Will your article be found? Authors choose a confusing variety of words to describe dental survival analyses

OBJECTIVES: Identify the words and phrases that authors used to describe time-to-event outcomes of dental treatments in patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic handsearch of 50 dental journals with the highest Citation Index for 2008 identified articles reporting dental treatment with time-to-event statistics (included "case" articles, n = 95), without time-to-event statistics (active "control" articles, n = 91), and all other articles (passive "control" articles n = 6796). The included and active controls were read, identifying 43 English words across the title, aim and abstract, indicating that outcomes were studied over time. Once identified, these words were sought within the 6796 passive controls. Words were divided into six groups. Differences in use of words were analyzed with Pearson's chi-square across these six groups, and the three locations (title, aim, and abstract).

RESULTS: In the abstracts, included articles used group 1 (statistical technique) and group 2 (statistical terms) more frequently than the active and passive controls (group 1: 35%, 2%, 0.37%, P < 0.001 and group 2: 31%, 1%, 0.06%, P < 0.001). The included and active controls used group 3 (quasi-statistical) equally, but significantly more often than the passive controls (82%, 78%, 3.21%, P < 0.001). In the aims, use of target words was similar for included and active controls, but less frequent for groups 1-4 in the passive controls (P < 0.001). In the title, group 2 (statistical techniques) and groups 3-5 (outcomes) were similar for included and active controls, but groups 2 and 3 were less frequent in the passive controls (P < 0.001). Significantly more included articles used group 6 words (stating the study duration) (54%, 30%, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION: All included articles used time-to-event analyses, but two-thirds did not include words to highlight this in the abstract. There is great variation in the words authors used to describe dental time-to-event outcomes. Electronic identification of such articles would be inconsistent, with low sensitivity and specificity. Authors should improve the reporting quality. Journals should allow sufficient space in abstracts to summarize research, and not impose unrealistic word limits. Readers should be mindful of these problems when searching for relevant articles. Additional research is required in this field.

Accumulating research: a systematic account of how cumulative meta-analyses would have provided knowledge, improved health, reduced harm and saved resources

BACKGROUND: "Cumulative meta-analysis" describes a statistical procedure to calculate, retrospectively, summary estimates from the results of similar trials every time the results of a further trial in the series had become available. In the early 1990 s, comparisons of cumulative meta-analyses of treatments for myocardial infarction with advice promulgated through medical textbooks showed that research had continued long after robust estimates of treatment effects had accumulated, and that medical textbooks had overlooked strong, existing evidence from trials. Cumulative meta-analyses have subsequently been used to assess what could have been known had new studies been informed by systematic reviews of relevant existing evidence and how waste might have been reduced.

METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used a systematic approach to identify and summarise the findings of cumulative meta-analyses of studies of the effects of clinical interventions, published from 1992 to 2012. Searches were done of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Methodology Register and Science Citation Index. A total of 50 eligible reports were identified, including more than 1,500 cumulative meta-analyses. A variety of themes are illustrated with specific examples. The studies showed that initially positive results became null or negative in meta-analyses as more trials were done; that early null or negative results were over-turned; that stable results (beneficial, harmful and neutral) would have been seen had a meta-analysis been done before the new trial; and that additional trials had been much too small to resolve the remaining uncertainties.

CONCLUSIONS: This large, unique collection of cumulative meta-analyses highlights how a review of the existing evidence might have helped researchers, practitioners, patients and funders make more informed decisions and choices about new trials over decades of research. This would have led to earlier uptake of effective interventions in practice, less exposure of trial participants to less effective treatments, and reduced waste resulting from unjustified research.

Factors that impact on the use of mechanical ventilation weaning protocols in critically ill adults and children: a qualitative-evidence synthesis

Background:
Prolonged mechanical ventilation is associated with a longer intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay and higher mortality. Consequently, methods to improve ventilator weaning processes have been sought. Two recent Cochrane systematic reviews in ICU adult and paediatric populations concluded that protocols can be effective in reducing the duration of mechanical ventilation, but there was significant heterogeneity in study findings. Growing awareness of the benefits of understanding the contextual factors impacting on effectiveness has encouraged the integration of qualitative evidence syntheses with effectiveness reviews, which has delivered important insights into the reasons underpinning (differential) effectiveness of healthcare interventions.

Objectives:
1. To locate, appraise and synthesize qualitative evidence concerning the barriers and facilitators of the use of protocols for weaning critically-ill adults and children from mechanical ventilation;

2. To integrate this synthesis with two Cochrane effectiveness reviews of protocolized weaning to help explain observed heterogeneity by identifying contextual factors that impact on the use of protocols for weaning critically-ill adults and children from mechanical ventilation;

3. To use the integrated body of evidence to suggest the circumstances in which weaning protocols are most likely to be used.

Search methods:
We used a range of search terms identified with the help of the SPICE (Setting, Perspective, Intervention, Comparison, Evaluation) mnemonic. Where available, we used appropriate methodological filters for specific databases. We searched the following databases: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, OVID, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, EBSCOHost, Web of Science Core Collection, ASSIA, IBSS, Sociological Abstracts, ProQuest and LILACS on the 26th February 2015. In addition, we searched: the grey literature; the websites of professional associations for relevant publications; and the reference lists of all publications reviewed. We also contacted authors of the trials included in the effectiveness reviews as well as of studies (potentially) included in the qualitative synthesis, conducted citation searches of the publications reporting these studies, and contacted content experts.

We reran the search on 3rd July 2016 and found three studies, which are awaiting classification.

Selection criteria:
We included qualitative studies that described: the circumstances in which protocols are designed, implemented or used, or both, and the views and experiences of healthcare professionals either involved in the design, implementation or use of weaning protocols or involved in the weaning of critically-ill adults and children from mechanical ventilation not using protocols. We included studies that: reflected on any aspect of the use of protocols, explored contextual factors relevant to the development, implementation or use of weaning protocols, and reported contextual phenomena and outcomes identified as relevant to the effectiveness of protocolized weaning from mechanical ventilation.

Data collection and analysis:
At each stage, two review authors undertook designated tasks, with the results shared amongst the wider team for discussion and final development. We independently reviewed all retrieved titles, abstracts and full papers for inclusion, and independently extracted selected data from included studies. We used the findings of the included studies to develop a new set of analytic themes focused on the barriers and facilitators to the use of protocols, and further refined them to produce a set of summary statements. We used the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQual) framework to arrive at a final assessment of the overall confidence of the evidence used in the synthesis. We included all studies but undertook two sensitivity analyses to determine how the removal of certain bodies of evidence impacted on the content and confidence of the synthesis. We deployed a logic model to integrate the findings of the qualitative evidence synthesis with those of the Cochrane effectiveness reviews.

Main results:
We included 11 studies in our synthesis, involving 267 participants (one study did not report the number of participants). Five more studies are awaiting classification and will be dealt with when we update the review.

The quality of the evidence was mixed; of the 35 summary statements, we assessed 17 as ‘low’, 13 as ‘moderate’ and five as ‘high’ confidence. Our synthesis produced nine analytical themes, which report potential barriers and facilitators to the use of protocols. The themes are: the need for continual staff training and development; clinical experience as this promotes felt and perceived competence and confidence to wean; the vulnerability of weaning to disparate interprofessional working; an understanding of protocols as militating against a necessary proactivity in clinical practice; perceived nursing scope of practice and professional risk; ICU structure and processes of care; the ability of protocols to act as a prompt for shared care and consistency in weaning practice; maximizing the use of protocols through visibility and ease of implementation; and the ability of protocols to act as a framework for communication with parents.

Authors' conclusions:
There is a clear need for weaning protocols to take account of the social and cultural environment in which they are to be implemented. Irrespective of its inherent strengths, a protocol will not be used if it does not accommodate these complexities. In terms of protocol development, comprehensive interprofessional input will help to ensure broad-based understanding and a sense of ‘ownership’. In terms of implementation, all relevant ICU staff will benefit from general weaning as well as protocol-specific training; not only will this help secure a relevant clinical knowledge base and operational understanding, but will also demonstrate to others that this knowledge and understanding is in place. In order to maximize relevance and acceptability, protocols should be designed with the patient profile and requirements of the target ICU in mind. Predictably, an under-resourced ICU will impact adversely on protocol implementation, as staff will prioritize management of acutely deteriorating and critically-ill patients.

The effectiveness, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for maltreated children and adolescents: An evidence synthesis

DESIGN We will address our research objectives by searching the published and unpublished literature and conducting an evidence synthesis of i) studies of the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions provided for children and adolescents who have suffered maltreatment, ii) economic evaluations of these interventions and iii) studies of their acceptability to children, adolescents and their carers. SEARCH STRATEGY: Evidence will be identified via electronic databases for health and allied health literature, social sciences and social welfare, education and other evidence based depositories, and economic databases. We will identify material generated by user-led,voluntary sector enquiry by searching the internet and browsing the websites of relevant UK government departments and charities. Additionally, studies will be identified via the bibliographies of retrieved articles/reviews; targeted author searches; forward citation searching. We will also use our extensive professional networks, and our planned consultations with key stakeholders and our study steering committee. Databases will be searched from inception to time of search. REVIEW STRATEGY Inclusion criteria: 1) Infants, children or adolescents who have experienced maltreatment between the ages of 0 17 years. 2) All psychosocial interventions available for maltreated children and adolescents, by any provider and in any setting, aiming to address the sequelae of any form of maltreatment, including fabricated illness. 3) For synthesis of evidence of effectiveness: all controlled studies in which psychosocial interventions are compared with no-treatment, treatment as usual, waitlist or other-treated controls. For a synthesis of evidence of acceptability we will include any design that asks participants for their views or provides data on non-participation. For decision-analytic modelling we may include uncontrolled studies. Primary and secondary outcomes will be confirmed in consultation with stakeholders. Provisional primary outcomes are psychological distress/mental health (particularly PTSD, depression and anxiety, self-harm); ii) behaviour; iii) social functioning; iv) cognitive / academic attainment, v) quality of life, and vi) costs. After studies that meet the inclusion criteria have been identified (independently by two reviewers), data will be extracted and risk of bias (RoB) assessed (independently by two reviewers) using the Cochrane Collaboration RoB Tool (effectiveness), quality hierarchies of data sources for economic analyses (cost-effectiveness) and the CASP tool for qualitative research (acceptability). Where interventions are similar and appropriate data are available (or can be obtained) evidence synthesis will be performed to pool the results. Where possible, we will explore the extent to which age, maltreatment history (including whether intra- or extra-familial), time since maltreatment, care setting (family / out-of-home care including foster care/residential), care history, and characteristics of intervention (type, setting, provider, duration) moderate the effects of psychosocial interventions. A synthesis of acceptability data will be undertaken, using a narrative approach to synthesis. A decision-analytic model will be constructed to compare the expected cost-effectiveness of the different types of intervention identified in the systematic review. We will also conduct a Value of information analysis if the data permit. EXPECTED OUTPUTS: A synthesis of the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for maltreated children (taking into account age, maltreatment profile and setting) and their acceptability to key stakeholders.