Systematic review of outcome domains and instruments used in clinical trials of tinnitus treatments in adults

BACKGROUND: There is no evidence-based guidance to facilitate design decisions for confirmatory trials or systematic reviews investigating treatment efficacy for adults with tinnitus. This systematic review therefore seeks to ascertain the current status of trial designs by identifying and evaluating the reporting of outcome domains and instruments in the treatment of adults with tinnitus. METHODS: Records were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE CINAHL, EBSCO, and CENTRAL clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN, ICTRP) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Eligible records were those published from 1 July 2006 to 12 March 2015. Included studies were those reporting adults aged 18 years or older who reported tinnitus as a primary complaint, and who were enrolled into a randomised controlled trial, a before and after study, a non-randomised controlled trial, a case-controlled study or a cohort study, and written in English. Studies with fewer than 20 participants were excluded. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-eight studies were included. Thirty-five different primary outcome domains were identified spanning seven categories (tinnitus percept, impact of tinnitus, co-occurring complaints, quality of life, body structures and function, treatment-related outcomes and unclear or not specified). Over half the studies (55 %) did not clearly define the complaint of interest. Tinnitus loudness was the domain most often reported (14 %), followed by tinnitus distress (7 %). Seventy-eight different primary outcome instruments were identified. Instruments assessing multiple attributes of the impact of tinnitus were most common (34 %). Overall, 24 different patient-reported tools were used, predominantly the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (15 %). Loudness was measured in diverse ways including a numerical rating scale (8 %), loudness matching (4 %), minimum masking level (1 %) and loudness discomfort level (1 %). Ten percent of studies did not clearly report the instrument used. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate poor appreciation of the basic principles of good trial design, particularly the importance of specifying what aspect of therapeutic benefit is the main outcome. No single outcome was reported in all studies and there was a broad diversity of outcome instruments. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: The systematic review protocol is registered on PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews): CRD42015017525 . Registered on 12 March 2015 revised on 15 March 2016.

MicroRNAs in pathology and as therapeutic target in gene therapy?

Dissertação para obtenção do grau de Mestre no Instituto Superior de Ciências da Saúde Egas Moniz

Medications, youth therapeutic cultures and performance consumptions: a sociological approach

"This article analyses performance consumptions among young people. The theme is explored along two main axes. The first concerns the social heterogeneity in this field, considered on two levels: the different purposes for those investments – cognitive/mental and physical performance; and the different social contexts – university and work – where performance practices and dispositions may be fostered. The second axis explores the roles of pharmacological and natural consumptions, and their interrelationship, in the dissemination of these practices. The empirical data for this analysis were drawn from an ongoing research project on performance consumptions among young people (aged 18−29 years) in Portugal, including both university students and young workers without university education. The results correspond to the stage of extensive research, for which a questionnaire was organised at a national level, using non-proportional quota sampling. On the one hand, they show that (a) there is a hierarchy of acceptance of consumptions according to their purposes, with cognitive/mental performance showing higher acceptance and (b) both pharmaceuticals and natural products are consumed for every type of performance investment. On the other, the comparison between students and workers introduces a certain heterogeneity in this general backdrop, both in terms of the purposes for their consumptions and their opting for natural or pharmacological resources. These threads of heterogeneity will prompt a discussion of the dynamics of pharmaceuticalisation within the field of performance, in particular how therapeutic cultures may be changing in terms of the way individuals relate to medications, expanding their uses in social life."