Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Individual Participant Data The PRISMA-IPD Statement

IMPORTANCE Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of individual participant data (IPD) aim to collect, check, and reanalyze individual-level data from all studies addressing a particular research question and are therefore considered a gold standard approach to evidence synthesis. They are likely to be used with increasing frequency as current initiatives to share clinical trial data gain momentum and may be particularly important in reviewing controversial therapeutic areas.

OBJECTIVE To develop PRISMA-IPD as a stand-alone extension to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) Statement, tailored to the specific requirements of reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of IPD. Although developed primarily for reviews of randomized trials, many items will apply in other contexts, including reviews of diagnosis and prognosis.

DESIGN Development of PRISMA-IPD followed the EQUATOR Network framework guidance and used the existing standard PRISMA Statement as a starting point to draft additional relevant material. A web-based survey informed discussion at an international workshop that included researchers, clinicians, methodologists experienced in conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of IPD, and journal editors. The statement was drafted and iterative refinements were made by the project, advisory, and development groups. The PRISMA-IPD Development Group reached agreement on the PRISMA-IPD checklist and flow diagram by consensus.

FINDINGS Compared with standard PRISMA, the PRISMA-IPD checklist includes 3 new items that address (1) methods of checking the integrity of the IPD (such as pattern of randomization, data consistency, baseline imbalance, and missing data), (2) reporting any important issues that emerge, and (3) exploring variation (such as whether certain types of individual benefit more from the intervention than others). A further additional item was created by reorganization of standard PRISMA items relating to interpreting results. Wording was modified in 23 items to reflect the IPD approach.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE PRISMA-IPD provides guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of IPD.

Digital slide viewing for primary reporting in gastrointestinal pathology: a validation study

Despite the increasing availability of digital slide viewing, and numerous advantages associated with its application, a lack of quality validation studies is amongst the reasons for poor uptake in routine practice. This study evaluated primary digital pathology reporting in the setting of routine subspecialist gastrointestinal pathology, commonplace in most tissue pathology laboratories and representing one of the highest volume specialties in most laboratories. Individual digital and glass slide diagnoses were compared amongst three pathologists reporting in a gastrointestinal subspecialty team, in a prospective series of 100 consecutive diagnostic cases from routine practice in a large teaching hospital laboratory. The study included a washout period of at least 6 months. Discordant diagnoses were classified, and the study evaluated against recent College of American Pathologists (CAP) recommendations for evaluating digital pathology systems for diagnostic use. The study design met all 12 of the CAP recommendations. The 100 study cases generated 300 pairs of diagnoses, comprising 100 glass slide diagnoses and 100 digital diagnoses from each of the three study pathologists. 286 of 300 pairs of diagnoses were concordant, representing intraobserver concordance of 95.3 %, broadly comparable to rates previously published in this field. In ten of the 14 discordant pairs, the glass slide diagnosis was favoured; in four cases, the digital diagnosis was favoured, but importantly, the 14 discordant intraobserver diagnoses were considered to be of minor clinical significance. Interobserver, or viewing modality independent, concordance was found in 94 of the total of 100 study cases, providing a comparable baseline discordance rate expected in any second viewing of pathology material. These overall results support the safe use of digital pathology in primary diagnostic reporting in this setting

Exploring the Influence of Reporting Delay on Criminal Justice Outcomes: Comparing Child and Adult Reporters of Childhood Sexual Abuse

Delay between disclosure and reporting child sexual abuse is common and has significant implications for the prosecution of such offenses. While we might expect the relationship to be a linear one with longer delay reducing the likelihood of prosecution, the present study confirms a more complex interaction. Utilizing data from 2,079 police records in Northern Ireland, the study investigated the impact of reporting delay on pretrial criminal justice outcomes for child and adult reporters of child sexual abuse. While teenagers were found to be the group most disadvantaged by reporting delay, increased delay actually appeared advantageous for some groups, notably adult females reporting offenses that occurred when they were 0 to 6 years old. Conversely, adult males reporting child sexual abuse did not appear to benefit from increased delay, suggesting both an adult and gender bias within decision-making processes. The implications for future research are discussed. 

Making randomised trials more efficient: report of the first meeting to discuss the Trial Forge platform

Randomised trials are at the heart of evidence-based healthcare, but the methods and infrastructure for conducting these sometimes complex studies are largely evidence free. Trial Forge (www.trialforge.org) is an initiative that aims to increase the evidence base for trial decision making and, in doing so, to improve trial efficiency.

This paper summarises a one-day workshop held in Edinburgh on 10 July 2014 to discuss Trial Forge and how to advance this initiative. We first outline the problem of inefficiency in randomised trials and go on to describe Trial Forge. We present participants' views on the processes in the life of a randomised trial that should be covered by Trial Forge.

General support existed at the workshop for the Trial Forge approach to increase the evidence base for making randomised trial decisions and for improving trial efficiency. Agreed upon key processes included choosing the right research question; logistical planning for delivery, training of staff, recruitment, and retention; data management and dissemination; and close down. The process of linking to existing initiatives where possible was considered crucial. Trial Forge will not be a guideline or a checklist but a 'go to' website for research on randomised trials methods, with a linked programme of applied methodology research, coupled to an effective evidence-dissemination process. Moreover, it will support an informal network of interested trialists who meet virtually (online) and occasionally in person to build capacity and knowledge in the design and conduct of efficient randomised trials.

Some of the resources invested in randomised trials are wasted because of limited evidence upon which to base many aspects of design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of clinical trials. Trial Forge will help to address this lack of evidence.

Transparency in Reporting on Charities’ Efficiency: A Framework for Analysis

In recent difficult economic times, the efficiency with which a charity spends the funds entrusted to it has become an increasingly important aspect of charitable performance. Transparency on efficiency, including the reporting of relevant measures and information to understand, contextualise and evaluate such measures, is suggested as important to a range of stakeholders. However, using a novel framework for the analysis of efficiency reporting in the context of transparency and stakeholder theory, this research provides evidence that reporting on efficiency in UK (United Kingdom) charities lacks transparency, both in terms of the extent and manner of disclosure. It is argued that efficiency reporting in UK charities is more concerned with legitimising these organisations rather than providing ethically-driven accounts of their efficiency.

Somatic Cough Syndrome (Previously Referred to as Psychogenic Cough) and Tic Cough (Previously Referred to as Habit Cough) in Adults and Children: CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report

BACKGROUND: We conducted a systematic review on the management of psychogenic cough, habit cough, and tic cough to update the recommendations and suggestions of the 2006 guideline on this topic.

METHODS: We followed the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST) methodologic guidelines and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework. The Expert Cough Panel based their recommendations on data from the systematic review, patients' values and preferences, and the clinical context. Final grading was reached by consensus according to Delphi methodology.

RESULTS: The results of the systematic review revealed only low-quality evidence to support how to define or diagnose psychogenic or habit cough with no validated diagnostic criteria. With respect to treatment, low-quality evidence allowed the committee to only suggest therapy for children believed to have psychogenic cough. Such therapy might consist of nonpharmacologic trials of hypnosis or suggestion therapy, or combinations of reassurance, counseling, and referral to a psychologist, psychotherapy, and appropriate psychotropic medications. Based on multiple resources and contemporary psychologic, psychiatric, and neurologic criteria (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition and tic disorder guidelines), the committee suggests that the terms psychogenic and habit cough are out of date and inaccurate.

CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the 2006 CHEST Cough Guidelines, the major change in suggestions is that the terms psychogenic and habit cough be abandoned in favor of somatic cough syndrome and tic cough, respectively, even though the evidence to do so at this time is of low quality.

Assessment of lux-marked Pseudomonas fluorescens for reporting on organic carbon compounds

Carbon-flow from plant roots to the rhizosphere provides a major source of nutrients for the soil microbial population. However, quantification of carbon-flow is problematic due to its complex composition. This study investigated the potential of lux-marked Pseudomonas fluorescens to discriminate between forms of carbon present in the rhizosphere by measuring the light response to a range of carbon compounds. Results indicate that bioluminescence of short-term carbon-starved P. fluorescens is dependent upon the source and concentration of carbon. This system, therefore, has the potential to both quantify and qualify organic acids present in rhizodeposits.

Quality of reporting of dental survival analyses

To explore the quality of reporting (writing and graphics) of articles that used time-to-event analyses to report dental treatment outcomes. A systematic search of the top 50 dental journals in 2008 produced the sample of articles for this analysis. Articles reporting treatment outcomes with (n = 95) and without (n = 91) time-to-event statistics were reviewed. Survival descriptive words used in the two groups were analysed (Pearson's chi-square). The quality of life tables, survival curves and time-to-event statistics were assessed (Kappa analysed agreement) and explored. Words describing dental outcomes 'over time' were more common in time-to-event compared with control articles (77%, 3%, P < 0.001). Non-specific use of 'rate' was common across both groups. Life tables and survival curves were used by 39% and 48% of the time-to-event articles, with at least one used by 82%. Construction quality was poor: 21% of life tables and 28% of survival curves achieved an acceptable standard. Time-to-event statistical reporting was poor: 3% achieved a high and 59% achieved an acceptable standard. The survival statistic, summary figure and standard error were reported in 76%, 95% and 20% of time-to-event articles. Individual statistical terms and graphic aids were common within and unique to time-to-event articles. Unfortunately, important details were regularly omitted from statistical descriptions and survival figures making the overall quality poor. It is likely this will mean such articles will be incorrectly indexed in databases, missed by searchers and unable to be understood completely if identified.

Treatment of Unexplained Chronic Cough: CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report

Background: Unexplained chronic cough (UCC) causes significant quality of life impairment. There is a need to identify effective assessment and treatment approaches for UCC.

Methods: This systematic review of randomized controlled clinical trials asked: What is the efficacy of treatment compared to usual care on cough severity, cough frequency, and cough-related quality of life in patients with unexplained chronic cough (UCC)? Studies of adults and adolescents >12 years with a chronic cough of >8 weeks duration that was unexplained after systematic investigation and treatment were included and assessed for relevance and quality. Based upon the systematic review, guideline suggestions were developed and voted upon using CHEST organization methodology.

Results: 11 RCTs and 5 systematic reviews were included. The 11 RCTs reported data on 570 participants with chronic cough who received a variety of interventions. Study quality was high in 10 RCTs. The studies used a variety of descriptors and assessments to identify unexplained chronic cough. While gabapentin and morphine showed positive effects on cough-related quality of life, only gabapentin was supported as a treatment recommendation. Studies of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) suffered from intervention fidelity bias, and when this was addressed, ICS were not found to be effective for UCC. Esomeprazole was not effective for UCC without features of gastroesophageal acid reflux. Studies addressing non-acid gastroesophageal reflux were not identified. A multimodality speech pathology intervention improved cough severity.

Conclusions: The evidence supporting the diagnosis and management of UCC is limited. UCC requires further study to establish agreed terminology and the optimal methods of investigation using established criteria for intervention fidelity. Speech pathology based cough suppression is suggested as a treatment option for UCC. This guideline presents suggestions for diagnosis and treatment based on the best available evidence and identifies gaps in our knowledge and areas for future research.

Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Genetic Associations: Mostly False? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: Many associations between abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and genetic polymorphisms have been reported. It is unclear which are genuine and which may be caused by type 1 errors, biases, and flexible study design. The objectives of the study were to identify associations supported by current evidence and to investigate the effect of study design on reporting associations.

METHODS: Data sources were MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science. Reports were dual-reviewed for relevance and inclusion against predefined criteria (studies of genetic polymorphisms and AAA risk). Study characteristics and data were extracted using an agreed tool and reports assessed for quality. Heterogeneity was assessed using I(2) and fixed- and random-effects meta-analyses were conducted for variants that were reported at least twice, if any had reported an association. Strength of evidence was assessed using a standard guideline.

RESULTS: Searches identified 467 unique articles, of which 97 were included. Of 97 studies, 63 reported at least one association. Of 92 studies that conducted multiple tests, only 27% corrected their analyses. In total, 263 genes were investigated, and associations were reported in polymorphisms in 87 genes. Associations in CDKN2BAS, SORT1, LRP1, IL6R, MMP3, AGTR1, ACE, and APOA1 were supported by meta-analyses.

CONCLUSION: Uncorrected multiple testing and flexible study design (particularly testing many inheritance models and subgroups, and failure to check for Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium) contributed to apparently false associations being reported. Heterogeneity, possibly due to the case mix, geographical, temporal, and environmental variation between different studies, was evident. Polymorphisms in nine genes had strong or moderate support on the basis of the literature at this time. Suggestions are made for improving AAA genetics study design and conduct.

Assessing and Reporting the Adverse Effects of Antipsychotic Medication: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies, and Prospective, Retrospective, and Cross-Sectional Research

Objective: Adverse effects (AEs) of antipsychotic medication have important implications for patients and prescribers in terms of wellbeing, treatment adherence and quality of life. This review summarises strategies for collecting and reporting AE data across a representative literature sample to ascertain their rigour and comprehensiveness. Methods: A PsycINFO search, following PRISMA Statement guidelines, was conducted in English-language journals (1980–July 2014) using the following search string: (antipsychotic* OR neuroleptic*) AND (subjective effect OR subjective experience OR subjective response OR subjective mental alterations OR subjective tolerability OR subjective wellbeing OR patient perspective OR self-rated effects OR adverse effects OR side-effects). Of 7,825 articles, 384 were retained that reported quantified results for AEs of typical or atypical antipsychotics amongst transdiagnostic adult, adolescent, and child populations. Information extracted included: types of AEs reported; how AEs were assessed; assessment duration; assessment of the global impact of antipsychotic consumption on wellbeing; and conflict of interest due to industry sponsorship. Results: Neurological, metabolic, and sedation-related cognitive effects were reported most systematically relative to affective, anticholinergic, autonomic, cutaneous, hormonal, miscellaneous, and non-sedative cognitive effects. The impact of AEs on patient wellbeing was poorly assessed. Cross-sectional and prospective research designs yielded more comprehensive data about AE severity and prevalence than clinical or observational retrospective studies. 3 Conclusions: AE detection and classification can be improved through the use of standardised assessment instruments and consideration of subjective patient impact. Observational research can supplement information from clinical trials to improve the ecological validity of AE data.