Literature review of estimation of prevalence rate of HIV/AIDS in India using population survey and sentinel surveillance based data

HIV/AIDS is a treatable although incurable disease that presents immense challenges to those infected including physical, social and psychological effects. As of 2009, an estimated 2.4 million people were living with HIV or AIDS in India, 0.3% of the country's population. In India, it is difficult to not only treat but also to track because it is associated with socio-economic factors such as illiteracy, social biases, poor sanitation, malnutrition and social class. Nevertheless, it is important to know the prevalence of HIV/AIDS for several reasons. At the individual level, the quality of life of people living with HIV/AIDS is markedly lower than their counterparts without the disease and is associated with challenges. At the community level, it is important to identify high risk groups, monitor prevention efforts, and allocate appropriate resources to target programs for the reduction of transmission of HIV. ^

Influenza vaccination as a primary or secondary prevention for cardiovascular diseases: A systematic review of the literature

Background: Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. CVD mainly comprise of coronary heart disease and stroke and were ranked first and fourth respectively amongst leading causes of death in the United States. Influenza (flu) causes annual outbreaks and pandemics and is increasingly recognized as an important trigger for acute coronary syndromes and stroke. Influenza vaccination is an inexpensive and effective strategy for prevention of influenza related complications in high risk individuals. Though it is recommended for all CVD patients, Influenza vaccine is still used at suboptimal levels in these patients owing to prevailing controversy related to its effectiveness in preventing CVD. This review was undertaken to critically assess the effectiveness of influenza vaccination as a primary or secondary prevention method for CVD. ^ Methods: A systematic review was conducted using electronic databases OVID MEDLINE, PUBMED (National Library of Medicine), EMBASE, GOOGLE SCHOLAR and TRIP (Turning Research into Practice). The study search was limited to peer-reviewed articles published in English language from January 1970 through May 2012. The case control studies, cohort studies and randomized controlled trials related to influenza vaccination and CVD, with data on at least one of the outcomes were identified. In the review, only population-based epidemiologic studies in all ethnic groups and of either sex and with age limitation of 30 yrs or above, with clinical CVD outcomes of interest were included. ^ Results: Of the 16 studies (8 case control studies, 6 cohort studies and 2 randomized controlled trials) that met the inclusion criteria, 14 studies reported that there was a significant benefit in u influenza vaccination as primary or secondary prevention method for preventing new cardiovascular events. In contrary to the above findings, two studies mentioned that there was no significant benefit of vaccination in CVD prevention. ^ Conclusion: The available body of evidence in the review elucidates that vaccination against influenza is associated with reduction in the risk of new CVD events, hospitalization for coronary heart disease and stroke and as well as the risk of death. The study findings disclose that the influenza vaccination is very effective in CVD prevention and should be encouraged for the high risk population. However, larger and more future studies like randomized control trials are needed to further evaluate and confirm these findings. ^

Cost-effectiveness of intensified interventions to control healthcare-associated MRSA infections -- A systematic literature review

Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus healthcare-associated infections (MRSA HAIs) are a major cause of morbidity in hospitalized patients. They pose great economic burden to hospitals caring for these patients. Intensified Interventions aim to control MRSA HAIs. Cost-effectiveness of Intensified Interventions is largely unclear. We performed a review of cost-effectiveness literature on Intensified Interventions , and provide a summary of study findings, the status of economic research in the area, and information that will help decision-makers at regional level and guide future research.^ We conducted literature search using electronic database PubMed, EBSCO, and The Cochrane Library. We limited our search to English articles published after 1999. We reviewed a total of 1,356 titles, and after applying our inclusion and exclusion criteria selected seven articles for our final review. We modified the Economic Evaluation Abstraction Form provided by CDC, and used this form to abstract data from studies.^ Of the seven selected articles two were cohort studies and the remaining five were modeling studies. They were done in various countries, in different study settings, and with different variations of the Intensified Intervention . Overall, six of the seven studies reported that Intensified Interventions were dominant or at least cost-effective in their study setting. This effect persisted on sensitivity testing.^ We identified many gaps in research in this field. The cost-effectiveness research in the field is mostly composed of modeling studies. The studies do not always clearly describe the intervention. The intervention and infection costs and the sources for these costs are not always explicit or are missing. In modeling studies, there is uncertainty associated with some key model inputs, but these inputs are not always identified. The models utilized in the modeling studies are not always tested for internal consistency or validity. Studies usually test the short term cost-effectiveness of Intensified Interventions but not the long results.^ Our study limitation was the inability to adjust for differences in study settings, intervention costs, disease costs, or effectiveness measures. Our study strength is the presentation of a focused literature review of Intensified Interventions in hospital settings. Through this study we provide information that will help decision makers at regional level, help guide future research, and might change clinical care and policies. ^

Menu labeling and food choice: A systematic review of the literature concerning the effects of menu labeling on consumer food choices

Objective: To review published literature on the impact of restaurant menu labeling on consumer food choices.^ Method: To examine all relevant studies published on the topic from 2002 to 2012.^ Results: Sixteen studies were identified as relevant and suitable for review. These studies comprised of one systematic review, one health impact assessment, and fourteen research studies conducted at restaurants, cafeterias, and laboratories. Three of ten studies conducted at restaurants and cafeterias and two of four studies conducted at laboratories found positive effects of menu labeling on consumer food choices. Conversely, the systematic review identified for this review found that five out of six studies resulted in weakly positive effects. The health impact assessment estimated positive effects; however, the results of this assessment must be cautiously interpreted since the authors used simulated data.^ Conclusion: Overall, there is insufficient evidence to provide support for the majority of the types of menu labels identified in this review on consumer food choice.^

Clinical trials, informed consent, & emergency medicine: A systematic literature review

Background: In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates clinical trials. These regulations address good clinical practices as well as human subject protection (FDA, 2012). One of the most important legal and ethical concerns in clinical trials is informed consent. 21 CFR 50 governs human subjects research. Part 50.24 provides an emergency research exception to the informed consent requirement. Research was conducted to determine the appropriateness of this exception, whether the benefit justifies the exception, and its public health significance.^ Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted and articles were identified from peer-reviewed journals.^ Results: There is some variance in opinions regarding the appropriateness of the exception, but the literature reviewed found the study results of these trials justified the waiver.^ Conclusion: The exception to the informed consent requirement is likely appropriate and justified in emergency research when implemented within the specified guidelines.^