Source of funding in experimental studies of mobile phone use on health: Update of systematic review

A previous review showed that among 59 studies published in 1995–2005, industry-funded studies were least likely to report effects of controlled exposure to mobile phone radiation on health-related outcomes. We updated literature searches in 2005–2009 and extracted data on funding, conflicts of interest and results. Of 75 additional studies 12% were industry-funded, 44% had public and 19% mixed funding; funding was unclear in 25%. Previous findings were confirmed: industry-sponsored studies were least likely to report results suggesting effects. Interestingly, the proportion of studies indicating effects declined in 1995–2009, regardless of funding source. Source of funding and conflicts of interest are important in this field of research.

Back related outcome assessment instruments

A literature review of the most widely used condition specific, self administered assessment questionnaires for low back pain had been undertaken. General and historic aspects, reliability, responsiveness and minimum clinically important difference, external validity, floor and ceiling effects, and available languages were analysed. These criteria, however, are only part of the consideration. Of similar importance are the content, wording of questions and answers in each of the six questionnaires and an analysis of the different score results. The issue of score bias is discussed and suggestions are given in order to increase the construct validity in the practical use of the individual questionnaires.

Source of funding and results of studies of health effects of mobile phone use: systematic review of experimental studies

OBJECTIVES: There is concern regarding the possible health effects of cellular telephone use. We examined whether the source of funding of studies of the effects of low-level radiofrequency radiation is associated with the results of studies. We conducted a systematic review of studies of controlled exposure to radiofrequency radiation with health-related outcomes (electroencephalogram, cognitive or cardiovascular function, hormone levels, symptoms, and subjective well-being). DATA SOURCES: We searched EMBASE, Medline, and a specialist database in February 2005 and scrutinized reference lists from relevant publications. DATA EXTRACTION: Data on the source of funding, study design, methodologic quality, and other study characteristics were extracted. The primary outcome was the reporting of at least one statistically significant association between the exposure and a health-related outcome. Data were analyzed using logistic regression models. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 59 studies, 12 (20%) were funded exclusively by the telecommunications industry, 11 (19%) were funded by public agencies or charities, 14 (24%) had mixed funding (including industry), and in 22 (37%) the source of funding was not reported. Studies funded exclusively by industry reported the largest number of outcomes, but were least likely to report a statistically significant result: The odds ratio was 0.11 (95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.78), compared with studies funded by public agencies or charities. This finding was not materially altered in analyses adjusted for the number of outcomes reported, study quality, and other factors. CONCLUSIONS: The interpretation of results from studies of health effects of radiofrequency radiation should take sponsorship into account.

Content comparison of health-related quality of life instruments for COPD

BACKGROUND: Due to the increasing importance of quality of life assessments in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, and the increased use of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) for comparative purposes it is essential to understand the relationship between health-related quality of life (HRQL) instruments and the ICF. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the content of recommended COPD-specific HRQL instruments using the ICF as reference. COPD-specific instruments mentioned in widely accepted guidelines were linked to the ICF using standardized linking rules. The degree of agreement between various health professionals was assessed by calculating the kappa statistic. RESULTS: Eleven instruments were included. They varied strongly in the number of concepts contained and the number of ICF categories used to map these concepts. A total of 548 concepts were identified and linked to 60 different ICF categories. Only the single category 'dyspnea' was covered by all instruments, whilst 21 categories were unique to specific instruments. The relationships of the measures with the ICF were identified. CONCLUSIONS: This study may aid researchers and clinicians to choose the most appropriate instrument for a specific purpose as well as help compare studies that have used different instruments for HRQL assessment.

Macular thickness measurements in healthy eyes using six different optical coherence tomography instruments

To compare central retinal thickness (CRT) measurements in healthy eyes by different commercially available OCT instruments and to compare the intersession reproducibility of such measurements.

Content comparison of health-related quality of life instruments for obstructive sleep apnea

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Due to the increasing importance of quality of life assessments in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients and due to an increased use of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), for comparative purposes it is essential to understand the relationship between health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instruments and the ICF. The purpose of this study was to compare the content covered by OSA-specific instruments using the ICF. PATIENTS AND METHODS: OSA-specific instruments were identified, including the Calgary Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index, the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire, the Obstructive Sleep Apnea Patient-Oriented Severity Index, and the Quebec Sleep Questionnaire, and linked to the ICF by six health professionals according to standardized guidelines. The degree of agreement between health professionals was calculated by means of the kappa statistic. RESULTS: A total of 308 concepts were identified and linked to 78 different ICF categories; 35 categories of the component body function, one category of the component body structure, 38 categories of the component activities and participation, and four categories of the component environmental factors. Only contents within the chapters mental functions, mobility and social life were addressed by all instruments. Forty-seven categories were covered by only one instrument. CONCLUSION: The ICF proved highly useful for the comparison of HRQOL instruments. This analysis may help researchers and clinicians to choose the most appropriate HRQOL instrument for a specific purpose as well as help to compare study outcomes of studies using different instruments for HRQOL assessment.

Identification of prognostic factors for chronicity in patients with low back pain: a review of screening instruments

Low back pain (LBP) is currently the most prevalent and costly musculoskeletal problem in modern societies. Screening instruments for the identification of prognostic factors in LBP may help to identify patients with an unfavourable outcome. In this systematic review screening instruments published between 1970 and 2007 were identified by a literature search. Nine different instruments were analysed and their different items grouped into ten structures. Finally, the predictive effectiveness of these structures was examined for the dependent variables including "work status", "functional limitation", and "pain". The strongest predictors for "work status" were psychosocial and occupational structures, whereas for "functional limitation" and "pain" psychological structures were dominating. Psychological and occupational factors show a high reliability for the prognosis of patients with LBP. Screening instruments for the identification of prognostic factors in patients with LBP should include these factors as a minimum core set.