critical care RCTs.
| S-EPMC10180607 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Post-stroke insomnia (PSI) is a highly prevalent complication after stroke. Current evidence of psychotropic drug use for PSI management is scarce and indicates harmful adverse events (AEs). Traditional East Asian herbal medicine is a widely used traditional remedy for insomnia. However, so far, no study has systematically reviewed the efficacy and safety of traditional east asian herbal medicine (HM) for PSI. Therefore, we perform meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of HM for PSI. After a comprehensive electronic search of 15 databases, we review the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of HM use as monotherapy for PSI. Our outcomes were the Pittsburgh sleep quality index and total effective rate. In total, 24 RCTs were conducted with 1942 participants. HM showed statistically significant benefits in sleep quality. It also appeared to be safer than psychotropic drugs in terms of AEs, except when the treatment period was two weeks. The methods used for RCTs were poor, and the quality of evidence assessed was graded "low" or "moderate." The findings of this review indicate that the use of HM as a monotherapy may have potential benefits in PSI treatment when administered as an alternative to conventional medications. However, considering the methodological quality of the included RCTs, we were uncertain of the clinical evidence. Further, well-designed RCTs are required to confirm these findings.
| S-EPMC8834856 | biostudies-literature
Project description:No systematic review has been published in English of Dengzhanxixin (DZXX) injection for cerebral infarction. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effects and safety of DZXX injection for cerebral infarction.Eight databases were searched from their inception. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to DZXX for cerebral infarction in English or Chinese without restrictions on the publication status were included. Neurological deficit, quality of life, and response rates were analyzed. Adverse events were also investigated.Twenty-three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 2291 participants were included. Meta-analysis showed that DZXX injection plus routine western therapy was better than routine western therapy alone for reducing neurologic deficit (MD -2.86, 95% CI -3.87 to -1.86), for improving quality of life (MD 9.48, 95% CI 8.34-10.63), and for improving response rates (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.15-1.25). No serious adverse drug events (ADE) were reported.DZXX injection may have a potential therapeutic effect for cerebral infarction in reducing neurologic deficit, improving life quality and response rates. However, we could not draw any definitive conclusions due to the insufficient evidences. More high-quality trials are needed to provide more strong evidence and to assess the safety of DZXX injection.
| S-EPMC5556216 | biostudies-other
Project description:Study questionAre systematic reviews published within a 3-year period on interventions in ART concordant in their conclusions?Summary answerThe majority of the systematic reviews published within a 3-year period in the field of assisted reproduction on the same topic had discordant conclusions.What is known alreadySystematic reviews and meta-analyses have now replaced individual randomized controlled trials (RCTs) at the top of the evidence pyramid. There has been a proliferation of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, many of which suffer from methodological issues and provide varying conclusions.Study design size durationWe assessed nine interventions in women undergoing ART with at least three systematic reviews each, published from January 2015 to December 2017.Participants/materials setting methodsThe systematic reviews which included RCTs were considered eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was extent of concordance between systematic reviews on the same topic. Secondary outcomes included assessment of quality of systematic reviews, differences in included studies in meta-analyses covering the same search period, selective reporting and reporting the quality of evidence.Main results and the role of chanceConcordant results and conclusions were found in only one topic, with reviews in the remaining eight topics displaying partial discordance. The AMSTAR grading for the majority of the non-Cochrane reviews was critically low whilst it was categorized as high for all of the Cochrane reviews. For three of the nine topics, none of the included systematic reviews assessed the quality of evidence. We were unable to assess selective reporting as most of the reviews did not have a pre-specified published protocol.Limitations reasons for cautionWe were limited by the high proportion of reviews lacking a pre-specified protocol, which made it impossible to assess for selective reporting. Furthermore, many reviews did not specify primary and secondary outcomes which made it difficult to assess reporting bias. All the authors of this review were Cochrane review authors which may introduce some assessment bias. The categorization of the review's conclusions as beneficial, harmful or neutral was subjective, depending on the tone and wording of the conclusion section of the review.Wider implications of the findingsThe majority of the systematic reviews published within a 3-year period on the same topic in the field of assisted reproduction revealed discordant conclusions and suffered from serious methodological issues, hindering the process of informed healthcare decision-making.Study funding/competing interestsAll the authors are Cochrane authors. M.S.K. is an editorial board member of Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility group. No grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors was obtained.
| S-EPMC7753002 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe surge in artificial intelligence (AI) interventions in primary care trials lacks a study on reporting quality.ObjectiveThis study aimed to systematically evaluate the reporting quality of both published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and protocols for RCTs that investigated AI interventions in primary care.MethodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases were searched for RCTs and protocols on AI interventions in primary care until November 2024. Eligible studies were published RCTs or full protocols for RCTs exploring AI interventions in primary care. The reporting quality was assessed using CONSORT-AI (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-Artificial Intelligence) and SPIRIT-AI (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials-Artificial Intelligence) checklists, focusing on AI intervention-related items.ResultsA total of 11,711 records were identified. In total, 19 published RCTs and 21 RCT protocols for 35 trials were included. The overall proportion of adequately reported items was 65% (172/266; 95% CI 59%-70%) and 68% (214/315; 95% CI 62%-73%) for RCTs and protocols, respectively. The percentage of RCTs and protocols that reported a specific item ranged from 11% (2/19) to 100% (19/19) and from 10% (2/21) to 100% (21/21), respectively. The reporting of both RCTs and protocols exhibited similar characteristics and trends. They both lack transparency and completeness, which can be summarized in three aspects: without providing adequate information regarding the input data, without mentioning the methods for identifying and analyzing performance errors, and without stating whether and how the AI intervention and its code can be accessed.ConclusionsThe reporting quality could be improved in both RCTs and protocols. This study helps promote the transparent and complete reporting of trials with AI interventions in primary care.
| S-EPMC11897677 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionTraditional Chinese medicine (TCM) may have special advantages in facilitating smoking cessation, but consensus on effectiveness is lacking. We aim to comprehensively review, update, and refine current evidence on TCM effectiveness and safety.MethodsNine databases were searched from their inception up to 28 February 2023. Systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analysis of TCM for smoking cessation were identified and retrieved. Additional databases and hand searches of RCTs from included SRs were performed for data pooling. Cochrane ROB tools and AMSTAR-2 were used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs and SRs, respectively. RCT data are presented as relative risks (RR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using RevMan 5.4.ResultsThirteen SRs involving 265 studies with 33081 participants were included. Among these 265 studies, 157 were duplicates (58.36%) and 52 were non-RCTs (19.62%). Combined with the remaining 56 RCTs identified through hand searches, 88 RCTs involving 12434 participants were finally included for data synthesis. All the SRs focused on acupoint stimulation, and the majority were of low or very low quality. The methodological quality of RCTs was either unclear or high risk. For continuous abstinence rate, TCM external interventions were better than placebo in 6 months to 1 year (RR=1.60; 95% CI: 1.14-2.25; I2=27%; n=5533 participants). Compared with placebo, TCM external application was effective in reducing nicotine withdrawal symptoms, and the effect was gradually stable and obvious in the fourth week (MD= -4.46; 95% CI: -5.43 - -3.49; n=165 participants). Twelve RCTs reported adverse events as outcome indicators for safety evaluation, and no serious adverse events occurred.ConclusionsDespite the methodological limitations of the original studies, our review suggests that TCM intervention shows potential effectiveness on the continuous abstinence rate. Extending the intervention time can enhance the effect of TCM on nicotine withdrawal symptoms. Referred to adverse events, more data for safety evaluation are required.
| S-EPMC10647068 | biostudies-literature