| 1. |
- Axfors, Cathrine, et al.
(author)
-
Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19 : a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
- 2021
-
In: BMC Infectious Diseases. - : BioMed Central (BMC). - 1471-2334. ; 21:1
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, ). Methods: In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. Results: A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I-2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. Conclusions: Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care.
|
|
| 2. |
- Gijon-Nogueron, Gabriel, et al.
(author)
-
Data Collection Procedures and Injury Definitions in Badminton : A Consensus Statement According to the Delphi Approach
- 2022
-
In: Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine. - : Wolters Kluwer. - 1050-642X .- 1536-3724. ; 32:5, s. e444-e450
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Previous studies involving injury surveillance in badminton players have used nonstandardized injury definitions and data collection methodologies. The purpose of this study was to apply a Delphi method to (1) reach a consensus on an injury definition in badminton and (2) develop a standardized badminton injury report form. An Injury Consensus Group was established under the auspices of the Badminton World Federation, and initial injury definitions and injury report form were developed. An internal panel was formed from the Injury Consensus Group, and an external panel was selected based on a combination of profession, experience in the field, sport-specific knowledge/expertise, and geographical location to obtain a widely representative sample. Through 2 rounds of voting by the external panel, consensus was reached on both the definition of an injury in badminton and a standardized injury report form. The agreed injury definition was “Any physical injury sustained by a player during a match or training regardless if further diagnostic tests were done or if playing time was lost” and the injury report form contained the following 7 sections: Injury record, Diagnosis, Injury mechanism, Regarding pain, Pain and return to play/training after injury, Grade of severity, and Recurrence. We recommend the use of the definitions and methods presented in this consensus statement for the reporting of injury in all international and domestic badminton players. This should make future injury surveillance reports directly comparable and hence more informative in recognizing trends over time and differences between countries.
|
|
