Evidence-based medicine has been hijacked: a report to David Sackett. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;73:82-86. [PMID: 26934549 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.02.012]

Investigating the trustworthiness of randomized controlled trials in osteopathic research: a systematic review with meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To systematically investigate trustworthiness (methodological rigor, transparency, good governance, research integrity, and absence of misconduct) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of osteopathic manual therapy.

METHODS

This prospectively registered review (PROSPERO-ID: CRD42023457697) searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, PEDro, ostmed.dr, and Chiroindex for RCTs evaluating osteopathic treatments (January 2021-June 2024). Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using Cochrane tool 2, while trustworthiness was assessed with the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Screening Tool and the REAPPRAISED checklist. Journal trustworthiness, misleading representations in abstracts ("spin"), and results plausibility (via meta-analysis) were also assessed. Findings were synthesized descriptively.

RESULTS

Sixty-one RCTs were included (median sample size 45, interquartile range (IQR) 30-76), largely studying healthy volunteers (29%). Most had high RoB (74%), and only 7% acknowledged potential conflicts from authors' professional ties. No journals appeared on cautionary lists, although 23% of articles were published within 2 months of submission. Only 27% of contactable authors engaged with reviewers. Seven abstracts (12%) were free of spin. Methodological concerns included poor missing data handling (31%), selective analyses (38%), unacknowledged multiple testing (36%), and outcome switching (12%). Meta-analysis found two outliers and five further with very large effects, while 19% provided inadequate data for pooling. Limitations include incomplete reports and lack of validated trustworthiness assessment tools.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to best practices in osteopathic RCTs needs improvement to enhance evidence-based decision-making, reduce research waste, and enhance reproducibility. Further research should explore whether these findings apply to other small, under-resourced fields.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Clinical trials are studies that test if medical treatments work. Doctors and others use these studies to decide how to care for patients or which treatments should be paid for. For clinical trials to be helpful, they need to follow rules to show they can be trusted. For example, researchers can build trust by sharing their plans before they start, reporting all their results honestly and answering questions about their work. In this project, we looked at 61 clinical trials from a 3.5-year period that tested a hands-on treatment called "osteopathic manual therapy." We checked how well these trials followed the rules for trustworthy research. We found that many trials had problems. For example, important research steps were skipped (such as properly registering the study on appropriate online platforms before starting, following the steps described in the registration documents, and correctly examining the collected data). Often, results were also made to look better than they really are, or it was not clearly explained what happened during the study. Only a few researchers answered questions when we asked them. This shows that some osteopathic trials need to do better so people can trust the results. We also suggest ways researchers can improve trustworthiness in the future.

Practising Less is More: An Exploration of What it Means to See "This Patient" Not a "Patient Like This"

In the last decade literature focused on a "less is more" approach has been primarily represented by clinical cases describing the excesses of an aggressive, redundant, non-personalized, and non-respectful medicine. Most of these articles focus on a "more is worse" approach and centre around the downstream negative consequences of medical overuse. Having identified a gap in the literature on the experience and practice of less, rather than the harms of excess, we carried out an exploratory qualitative study into how a "less is more" approach works in practice. A hermeneutic phenomenological approach was adopted to allow us to examine the realm of lived experience as a valid data source and as a path from which to understand a "less is more" approach "from the bedside." A Phenomenology of Practice was chosen as a more specific frame for this research because of its added focus on action and practical application in professional settings. Seventy stories written by physicians, patients, nurses, caregivers, and other health professionals have been received and analysed. These stories were gathered as part of a project called "Slow Stories" which aimed to collect clinical cases that have been positively resolved by adopting a "less is more" approach to patient care. After having conducted an in-depth analysis, separately and as a group, the researchers identified five key phenomenological themes; Time to relate is time to heal; Doing more does not mean doing better; Settings for a slow medicine; Slow care at the end of life; and Personalized vs. standardized treatment. Each of these themes offers insights into how a "less is more" approach can be used in practice and illustrates how a "less is more" strategy can play a significant role in positively resolving certain clinical cases.

Questioning evidence-based practice in physiotherapy: a philosophical reflection. The example of physiotherapy with musicians

Introduction

In the late 1990s, evidence-based medicine (EBM) emerged, emphasizing the conscientious use of current best evidence in medicine and ensuring the best care for each individual. Thus, applying evidence-based practice (EBP) in physiotherapy is complex due to sparse research, distinct challenges, and unsuitable tools. This is particularly relevant considering musicians' health since the literature is very limited.

Part I

The first part advocates for EBP and explain how it ensures both the best care and adherence to ethical principles (beneficence, non-maleficence, respect for autonomy, and justice), for both caregivers and patients.

Part II

The second part discusses the common pitfalls often encountered by healthcare professionals, and especially as physiotherapists for musicians, when applying evidence at the patient's bedside, again from both perspectives, healthcare professionals and patients.

Part III

Finally, this third part aims to open the discussion by considering various perspectives, such as values-based practice or the importance of qualitative research, to reshape EBP in physiotherapy.

Conclusion

This work highlights the prevalent existence of grey zones encountered by healthcare practitioners with musicians. While conducting more research to help understand them, physiotherapists must learn to navigate these waters.

Statistics as a Social Activity: Attitudes toward Amalgamating Evidence

Amalgamation of evidence in statistics is conducted in several ways. Within a study, multiple observations are combined by averaging, or as factors in a likelihood or prediction algorithm. In multilevel modeling or Bayesian analysis, population or prior information is combined with data using the weighted averaging derived from probability modeling. In a scientific research project, inferences from data analysis are interpreted in light of mechanistic models and substantive theories. Within a scholarly or applied research community, data and conclusions from separate laboratories are amalgamated through a series of steps, including peer review, meta-analysis, review articles, and replication studies. These issues have been discussed for many years in the philosophy of science and statistics, gaining attention in recent decades first with the renewed popularity of Bayesian inference and then with concerns about the replication crisis in science. In this article, we review the amalgamation of statistical evidence from different perspectives, connecting the foundations of statistics to the social processes of validation, criticism, and consensus building.

Back to the Basics of SARS-CoV-2 Biochemistry: Microvascular Occlusive Glycan Bindings Govern Its Morbidities and Inform Therapeutic Responses

Consistent with the biochemistry of coronaviruses as well established over decades, SARS-CoV-2 makes its initial attachment to host cells through the binding of its spike protein (SP) to sialylated glycans (containing the monosaccharide sialic acid) on the cell surface. The virus can then slide over and enter via ACE2. SARS-CoV-2 SP attaches particularly tightly to the trillions of red blood cells (RBCs), platelets and endothelial cells in the human body, each cell very densely coated with sialic acid surface molecules but having no ACE2 or minimal ACE2. These interlaced attachments trigger the blood cell aggregation, microvascular occlusion and vascular damage that underlie the hypoxia, blood clotting and related morbidities of severe COVID-19. Notably, the two human betacoronaviruses that express a sialic acid-cleaving enzyme are benign, while the other three-SARS, SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-are virulent. RBC aggregation experimentally induced in several animal species using an injected polysaccharide caused most of the same morbidities of severe COVID-19. This glycan biochemistry is key to disentangling controversies that have arisen over the efficacy of certain generic COVID-19 treatment agents and the safety of SP-based COVID-19 vaccines. More broadly, disregard for the active physiological role of RBCs yields unreliable or erroneous reporting of pharmacokinetic parameters as routinely obtained for most drugs and other bioactive agents using detection in plasma, with whole-blood levels being up to 30-fold higher. Appreciation of the active role of RBCs can elucidate the microvascular underpinnings of other health conditions, including cardiovascular disease, and therapeutic opportunities to address them.

Pragmatic randomized controlled trials: strengthening the concept through a robust international collaborative network: PRIME-9-Pragmatic Research and Innovation through Multinational Experimentation

In an era focused on value-based healthcare, the quality of healthcare and resource allocation should be underpinned by empirical evidence. Pragmatic clinical trials (pRCTs) are essential in this endeavor, providing randomized controlled trial (RCT) insights that encapsulate real-world effects of interventions. The rising popularity of pRCTs can be attributed to their ability to mirror real-world practices, accommodate larger sample sizes, and provide cost advantages over traditional RCTs. By harmonizing efficacy with effectiveness, pRCTs assist decision-makers in prioritizing interventions that have a substantial public health impact and align with the tenets of value-based health care. An international network for pRCT provides several advantages, including larger and diverse patient populations, access to a broader range of healthcare settings, sharing knowledge and expertise, and overcoming ethical and regulatory barriers. The hypothesis and study design of pRCT answers the decision-maker's questions. pRCT compares clinically relevant alternative interventions, recruits participants from diverse practice settings, and collects data on various health outcomes. They are scarce because the medical products industry typically does not fund pRCT. Prioritizing these studies by expanding the infrastructure to conduct clinical research within the healthcare delivery system and increasing public and private funding for these studies will be necessary to facilitate pRCTs. These changes require more clinical and health policy decision-makers in clinical research priority setting, infrastructure development, and funding. This paper presents a comprehensive overview of pRCTs, emphasizing their importance in evidence-based medicine and the advantages of an international collaborative network for their execution. It details the development of PRIME-9, an international initiative across nine countries to advance pRCTs, and explores various statistical approaches for these trials. The paper underscores the need to overcome current challenges, such as funding limitations and infrastructural constraints, to leverage the full potential of pRCTs in optimizing healthcare quality and resource utilization.

Sialylated Glycan Bindings from SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein to Blood and Endothelial Cells Govern the Severe Morbidities of COVID-19

Consistent with well-established biochemical properties of coronaviruses, sialylated glycan attachments between SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (SP) and host cells are key to the virus's pathology. SARS-CoV-2 SP attaches to and aggregates red blood cells (RBCs), as shown in many pre-clinical and clinical studies, causing pulmonary and extrapulmonary microthrombi and hypoxia in severe COVID-19 patients. SARS-CoV-2 SP attachments to the heavily sialylated surfaces of platelets (which, like RBCs, have no ACE2) and endothelial cells (having minimal ACE2) compound this vascular damage. Notably, experimentally induced RBC aggregation in vivo causes the same key morbidities as for severe COVID-19, including microvascular occlusion, blood clots, hypoxia and myocarditis. Key risk factors for COVID-19 morbidity, including older age, diabetes and obesity, are all characterized by markedly increased propensity to RBC clumping. For mammalian species, the degree of clinical susceptibility to COVID-19 correlates to RBC aggregability with p = 0.033. Notably, of the five human betacoronaviruses, the two common cold strains express an enzyme that releases glycan attachments, while the deadly SARS, SARS-CoV-2 and MERS do not, although viral loads for COVID-19 and the two common cold infections are similar. These biochemical insights also explain the previously puzzling clinical efficacy of certain generics against COVID-19 and may support the development of future therapeutic strategies for COVID-19 and long COVID patients.

Evidence-based sentencing and scientific evidence

Evidence-based sentencing (EBS) is a new name for an aspiration that has deep roots in criminal law: to apply the sentence most appropriate to each offender's risk of reoffending, in order to reduce that risk as far as possible. This modern version of the traditional sentencing goals of rehabilitation and incapacitation fits into the broader approach of so-called "evidence-based public policy." It takes the view that the best existing evidence for reducing reoffending are modern structured risk assessment tools and claims to be able to achieve several goals at once: reducing reoffending, maintaining high levels of public safety, making more efficient use of public resources, and moving criminal policy away from ideological battles by basing it on the objective knowledge provided by the best available scientific evidence. However, despite the success of this approach in recent years, it is not clear to what extent it succeeds in correctly assessing the risk of individual offenders, nor whether it achieves its intended effect of reducing recidivism. This paper aims to critically examine these two issues: the quality of the scientific evidence on which EBS is based, and the available data on the extent to which it achieves (or does not achieve) its intended goals.

The Changing Medical Publishing Industry: Economics, Expansion, and Equity

Medical journal publishing has changed dramatically over the past decade. The shift from print to electronic distribution altered the industry's economic model. This was followed by open access mandates from funding organizations and the subsequent imposition of article processing charges on authors. The medical publishing industry is large and while there is variation across journals, it is overall highly profitable. As journals have moved to digital dissemination, advertising revenues decreased and publishers shifted some of the losses onto authors by way of article processing charges. The number of open access journals has increased substantially in recent years. The open access model presents an equity paradox; while it liberates scientific knowledge for the consumer, it presents barriers to those who produce research. This emerging "pay-to-publish" system offers advantages to authors who work in countries and at institutes with more resources. Finally, the medical publishing industry represents an unusual business model; the people who provide both the content and the external peer review receive no payment from the publisher, who generates revenue from the content. The very unusual economic model of this industry makes it vulnerable to disruptive change. The economic model of medical publishing is rapidly evolving and this will lead to disruption of the industry. These changes will accelerate dissemination of science and may lead to a shift away from lower-impact journals towards pre-print servers.

Observational studies of antidepressant use and suicide risk are selectively published in psychiatric journals

OBJECTIVES

To investigate if observational studies showing favorable results for antidepressants on suicidal behavior (reduced risk) are preferably and more easily published in psychiatric journals and cited more often compared to studies with unfavorable results (increased risk).

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Prespecified secondary analysis, including 27 original studies selected through a systematic review of observational studies reporting associations between the use of newer antidepressant drugs and suicide risk.

RESULTS

Independent of study quality, studies reporting favorable results were more frequently published in psychiatric than nonpsychiatric journals and were more often conducted by lead authors with financial conflicts of interest (fCOI). Within psychiatric journals, lead authors with fCOI published in journals with a higher impact factor (IF) and ranking. Within psychiatric journals, favorability of results also correlated with citation frequency, IF, and journal ranking, but these associations became weaker and inconclusive after adjusting for study quality. Results for ease of publishing were inconclusive.

CONCLUSION

Studies reporting unfavorable results (increased suicide risk with antidepressant exposure) are less likely to be published in psychiatric journals. Lead authors with fCOI report more favorable results, and their studies are published in the most prestigious psychiatric journals. This may create a biased evidence base and an unbalanced dissemination and appraisal of findings within psychiatry.

COVID-19 Excess Deaths in Peru's 25 States in 2020: Nationwide Trends, Confounding Factors, and Correlations With the Extent of Ivermectin Treatment by State

Introduction In 2020, nations hastened to contain an emerging COVID-19 pandemic by deploying diverse public health approaches, but conclusive appraisals of the efficacy of these approaches are elusive in most cases. One of the medicines deployed, ivermectin (IVM), a macrocyclic lactone having biochemical activity against SARS-CoV-2 through competitive binding to its spike protein, has yielded mixed results in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for COVID-19 treatments. In Peru, an opportunity to track the efficacy of IVM with a close consideration of confounding factors was provided through data for excess deaths as correlated with IVM use in 2020, under semi-autonomous policies in its 25 states. Methods To evaluate possible IVM treatment effects, excess deaths as determined from Peruvian national health data were analyzed by state for ages ≥60 in Peru's 25 states. These data were compared with monthly summary data for excess deaths in Peru for the period 2020-2021 as published by the WHO in 2022. To identify potential confounding factors, Google mobility data, population densities, SARS-CoV-2 genetic variations, and seropositivity rates were also examined. Results Reductions in excess deaths over a period of 30 days after peak deaths averaged 74% in the 10 states with the most intensive IVM use. As determined across all 25 states, these reductions in excess deaths correlated closely with the extent of IVM use (p<0.002). During four months of IVM use in 2020, before a new president of Peru restricted its use, there was a 14-fold reduction in nationwide excess deaths and then a 13-fold increase in the two months following the restriction of IVM use. Notably, these trends in nationwide excess deaths align with WHO summary data for the same period in Peru. Conclusions The natural experiment that was put into motion with the authorization of IVM use for COVID-19 in Peru in May 2020, as analyzed using data on excess deaths by locality and by state from Peruvian national health sources, resulted in strong evidence for the drug's effectiveness. Several potential confounding factors, including effects of a social isolation mandate imposed in May 2020, variations in the genetic makeup of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and differences in seropositivity rates and population densities across the 25 states, were considered but did not appear to have significantly influenced these outcomes.

What does high value care for musculoskeletal conditions mean and how do you apply it in practice? A consensus statement from a research network of physiotherapists in New South Wales, Australia

OBJECTIVES

To develop a physiotherapist-led consensus statement on the definition and provision of high-value care for people with musculoskeletal conditions.

DESIGN

We performed a three-stage study using Research And Development/University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method methodology. We reviewed evidence about current definitions through a rapid literature review and then performed a survey and interviews with network members to gather consensus. Consensus was finalised in a face-to-face meeting.

SETTING

Australian primary care.

PARTICIPANTS

Registered physiotherapists who are members of a practice-based research network (n=31).

RESULTS

The rapid review revealed two definitions, four domains of high value care and seven themes of high-quality care. Online survey responses (n=26) and interviews (n=9) generated two additional high-quality care themes, a definition of low-value care, and 21 statements on the application of high value care. Consensus was reached for three working definitions (high value, high-quality and low value care), a final model of four high value care domains (high-quality care, patient values, cost-effectiveness, reducing waste), nine high-quality care themes and 15 statements on application.

CONCLUSION

High value care for musculoskeletal conditions delivers most value for the patient, and the clinical benefits outweigh the costs to the individual or system providing the care. High-quality care is evidence based, effective and safe care that is patient-centred, consistent, accountable, timely, equitable and allows easy interaction with healthcare providers and healthcare systems.

Nursing science as the study of how to reconcile behavioral messiness with clinical norms and ideals

There is no settled definition of nursing science that describes how this field of scientific research is unique. This paper attempts to correct this problem. It uses a combination of historical analysis and abductive argument to support the thesis that nursing science is a sui generis social science that studies how to reconcile clinical ideals or norms that are applicable to practice in nursing with the messiness of human behavior.

When Characteristics of Clinical Trials Require Per-Protocol as Well as Intention-to-Treat Outcomes to Draw Reliable Conclusions: Three Examples

Under exceptional circumstances, including high rates of protocol non-compliance, per-protocol (PP) analysis can better indicate the real-world benefits of a medical intervention than intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Exemplifying this, the first randomized clinical trial (RCT) considered found that colonoscopy screenings were marginally beneficial, based upon ITT analysis, with only 42% of the intervention group actually undergoing the procedure. However, the study authors themselves concluded that the medical efficacy of that screening was a 50% reduction in colorectal cancer deaths among that 42% PP group. The second RCT found a ten-fold reduction in mortality for a COVID-19 treatment drug vs. placebo by PP analysis, but only a minor benefit by ITT analysis. The third RCT, conducted as an arm of the same platform trial as the second RCT, tested another COVID-19 treatment drug and reported no significant benefit by ITT analysis. Inconsistencies and irregularities in the reporting of protocol compliance for this study required consideration of PP outcomes for deaths and hospitalizations, yet the study coauthors refused to disclose them, instead directing inquiring scientists to a data repository which never held the study's data. These three RCTs illustrate conditions under which PP outcomes may differ significantly from ITT outcomes and the need for data transparency when these reported or indicated discrepancies arise.

Mapping the characteristics, methodological quality and standards of reporting of network meta-analyses on antithrombotic therapies: An overview

BACKGROUND

Although a large number of network meta-analyses (NMAs) in the field of cardiology are available, little is known about their methodological quality. We aimed to map the characteristics and critically appraised the standards of conduct and evidence reporting of NMAs assessing antithrombotic therapies for the treatment or prophylaxis of heart diseases and cardiac surgical procedures.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed and Scopus to identify NMAs comparing the clinical effects of antithrombotic therapies. Overall characteristics of the NMAs were extracted and their reporting quality and methodological quality were evaluated using the PRISMA-NMA checklist and AMSTAR-2, respectively.

RESULTS

We found 86 NMAs published between 2007 and 2022. Comparisons among direct-acting oral anticoagulants were available in 61 (71%) NMAs. Although around 75% of NMAs stated that they followed international guidelines for conduct and reporting, only one third provided a protocol/register. Complete search strategies and publication bias assessment were lacking in around 53% and 59% of studies, respectively. Most NMAs (n = 77, 90%) provided supplemental material; however, only 5 (6%) made the complete raw data available. Network diagrams were depicted in most studies (n = 67, 78%), yet network geometry was described in only 11 (12.8%) of them. Mean adherence to the PRISMA-NMA checklist was 65.1 ± 16.5%. AMSTAR-2 assessment showed 88% of the NMAs had critically low methodological quality.

CONCLUSION

Although there is a wide diffusion of NMA-type studies on antithrombotics for heart diseases, their methodological and reporting quality remains suboptimal. This may reflect fragile clinical practices due to misleading conclusions from critically low-quality NMAs.

Teaching evidence-based medicine in Mexico: a systematic review of medical doctor curriculums at a national level

OBJECTIVES

To assess the teaching of evidence-based medicine (EBM) in medical curriculums. As a secondary objective, we assessed the representativeness of science courses related to EBM.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Systematic review. Accredited curriculums by the Mexican Council for the Accreditation of Medical Education.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We provided a descriptive analysis of the required or elective EBM courses and EBM-related courses, academic credits and teaching period. EBM-related courses included research methodology, epidemiology, biostatistics, clinical research, public health, clinical epidemiology, scientific dissemination and health informatics to explore scientific education and training offered by medical schools. Additionally, we examined the curriculum's structure, location, type of institution, total programme duration and academic credits. Data collection occurred from December 2020 to February 2021.

RESULTS

We identified 171 registered curriculums, of which we assessed 60 unique programmes (50% public) in our analysis. We identified 16 EBM single courses on the fifth and sixth semesters, of which 12 (20%) were mandatory and 4 were electives (6.7%). The allocated academic credits for EBM courses are minimal, without difference between public or private institutions, representing 0.08% of the total curriculum. Public health, epidemiology, research methodology and biostatistics courses are offered with greater frequency (55% or less) and curricular value (0.6% or less). In some cases, they are taught as combined courses. Clinical research, health informatics and clinical epidemiology are taught less than EBM, while scientific dissemination is nil.

CONCLUSION

In Mexico, EBM teaching is limited to only one of five curriculums with minimal curricular value. A comprehensive curricular review is necessary across programmes to incorporate EBM as a first step to improve medical education and, consequently, public health. We call to action through an online, collaborative platform with several applications to optimise teaching of EBM.

REVIEW PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

The systematic review protocol is excluded from the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews since this platform only accepts systematic reviews with health-related outcomes. Review protocol registration: https://osf.io/3xm2q/.

Fast Methods for Drug Approval: Research Perspectives for Pandemic Preparedness

Public heath emergencies such as the outbreak of novel infectious diseases represent a major challenge for drug regulatory bodies, practitioners, and scientific communities. In such critical situations drug regulators and public health practitioners base their decisions on evidence generated and synthesised by scientists. The urgency and novelty of the situation create high levels of uncertainty concerning the safety and effectiveness of drugs. One key tool to mitigate such emergencies is pandemic preparedness. There seems to be, however, a lack of scholarly work on methodology for assessments of new or existing drugs during a pandemic. Issues related to risk attitudes, evidence production and evidence synthesis for drug approval require closer attention. This manuscript, therefore, engages in a conceptual analysis of relevant issues of drug assessment during a pandemic. To this end, we rely in our analysis on recent discussions in the philosophy of science and the philosophy of medicine. Important unanswered foundational questions are identified and possible ways to answer them are considered. Similar problems often have similar solutions, hence studying similar situations can provide important clues. We consider drug assessments of orphan drugs and drug assessments during endemics as similar to drug assessment during a pandemic. Furthermore, other scientific fields which cannot carry out controlled experiments may guide the methodology to draw defeasible causal inferences from imperfect data. Future contributions on methodologies for addressing the issues raised here will indeed have great potential to improve pandemic preparedness.

The Challenge of Quantification: An Interdisciplinary Reading

The present work looks at what we call "the multiverse of quantification", where visible and invisible numbers permeate all aspects and venues of life. We review the contributions of different authors who focus on the roles of quantification in society, with the aim of capturing different and sometimes separate voices. Several scholars, including economists, jurists, philosophers, sociologists, communication and data scientists, express concerns or identify critical areas of our relationship with new technologies of 'numericization'. While mindful of the important specificities of the different families of quantification, we use our broad and holistic canvas to explore possible spaces for a more systematic investigation of incumbent and novel quantifications, as to increase communication among disciplinary communities, and among these and society, in the pursuit a democratic agency and self-defence.

Progressive and degenerative journals: on the growth and appraisal of knowledge in scholarly publishing

Despite continued attention, finding adequate criteria for distinguishing "good" from "bad" scholarly journals remains an elusive goal. In this essay, I propose a solution informed by the work of Imre Lakatos and his methodology of scientific research programmes (MSRP). I begin by reviewing several notable attempts at appraising journal quality - focusing primarily on the impact factor and development of journal blacklists and whitelists. In doing so, I note their limitations and link their overarching goals to those found within the philosophy of science. I argue that Lakatos's MSRP and specifically his classifications of "progressive" and "degenerative" research programmes can be analogized and repurposed for the evaluation of scholarly journals. I argue that this alternative framework resolves some of the limitations discussed above and offers a more considered evaluation of journal quality - one that helps account for the historical evolution of journal-level publication practices and attendant contributions to the growth (or stunting) of scholarly knowledge. By doing so, the seeming problem of journal demarcation is diminished. In the process I utilize two novel tools (the mistake index and scite index) to further illustrate and operationalize aspects of the MSRP.

Project rebuild the evidence base (REB): A method to interpret randomised clinical trials and their meta-analysis to present solid benefit-risk assessments to patients

Evidence-based medicine is the cornerstone of shared-decision making in healthcare today. The public deserves clear, transparent and trust-worthy information on drug efficacy. Yet today, many drugs are prescribed and used without solid evidence of efficacy. Clinical trials and randomised clinical trials (RCTs) are the best method to evaluate drug efficacy and side effects. In a shared medical decision-making approach, general practitioners need drug assessment based on patient-important outcomes. The aim of project rebuild the evidence base (REB) is to bridge the gap between the data needed in clinical practice and the data available from clinical research. The drugs will be assessed on clinical patient important outcomes and for a population. Using the Cochrane tools, we propose to analyse for each population and outcome: 1) a meta-analysis based on RCTs with a low risk of bias overall; 2) an evaluation of results of confirmatory RCTs; 3) a statistical analysis of heterrogeneity between RCTs and 4) an analysis of publication bias. Depending on the results of these analyses, the evidence will be categorized in 4 different levels: firm evidence, evidence (to be confirmed), signal or absence of evidence. Project REB proposes a method for reading and interpreting RCTs and their meta-analysis to produce quality data for general practitioners to focus on risk-benefit assessment in the interest of patients. If this data does not exist, it could enable clinical research to better its aim.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the management of psoriasis: systematic review, critical appraisal, and quality assessment with the AGREE II instrument

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is considered one of the stubborn lifelong dermatologic diseases, making the patients seized in their social cage. Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and expert opinions ensure that patients with psoriasis render the most recent and developed care. This systematic review assessed and compared the most recently approved international CPGs with the AGREE II instrument.

METHODS

After we identified our research question, we searched the bibliographic international databases to identify and screen for relevant and eligible guidelines that address the topic of interest. Four independent reviewers (Senior Expert Dermatologist in Psoriasis) have critically appraised the selected guidelines via the AGREE II instrument. We conducted inter-rater analysis and percent agreement among raters and calculation of intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) 'Kappa'.

RESULTS

Out of 33 articles for CPGs, only Four eligible CPGs fulfill the inclusion criteria. Selected CPGs were critically appraised; first from the American College of Rheumatology that is also National Psoriasis Foundation (ACR/NPF-2018), second from the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE-2017) for Psoriasis: Assessment and Management, third from the Saudi practical guidelines on the biologic treatment for Psoriasis (Saudi CPGs, 2015), and lastly from the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD/NPF-2019) Management and Treatment of Psoriasis with Awareness and Attention to Comorbidities. The complete assessments (OA) of two CPGs (AAD/NPF and NICE) scored greater than 80%; 'six domains' of AGREE II had greater score that is congruent with results; (1) scope and motive, (2) shareholder involvement, (3) rigor of growth, (4) clarity of speech, (5) validity, and (6) journalistic independence domains. Domain (3) scored (84, 71, and 90%), domain (5) (51%, 47, and 90%), domain (6) (70, 52, and 90%) for (Saudi CPGs, AAD/NPF, and NICE), respectively. Generally, the clinical recommendations were significantly better for NICE CPGs.

CONCLUSIONS

Four evidence-based 'CPGs' introduced a high-quality methodological analysis. NICE indicated the greatest quality followed by Saudi CPGs and AAD/NPF and all four CPGs were suggested for practice.

Changing publication practices and the typification of the journal article in science and technology studies

In this article, we study the development of the STS journal article format since the 1980s. Our analysis is based on quantitative data that suggest that the diversity of various journal publication types has diminished over the past four decades, while the format of research articles has become increasingly typified. We contextualize these historical shifts in qualitative terms, drawing on a set of 76 interviews with STS scholars and other stakeholders in scholarly publishing. Here, we first portray the STS publication culture of the 1980s and early 1990s. We then contrast this with an analysis of publishing practices today, which are characterized by a much more structured research process that is largely organized around the production of typified journal articles. Whereas earlier studies have often emphasized the importance of rhetorical persuasion strategies as drivers in the development of scholarly communication formats, our analysis highlights a complementary and historically novel set of shaping factors, namely, increasingly quantified research (self-)assessment practices in the context of a projectification of academic life. We argue that reliance on a highly structured publication format is a distinct strategy for making STS scholarship 'doable' in the sense of facilitating the planning ability and daily conduct of research across a variety of levels - including the writing process, collaboration with peers, attracting funding, and interaction with journals. We conclude by reflecting on the advantages and downsides of the typification of journal articles for STS.

Is There a Doctors' Effect on Patients' Physical Health, Beyond the Intervention and All Known Factors? A Systematic Review

Purpose

Despite billions of doctor visits worldwide each year, little is known on whether doctors themselves affect patients' physical health after accounting for intervention and confounders such as patients' and doctors' data, hospital effects, nor how strong that doctors' effect is. Knowledge of surgeons' and psychotherapists' effects exists, but not for 102 other medical specialties notwithstanding the importance of such knowledge.

Methods

Eligibility Criteria: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), case-control, and cohort studies including medical doctors except surgeons for any intervention, reporting the proportion of variance in patients' outcomes owing to the doctors (random effects), or the fixed effects of grading doctors by outcomes, after multivariate adjustment. Exclusions: studies of <15 doctors or solely reporting doctors' effects for known variables.

Sources

Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, inception to June 2020. Manual search for papers referring/referred to by resulting studies.

Risk of Bias

Using Newcastle-Ottawa scale.

Results

Despite all medical interventions bar surgery being eligible, only thirty cohort papers were found, covering 36,239 doctors, with 10 specialties, 21 interventions, 60 outcomes (17 unique). Studies reported doctors' effects by grading doctors from best to worst, or by diversely calculating the doctor-attributed percentage of patients' outcome variation, ie the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). Sixteen studies presented fixed effects, 18 random effects, and 3 another approach. No RCTs found. Thirteen studies reported exceptionally good and/or poor performers with confidence intervals wholly outside the average performance. ICC range 0 to 33%, mean 3.9%. Highly diverse reporting, meta-analysis therefore not applicable.

Conclusion

Doctors, on their own, can affect patients' physical health for many interventions and outcomes. Effects range from negligible to substantial, even after accounting for all known variables. Many published cohorts may reveal valuable information by reanalyzing their data for doctors' effects. Positive and negative doctor outliers appear regularly. Therefore, it can matter which doctor is chosen.

Evidence reversals in primary care research: a study of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Evidence-Based Medicine is built on the premise that clinicians can be more confident when their decisions are grounded in high-quality evidence. Furthermore, evidence from studies involving patient-oriented outcomes is preferred when making decisions about tests or treatments. Ideally, the findings of relevant and valid trials should be stable over time, that is, unlikely to be reversed in subsequent research.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the stability of evidence from trials relevant to primary healthcare and to identify study characteristics associated with their reversal.

METHODS

We studied synopses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from 2002 to 2005 as "Daily POEMs" (Patient Oriented Evidence that Matters). The initial evidence (E1) from these POEMs (2002-2005) was compared with the updated evidence (E2) on that same topic in a summary resource (DynaMed 2019). Two physician-raters independently categorized each POEM-RCT as (i) reversed when E1 ≠ E2, or as (ii) not reversed, when E1 = E2. For all "Evidence Reversals" (E1 ≠ E2), we assessed the direction of change in the evidence.

RESULTS

We evaluated 408 POEMs on RCTs. Of those, 35 (9%; 95% confidence interval [6-12]) were identified as reversed, 359 (88%) were identified as not reversed, and 14 (3%) were indeterminate. On average, this represents about 2 evidence reversals per annum for POEMs about RCTs.

CONCLUSIONS

Over 12-17 years, 9% of RCTs summarized as POEMs are reversed. Information alerting services that apply strict criteria for relevance and validity of clinical information are likely to identify RCTs whose findings are stable over time.

Shaping the Qualities, Values and Standards of Science. How Reporting Guidelines Improve the Transparency of Biomedical Research

What is scientific quality and how can it be achieved? Recent developments in clinical biomedicine gave prominence to transparency as a new core value for scientific research. Without transparency, other characteristics and values remain unknown. But how can abstract concepts and values be implemented in day-to-day scientific practices and what gets lost on the way? In order to answer this question, this study investigates the role of the PRISMA reporting guideline for writing systematic reviews and meta-analyses. By combining a document analysis and expert interviews with its developers, it attempts to bridge the gap between research practice and current modes of evaluation. Beside showing how the guideline was designed to be applicable and acceptable as a new standard, the analysis revealed crucial distinctions between transparency as an abstract quality goal and its practical implementation in the form of specifically formulated rules. Although PRISMA relies on transparency in order to be meaningful, it blurs the concept in order to circumvent some of its main disadvantages.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the management of perioperative hypothermia: Systematic review, critical appraisal, and quality assessment with the AGREE II instrument

Inadvertent perioperative hypothermia is considered an emergency life-threatening situation. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on how to manage hypothermia, based on evidence and expert opinions, could save lives. This systematic review assessed and compared the most recently approved international CPGs with the AGREE II instrument. We searched international bibliographic databases to identify relevant guidelines for managing perioperative hypothermia. Four independent reviewers (consultant anesthesiologists) critically appraised the selected guidelines with the AGREE II instrument. We analyzed inter-rater agreement and calculated an intra-class correlation coefficient (Kappa). We identified five CPGs for perioperative hypothermia that were eligible for critical appraisal. These CPGs were issued by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE-2016); the American Society of Peri-Anesthesia Nurses/Agency for Health Care Research and Quality (ASPAN/AHRQ-2006); the University of Southern Mississippi (USM/CPG-2017); The University Assistance Complex of Salamanca (UACS/CPG-2018); and the Justus-Liebig University of Giessen (UKGM/CPG-2015). The overall assessments of NICE-2016 and ASPAN/AHRQ-2006 scored >80%. These results were consistent with high scores achieved in the six domains of AGREE II: (1) scope and purpose, (2) stakeholder involvement, (3) rigor of development, (4) clarity of presentation, (5) applicability, and (6) editorial independence domains. The NICE-2016, ASPAN/AHRQ-2006, and USM/CPG-2017) scored, respectively, 94%, 81%, and 70% for domain 3, 91%, 87%, and 66% for domain 5, and 90%, 82%, and 77% for domain 6. Generally, the NICE CPGs received significantly better clinical recommendations. However, all five evidence-based CPGs were of high methodological quality and were recommended for use in practice. Saudi Arabia should formulate its own national CPGs for diagnosis and management of perioperative hypothermia and to be published on NICE.

•

Guidance for adapting CPGs to a given clinical practice is a realistic, practical alternative to de novo CPG development, which is a time-consuming and resource-intensive approach.

•

Some nations, particularly those with low- and middle-income economies, have chosen to employ CPG adaptation, rather than developing new evidence-based practice programs.

•

Several formal adaptation approaches are currently available, and they may be tailored further to suit particular circumstances. Evaluations like the one described in the present study should provide guidance for appropriate CPG adaptation or development efforts, particularly for organizations with little expertise with the AGREE II instrument.

•

The current critical appraisal emphasized the importance of clinicians performing quality assessments of CPGs to ensure transparency and strength in the CPG development process, in accordance with international CPG standards. Moreover, our findings will support the provision of best practices for POH. Based on our findings, we propose that anesthesiologists should include an AGREE II review of CPGs in their capacity development strategies.

[Adherence to and influencing factors of evidence-based practice in physiotherapeutic care in Germany: a cross-sectional study]

BACKGROUND

The implementation of evidence-based practice (EBP) is a central goal in health care. As in other areas, the transfer of scientific knowledge into clinical practice is very delayed or incomplete in physiotherapy. The primary aim of the present study is to describe the adherence to EBP among physiotherapists working in Germany. The secondary goal is the exploratory analysis of selected factors influencing the implementation of EBP.

METHODS

The present exploratory analysis is based on the data of physiotherapists who participated in a cross-sectional study on the use of EBP by health care professionals (study registration no.: DRKS00013792). The participants in the online survey completed the "Evidence-based Practice Inventory", a questionnaire with five dimensions used to quantify the adherence to EBP. Univariable and multivariable regression analysis was used to examine the associations between various sociodemographic characteristics and EBP.

RESULTS

318 physiotherapists participated in the survey (age: 37±12 years; 60 % female; professional experience: 14±11 years). Approximately 70-80 % of the participants, in principle, had a positive attitude towards EBP and perceived EBP as helpful and useful in clinical practice. About 60 % of the respondents felt able to apply the principles of the EBP (e. g., acquisition, appraisal and application of external evidence). However, the data also showed that the implementation of EBP in clinical physiotherapeutic care is insufficient. For example, only 20 % of the respondents reported that their facility paid great attention to applying the principles of the EBP in decision-making, and only about a third of the respondents said that they frequently searched for or used external evidence. The strongest facilitators of EBP include the participation in scientific publications and more than one hour per week to read scientific literature at work.

CONCLUSION

In principle, physiotherapists in Germany have a positive attitude towards EBP, but currently do not adequately take into account the principles of EBP. These factors should be further analyzed and targeted through effective interventions.

Choices in hemodialysis therapies: variants, personalized therapy and application of evidence-based medicine

The extent of removal of the uremic toxins in hemodialysis (HD) therapies depends primarily on the dialysis membrane characteristics and the solute transport mechanisms involved. While designation of ‘flux’ of membranes as well toxicity of compounds that need to be targeted for removal remain unresolved issues, the relative role, efficiency and utilization of solute removal principles to optimize HD treatment are better delineated. Through the combination and intensity of diffusive and convective removal forces, levels of concentrations of a broad spectrum of uremic toxins can be lowered significantly and successfully. Extended clinical experience as well as data from several clinical trials attest to the benefits of convection-based HD treatment modalities. However, the mode of delivery of HD can further enhance the effectiveness of therapies. Other than treatment time, frequency and location that offer clinical benefits and increase patient well-being, treatment- and patient-specific criteria may be tailored for the therapy delivered: electrolytic composition, dialysate buffer and concentration and choice of anticoagulating agent are crucial for dialysis tolerance and efficacy. Evidence-based medicine (EBM) relies on three tenets, i.e. clinical expertise (i.e. doctor), patient-centered values (i.e. patient) and relevant scientific evidence (i.e. science), that have deviated from their initial aim and summarized to scientific evidence, leading to tyranny of randomized controlled trials. One must recognize that practice patterns as shown by Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study and personalization of HD care are the main driving force for improving outcomes. Based on a combination of the three pillars of EBM, and particularly on bedside patient–clinician interaction, we summarize what we have learned over the last 6 decades in terms of best practices to improve outcomes in HD patients. Management of initiation of dialysis, vascular access, preservation of kidney function, selection of biocompatible dialysers and use of dialysis fluids of high microbiological purity to restrict inflammation are just some of the approaches where clinical experience is vital in the absence of definitive scientific evidence. Further, HD adequacy needs to be considered as a broad and multitarget approach covering not just the dose of dialysis provided, but meeting individual patient needs (e.g. fluid volume, acid–base, blood pressure, bone disease metabolism control) through regular assessment—and adjustment—of a series of indicators of treatment efficiency. Finally, in whichever way new technologies (i.e. artificial intelligence, connected health) are embraced in the future to improve the delivery of dialysis, the human dimension of the patient–doctor interaction is irreplaceable. Kidney medicine should remain ‘an art’ and will never be just ‘a science’.

The membrane perspective of uraemic toxins: which ones should, or can, be removed?

Informed decision-making is paramount to the improvement of dialysis therapies and patient outcomes. A cornerstone of delivery of optimal dialysis therapy is to delineate which substances (uraemic retention solutes or 'uraemic toxins') contribute to the condition of uraemia in terms of deleterious biochemical effects they may exert. Thereafter, decisions can be made as to which of the accumulated compounds need to be targeted for removal and by which strategies. For haemodialysis (HD), the non-selectivity of membranes is sometimes considered a limitation. Yet, considering that dozens of substances with potential toxicity need to be eliminated, and targeting removal of individual toxins explicitly is not recommended, current dialysis membranes enable elimination of several molecules of a broad size range within a single therapy session. However, because HD solute removal is based on size-exclusion principles, i.e. the size of the substances to be removed relative to the mean size of the 'pores' of the membrane, only a limited degree of selectivity of removal is possible. Removal of unwanted substances during HD needs to be weighed against the unavoidable loss of substances that are recognized to be necessary for bodily functions and physiology. In striving to improve the efficiency of HD by increasing the porosity of membranes, there is a greater potential for the loss of substances that are of benefit. Based on this elementary trade-off and availability of recent guidance on the relative toxicity of substances retained in uraemia, we propose a new evidence-linked uraemic toxin elimination (ELUTE) approach whereby only those clusters of substances for which there is a sufficient body of evidence linking them to deleterious biological effects need to be targeted for removal. Our approach involves correlating the physical properties of retention solutes (deemed to express toxicity) with key determinants of membranes and separation processes. Our analysis revealed that in attempting to remove the relatively small number of 'larger' substances graded as having only moderate toxicity, uncontrolled (and efficient) removal of several useful compounds would take place simultaneously and may compromise the well-being or outcomes of patients. The bulk of the uraemic toxin load comprises uraemic toxins below <30 000 Da and are adequately removed by standard membranes. Further, removal of a few difficult-to-remove-by-dialysis (protein-bound) compounds that express toxicity cannot be achieved by manipulation of pore size alone. The trade-off between the benefits of effective removal of the bulk of the uraemic toxin load and risks (increased loss of useful substances) associated with targeting the removal of a few larger substances in 'high-efficiency' HD treatment strategies needs to be recognized and better understood. The removability during HD of substances, be they toxic, inert or beneficial, needs be revised to establish the pros and cons of current dialytic elimination strategies.  .

Pearls on science, collaboration, and mentorship in health research: A masterclass conversation with Dr. John Ioannidis

Effective collaboration and mentorship are essential to success in a career of health research. We summarize our conversation with Dr. John Ioannidis, professor at Stanford University, author of the most accessed manuscript in the history of the Public Library of Science, and one of the most cited scientists in history. Dr. Ioannidis was invited for a question and answer session as part of a graduate-level course on biostatistical collaboration hosted at McMaster University in December 2020. This text provides insight into the experiences and pearls he shared, that we hope will inspire and guide other researchers early or junior in their careers. He emphasized the importance of passion, enthusiasm and a sincere pursuit for high quality research as being the cornerstones to success and continued productivity in this field.

Evidence-based medicine's curious path: From clinical epidemiology to patient-centered care through decision analysis

Evidence-based medicine (EBM), one of the most important movements in health care, has been a lightning rod for controversy. Conflicts about the meaning and value of EBM are owing in part to lack of clarity about basic questions regarding its development, the importance of expertise and intuition, and the role of evidence in clinical decision making. These issues have persisted in part because of unclarity at the outset, but also because of how EBM evolved, why it was introduced when it was, and how it was modified following its introduction. This paper traces the evolution of EBM from clinical epidemiology (CE) and the internal dispute that precipitated the developers to establish EBM as a distinct approach to clinical practice. The paper proposes that health care industrialization also had a significant role in EBM's emergence and that industrialization influenced the decision to merge EBM with the method of normative decision making known as decision analysis (DA). The paper discusses the impact of this merger, in particular how it led to EBM's identification with managed care and has added momentum to the effort at forging a connection between a normative decision model and clinical judgement. This effort would turn clinical decision making into a conduit for bringing administrative rules and regulations into the consulting room and would result in expertise becoming a surplus skill. The paper closes by discussing a challenge yet unmet by EBM's advocates and critics-to chronicle the dangers that EBM in the framework of DA during the current era of industrialization poses to health and health care, and discover ways of unhinging the relationship between model and judgement.

Navigating a world of genes: A conceptual analysis of gene fetishism, geneticization, genetic exceptionalism and genetic essentialism

Genetics, as a discipline, is an essential part of the modern world. However, analyzing the interaction between genetics and society can be complex. Therefore, terminology has arisen from diverse fields to better understand genetics and its relation to other domains. Nevertheless, the diverse origins of many of these terms, as well as a lack of clarity in their definitions, have led to differences in use. This paper focuses on four such terms: genetic fetishism, geneticization, genetic essentialism, and genetic exceptionalism. By clarifying what each term means, the fields that utilize them will be helped. Furthermore, these terms can have specific value to bioethics in analyzing ethical issues that arise from genetics and the interaction with the socio-cultural world. While these terms may not always be applicable, a more careful analysis of their meaning can cultivate a more scientific and rigorous analysis of the ways genetics impacts and is understood by humanity.

Comparison of two delayed strategies for renal replacement therapy initiation for severe acute kidney injury (AKIKI 2): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Delaying renal replacement therapy (RRT) for some time in critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury and no severe complication is safe and allows optimisation of the use of medical devices. Major uncertainty remains concerning the duration for which RRT can be postponed without risk. Our aim was to test the hypothesis that a more-delayed initiation strategy would result in more RRT-free days, compared with a delayed strategy.

METHODS

This was an unmasked, multicentre, prospective, open-label, randomised, controlled trial done in 39 intensive care units in France. We monitored critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury (defined as Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes stage 3) until they had oliguria for more than 72 h or a blood urea nitrogen concentration higher than 112 mg/dL. Patients were then randomly assigned (1:1) to either a strategy (delayed strategy) in which RRT was started just after randomisation or to a more-delayed strategy. With the more-delayed strategy, RRT initiation was postponed until mandatory indication (noticeable hyperkalaemia or metabolic acidosis or pulmonary oedema) or until blood urea nitrogen concentration reached 140 mg/dL. The primary outcome was the number of days alive and free of RRT between randomisation and day 28 and was done in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT03396757 and is completed.

FINDINGS

Between May 7, 2018, and Oct 11, 2019, of 5336 patients assessed, 278 patients underwent randomisation; 137 were assigned to the delayed strategy and 141 to the more-delayed strategy. The number of complications potentially related to acute kidney injury or to RRT were similar between groups. The median number of RRT-free days was 12 days (IQR 0-25) in the delayed strategy and 10 days (IQR 0-24) in the more-delayed strategy (p=0·93). In a multivariable analysis, the hazard ratio for death at 60 days was 1·65 (95% CI 1·09-2·50, p=0·018) with the more-delayed versus the delayed strategy. The number of complications potentially related to acute kidney injury or renal replacement therapy did not differ between groups.

INTERPRETATION

In severe acute kidney injury patients with oliguria for more than 72 h or blood urea nitrogen concentration higher than 112 mg/dL and no severe complication that would mandate immediate RRT, longer postponing of RRT initiation did not confer additional benefit and was associated with potential harm.

FUNDING

Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique.

How prevalent are financial conflicts of interest in dermatology randomized controlled trials? A cross-sectional study

Since the last assessment of conflicts of interest (COIs) in dermatology randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in 2004, several countries have introduced transparency databases. We assessed the prevalence of financial COIs in dermatology RCTs and quantified payments from study sponsors to academic/clinical authors using transparency databases, which are available in the USA, France, Australia, Belgium and the Netherlands, while the UK has a noncompulsory transparency database. We included RCTs from the top 10 dermatology journals and the top 7 general medical journals published in 2019. The study assessed 83 RCTs, and COIs were identified in 69%. The highest prevalence was in exclusively industry-funded trials (46/47, 98%), which consisted of personal payments to an academic/clinical author (96% of trials) and having authors who were employees/stockholders (96%). Payments were identified for 31/56 (55%) academic/clinical first/final authors (median payment US$28 746, maximum US$597 299, interquartile range US$17 061-146 253), and 24/31 payments (77%) payments were each > US$10 000.

Do Brief Alcohol Interventions Reduce Driving After Drinking Among College Students? A Two-step Meta-analysis of Individual Participant Data

Aims

College students who drink are at an increased risk of driving after drinking and alcohol-involved traffic accidents and deaths. Furthermore, the persistence of driving after drinking over time underscores a need for effective interventions to prevent future drunk driving in adulthood. The present study examined whether brief alcohol interventions (BAIs) for college students reduce driving after drinking.

Methods

A two-step meta-analysis of individual participant data (IPD) was conducted using a combined sample of 6801 college students from 15 randomized controlled trials (38% male, 72% White and 58% first-year students). BAIs included individually delivered Motivational Interviewing with Personalized Feedback (MI + PF), Group Motivational Interviewing (GMI), and stand-alone Personalized Feedback (PF) interventions. Two outcome variables, driving after two+/three+ drinks and driving after four+/five+ drinks, were checked, harmonized and analyzed separately for each study and then combined for meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis.

Results

BAIs lowered the risk of driving after four+/five+ drinks (19% difference in the odds of driving after drinking favoring BAIs vs. control), but not the risk of driving after two+/three+ drinks (9% difference). Subsequent subgroup analysis indicated that the MI + PF intervention was comparatively better than PF or GMI.

Conclusions

BAIs provide a harm reduction approach to college drinking. Hence, it is encouraging that BAIs reduce the risk of driving after heavy drinking among college students. However, there may be opportunities to enhance the intervention content and timing to be more relevant for driving after drinking and improve the outcome assessment and reporting to demonstrate its effect.

Ethical care requires pragmatic care research to guide medical practice under uncertainty

BACKGROUND

The current research-care separation was introduced to protect patients from explanatory studies designed to gain knowledge for future patients. Care trials are all-inclusive pragmatic trials integrated into medical practice, with no extra tests, risks, or cost, and have been designed to guide practice under uncertainty in the best medical interest of the patient.

PROPOSED REVISION

Patients need a distinction between validated care, previously verified to provide better outcomes, and promising but unvalidated care, which may include unnecessary or even harmful interventions. While validated care can be practiced normally, unvalidated care should only be offered within declared pragmatic care research, designed to protect patients from harm. The validated/unvalidated care distinction is normative, necessary to the ethics of medical practice. Care trials, which mark the distinction and allow the tentative use of promising interventions necessarily involve patients, and thus the design and conduct of pragmatic care research must respect the overarching rule of care ethics "to always act in the best medical interest of the patient." Yet, unvalidated interventions offered in contexts of medical uncertainty cannot be prescribed or practiced as if they were validated care. The medical interests of current patients are best protected when unvalidated practices are restricted to a care trial protocol, with 1:1 random allocation (or "hemi-prescription") versus previously validated care, to optimize potential benefits and minimize risks for each patient.

CONCLUSION

Pragmatic trials can regulate medical practice by providing (i) a transparent demarcation between unvalidated and validated care; (ii) norms of medical conduct when using tests and interventions of yet unknown benefits in practice; and eventually (iii) a verdict regarding optimal care.

Meta-research publications in dentistry: a review

The present scoping review has the objective of providing an overview of meta-research in dentistry. A search of the PubMed database was performed for the period 11 October 2014 to 10 October 2019. Study selection and data extraction were performed independently by one author; prior to this, a random sample of 10% of the retrieved titles and abstracts were independently screened by two authors, achieving agreement of >80% on eligibility for initial inclusion, corresponding to good agreement. The following information was extracted from the full text of each article: meta-research area of interest; study design; type of studies evaluated in the meta-research; type of methodology used in assessment of the primary research; conflicts of interest reported; sponsorships reported; dental discipline; journal of publication; country of the first author; number of citations; and impact factor. A total of 7800 documents were initially retrieved. After analysis of the title/abstract and the full text of each article, and a snowballing procedure, 155 meta-research studies were identified and included. The 'methods' and 'reporting' meta-research areas were the most prevalent, with 73 (47%) and 61 (40%) studies, respectively. General dentistry, and orthodontics and dentofacial orthopaedics were the dental specialties with the greatest number/proportion of included studies with 45 (29%) and 28 (18%) studies, respectively. These findings may help to prioritize future meta-research in dentistry, consequently avoiding unnessecary investigations, and increasing the value of oral and dental research.

Emperor's syndrome in the COVID-19 era: Time for patient-centered nephrology?

The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has been a wake-up call in which has forced us to react worldwide. Health policies and practices have attracted particular attention in terms of human and financial cost. Before COVID-19, chronic kidney disease was already considered a risk multiplier in patients with diabetes and hypertension, the two now being the major risk factors for COVID-19 infection and adverse outcome. In contrast to the urgent need for action, the nephrology field is considered to be in a state of stagnation regarding the management of chronic kidney disease patients who still experience unacceptably high morbidity and mortality. Ironically and paradoxically in a field lacking robust clinical trials, clinical practice is driven by guidelines-based medicine on weak evidence. The Emperor's syndrome, referring to Hans Christian Andersen's fairy tale, has been described in medicine as voluntary blindness to an obvious truth, being a weak evidence-based therapeutic intervention or weak health care. A promising positive example of improving heart and kidney outcomes is the emerging treatment with sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. COVID-19 could boost actions for patient-centered care as a positive shift in nephrology care.

Hydroxychloroquine Controversies: Clinical Trials, Epistemology, and the Democratization of Science

The claim that anti-malaria drugs, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, can cure COVID-19 became a focus of fierce political battles that pitted promoters of these pharmaceuticals, Presidents Bolsonaro and Trump among them, against "medical elites." At the center of these battles are different meanings of effectiveness in medicine, the complex role of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in proving such effectiveness, the task of medical experts and the state in regulating pharmaceuticals, patients' activism, and the collective production of medical knowledge. This article follows the trajectory of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine as anti-COVID-19 drugs, focusing on the reception of views of their main scientific promoter, the French infectious disease specialist, Didier Raoult. The surprising career of these drugs, our text proposes, is fundamentally a political event, not in the narrow sense of engaging specific political fractions, but in the much broader sense of the politics of public participation in science.