Methodology used in studies reporting chronic kidney disease prevalence : a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Many publications report the prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in the general population. Comparisons across studies are hampered as CKD prevalence estimations are influenced by study population characteristics and laboratory methods. METHODS: For this systematic review, two researchers independently searched PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify all original research articles that were published between 1 January 2003 and 1 November 2014 reporting the prevalence of CKD in the European adult general population. Data on study methodology and reporting of CKD prevalence results were independently extracted by two researchers. RESULTS: We identified 82 eligible publications and included 48 publications of individual studies for the data extraction. There was considerable variation in population sample selection. The majority of studies did not report the sampling frame used, and the response ranged from 10 to 87%. With regard to the assessment of kidney function, 67% used a Jaffe assay, whereas 13% used the enzymatic assay for creatinine determination. Isotope dilution mass spectrometry calibration was used in 29%. The CKD-EPI (52%) and MDRD (75%) equations were most often used to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR). CKD was defined as estimated GFR (eGFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) in 92% of studies. Urinary markers of CKD were assessed in 60% of the studies. CKD prevalence was reported by sex and age strata in 54 and 50% of the studies, respectively. In publications with a primary objective of reporting CKD prevalence, 39% reported a 95% confidence interval. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this systematic review showed considerable variation in methods for sampling the general population and assessment of kidney function across studies reporting CKD prevalence. These results are utilized to provide recommendations to help optimize both the design and the reporting of future CKD prevalence studies, which will enhance comparability of study results.

Bias in dissemination of clinical research findings: structured OPEN framework of what, who and why, based on literature review and expert consensus.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to review highly cited articles that focus on non-publication of studies, and to develop a consistent and comprehensive approach to defining (non-) dissemination of research findings. SETTING: We performed a scoping review of definitions of the term 'publication bias' in highly cited publications. PARTICIPANTS: Ideas and experiences of a core group of authors were collected in a draft document, which was complemented by the findings from our literature search. INTERVENTIONS: The draft document including findings from the literature search was circulated to an international group of experts and revised until no additional ideas emerged and consensus was reached. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: We propose a new approach to the comprehensive conceptualisation of (non-) dissemination of research. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Our 'What, Who and Why?' approach includes issues that need to be considered when disseminating research findings (What?), the different players who should assume responsibility during the various stages of conducting a clinical trial and disseminating clinical trial documents (Who?), and motivations that might lead the various players to disseminate findings selectively, thereby introducing bias in the dissemination process (Why?). CONCLUSIONS: Our comprehensive framework of (non-) dissemination of research findings, based on the results of a scoping literature search and expert consensus will facilitate the development of future policies and guidelines regarding the multifaceted issue of selective publication, historically referred to as 'publication bias'.

An evaluation of the Swiss staging model for hypothermia using case reports from the literature.

BACKGROUND: Core body temperature is used to stage and guide the management of hypothermic patients, however obtaining accurate measurements of core temperature is challenging, especially in the pre-hospital context. The Swiss staging model for hypothermia uses clinical indicators to stage hypothermia. The proposed temperature range for clinical stage 1 is <35-32 °C (95-90 °F), for stage 2, <32-28 °C (<90-82 °F) for stage 3, <28-24 °C (<82-75 °F), and for stage 4 below 24 °C (75 °F). However, the evidence relating these temperature ranges to the clinical stages needs to be strengthened. METHODS: Medline was used to retrieve data on as many cases of accidental hypothermia (core body temperature <35 °C (95 °F)) as possible. Cases of therapeutic or neonatal hypothermia and those with confounders or insufficient data were excluded. To evaluate the Swiss staging model for hypothermia, we estimated the percentage of those patients who were correctly classified and compared the theoretical with the observed ranges of temperatures for each clinical stage. The number of rescue collapses was also recorded. RESULTS: We analysed 183 cases; the median temperature for the sample was 25.2 °C (IQR 22-28). 95 of the 183 patients (51.9 %; 95 % CI = 44.7 %-59.2 %) were correctly classified, while the temperature was overestimated in 36 patients (19.7 %; 95 % CI = 13.9 %-25.4 %). We observed important overlaps among the four stage groups with respect to core temperature, the lowest observed temperature being 28.1 °C for Stage 1, 22 °C for Stage 2, 19.3 °C for Stage 3, and 13.7 °C for stage 4. CONCLUSION: Predicting core body temperature using clinical indicators is a difficult task. Despite the inherent limitations of our study, it increases the strength of the evidence linking the clinical hypothermia stage to core temperature. Decreasing the thresholds of temperatures distinguishing the different stages would allow a reduction in the number of cases where body temperature is overestimated, avoiding some potentially negative consequences for the management of hypothermic patients.

Fingermark age determinations: legal considerations, review of the literature and practical propositions

The question of the age of fingermarks is often raised in investigations and trials when suspects admit that they have left their fingermarks at a crime scene but allege that the contact occurred at a different time than the crime and for legal reasons. In the first part of this review article, examples from American appellate court cases will be used to demonstrate that there is a lack of consensus among American courts regarding the admissibility and weight of testimony from expert witnesses who provide opinions about the age of fingermarks. Of course, these issues are not only encountered in America but have also been reported elsewhere, for example in Europe. The disparity in the way fingermark dating cases were managed in these examples is probably due to the fact that no methodology has been validated and accepted by the forensic science community so far. The second part of this review article summarizes the studies reported on fingermark dating in the literature and highlights the fact that most proposed methodologies still suffer from limitations preventing their use in practice. Nevertheless, several approaches based on the evolution of aging parameters detected in fingermark residue over time appear to show promise for the fingermark dating field. Based on these approaches, the definition of a formal methodological framework for fingermark dating cases is proposed in order to produce relevant temporal information. This framework identifies which type of information could and should be obtained about fingermark aging and what developments are still required to scientifically address dating issues.

Tropheryma whipplei tricuspid endocarditis: a case report and review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: The main clinical manifestations of Whipple's disease are weight loss, arthropathy, diarrhea and abdominal pain. Cardiac involvement is frequently described. However, endocarditis is rare and is not usually the initial presentation of the disease. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported case of a patient with Tropheryma whipplei tricuspid endocarditis without any other valve involved and not presenting signs of arthralgia and abdominal involvement. CASE PRESENTATION: We report a case of a 50-year-old Caucasian man with tricuspid endocarditis caused by Tropheryma whipplei, showing signs of severe shock and an absence of other more classic clinical signs of Whipple's disease, such as arthralgia, abdominal pain and diarrhea. Tropheryma whipplei was documented by polymerase chain reaction of the blood and pleural fluid. The infection was treated with a combined treatment of doxycycline, hydroxychloroquine and sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim for one year. CONCLUSION: Tropheryma whipplei infectious endocarditis should always be considered when facing a blood-culture negative endocarditis particularly in right-sided valves. Although not standardized yet, treatment of Tropheryma whipplei endocarditis should probably include a bactericidal antibiotic (such as doxycycline) and should be given over a prolonged period of time (a minimum of one year).