Podcast appearances and mentions of meta analyses

Episode Description & Show Notes: This week, a fitness influencer went viral for saying people over 200 pounds shouldn't be allowed in Pilates class—and that instructors with a “gut” shouldn't be teaching. Yes, she deleted the video. But the damage was done. Thousands of people agreed with her. This is the fitness industry we're still up against. And in this episode, we're not just pushing back—we're burning the whole narrative down. We break down 13 research-backed reasons why building your fitness brand around body transformation isn't just unethical—it's lazy, outdated, and costing you money. What we cover: Why transformation-based branding leads to low retention and high churn How extrinsic motivation backfires (and what the neuroscience says) The impact of shame-based messaging on mental health How to actually build emotional loyalty that fuels long-term growth Why purpose-driven brands scale better—and feel better This episode is part reckoning, part guidebook. We brought the science, the lived experience, and the tools to help you build a brand that doesn't just sell workouts—but moves people. Whether you've already left the old model behind or are still working your way out of it—this one's for you. If this message resonates, share it. Post it. Text it to your team. Forward it to another studio owner. This is how we shift the industry—together.   SPRING INTO SUMMER AUDITS (Limited-Time Offer) Want to be sure your brand is saying what it's supposed to—and that your class experience is reinforcing it? Brand Strategy Audit with Barry – $150 Experience Architecture Audit with Shay – $150 Bundle both for $250 We'll review your messaging, experience delivery, and help you align your brand with what actually works—ethically, emotionally, and financially. DM us “AUDIT” on Instagram or email us at hello@fitcarma.com   Citations & Research Sources McGonigal, K. (2020). The Joy of Movement: How Exercise Helps Us Find Happiness, Hope, Connection, and Courage. https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/562466/the-joy-of-movement-by-kelly-mcgonigal/ Singh, B. et al. (2023). Effect of Physical Activity on Symptoms of Depression and Anxiety in Adults: A Meta-Review of Meta-Analyses. British Journal of Sports Medicine. https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2023/02/16/bjsports-2022-106195 Ducharme, J. (2022). Mental Health Benefits Are Getting Americans Back to the Gym. TIME Magazine. https://time.com/6233766/mental-health-benefits-exercise/ Inspire360 (2023). Mental Health Issues Are on the Rise: How the Fitness Industry Can Help. https://blog.inspire360.com/mental-health-and-the-fitness-industry/ Mintel (2023). Exercise Trends and Mental Wellness in the U.S. https://www.mintel.com (requires subscription access) Mindbody Wellness Index (2022–2023). Top Reasons Americans Exercise. https://www.mindbodyonline.com/business/education/blog/wellness-index Clear, J. (2018). Atomic Habits: An Easy & Proven Way to Build Good Habits & Break Bad Ones. https://jamesclear.com/atomic-habits Harvard Business Review (Reichheld & Schefter, 2000). The Economics of E-Loyalty. https://hbr.org/2000/07/the-economics-of-e-loyalty Blink Fitness. Mood Above Muscle Campaign Case Study. https://www.blinkfitness.com/about/mood-above-muscle PubMed (Tiggemann & Zaccardo, 2015). “Fitspiration” on Social Media: Body Image Effects of Fitspo vs. Self-Compassion. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26176993/ Two Brain Business (2019). The Real Problem With 6-Week Challenges. https://twobrainbusiness.com/the-real-problem-with-6-week-challenges/ Marshall, E. (2025). Music Is Medicine: How Rhythm Heals the Body and Moves the Soul. https://musicismedicine.co Fitcarma Brand Strategy Guide (2025). Internal brand framework. https://fitcarma.com

Welcome to Iron Radio, hosted by Phil Stevens, Dr. Mike Nelson, and Lonnie Lowry. Join us this week as we delve into the latest study on the anabolic effects of vegan versus omnivorous diets in older adults. Learn about the role of physical activity, protein quality, and well-planned meals in muscle protein synthesis. This episode also explores the balance between fitness and life, stressing the importance of relaxation even for elite athletes, and the benefits of having diverse interests outside of training. Tune in for expert insights and practical advice!01:07 Lonnie Lowry's Introduction and Book Announcement01:52 Discussion on Meta-Analyses and Research Evolution02:51 Vegan Diets and Muscle Building in Older Adults03:45 Study Findings on Vegan vs. Omnivorous Diets06:15 Practical Implications of Vegan Diets10:42 Challenges of Vegan Diets for Athletes18:13 Transition and Podcast Updates18:24 Balancing Fitness and Life28:17 The Elite Mindset: Training and Progress29:16 Balancing Intensity and Relaxation30:53 Tracking and Letting Go31:37 The Role of Coaches and Stress Management32:53 Relaxation and Mental Health in Fitness35:58 Client Goals and Program Adherence37:38 The Importance of Recreation and Balance42:09 Experimentation and Flexibility in Training49:23 Concluding Thoughts and Advice Donate to the show via PayPal HERE.You can also join Dr Mike's Insider Newsletter for more info on how to add muscle, improve your performance and body comp - all without destroying your health, go to www.ironradiodrmike.com Thank you!Phil, Jerrell, Mike T, and Lonnie

Brian J. Willoughby, Ph.D. is a professor in the School of Family Life at Brigham Young University and a research fellow at The Wheatley Institute. He received a bachelor's degree in Psychology from BYU and masters and doctoral degrees in Family Social Science from the University of Minnesota. Brian's research generally focuses on how adolescents, young adults, and adults move toward and form long-term committed relationships, and has been widely cited in the media. He is also the author of The Millennial Marriage and The Marriage Paradox: Why Emerging Adults Love Marriage Yet Push it Aside. Brian and his wife Cassi have been married for 23 years and they have four children. Links Wheatley Institute research reports Addressing Pornography Share your thoughts in the Leading Saints community Transcript coming soon Get 14-day access to the Core Leader Library Highlights Kurt and Brian discuss the complexities of pornography use within religious contexts. Brian emphasizes that young adults will encounter pornography, often leading to shame and guilt. He highlights the importance of understanding the motivations behind pornography use, which can range from curiosity to emotional coping mechanisms. Brian also addresses the stigma surrounding addiction labels. He explains that only about 10% of users experience compulsive behavior, while many others face problematic use. Church leaders should focus on creating a safe environment for youth to discuss these issues. By asking questions about triggers and providing coping strategies, leaders can help youth navigate their experiences. Brian encourages a balanced approach to discussing pornography, emphasizing hope, understanding, and the potential for growth through repentance. 03:35 - Brian Willoughby's Expertise in Pornography Research 04:26 - Overview of BYU and the Wheatley Institute 05:57 - Research Impact on Policy and Society 06:57 - Teaching Future Therapists and Family Studies 07:37 - The Stigma of Pornography in Religious Contexts 08:50 - Understanding the Broader Impact of Pornography 09:51 - Meta-Analyses and Key Findings on Pornography 11:38 - The Concept of Addiction and Compulsive Behavior 12:58 - Potential for DSM Inclusion of Hypersexual Disorder 13:47 - Brain Chemistry and Pornography Use 15:29 - Distinction Between Addictive and Problematic Use 17:34 - Scripting Expectations from Pornography 19:24 - Social Media and Its Impact on Mental Health 20:34 - The Need for Open Conversations About Pornography 21:09 - The Role of Church Leaders in Addressing Pornography 22:13 - The Importance of Avoiding Labels of Addiction 23:47 - Understanding Youth Experiences with Pornography 25:56 - The Normative Context of Pornography Use 27:06 - Creating Positive Conversations Around Pornography 28:51 - The Role of Fear and Anxiety in Youth Discussions 30:05 - Normalizing Sin and Repentance 31:04 - Distinction Between Guilt and Shame 34:02 - Motivating Youth Through Guilt vs. Shame 36:57 - The Importance of Understanding Triggers 39:11 - Building Coping Skills for Youth 41:27 - Final Thoughts on Support and Guidance The award-winning Leading Saints Podcast is one of the top independent Latter-day Saints podcasts as part of nonprofit Leading Saints' mission to help Latter-day Saints be better prepared to lead. Learn more and listen to any of the past episodes for free at LeadingSaints.org. Past guests include Emily Belle Freeman, David Butler, Hank Smith, John Bytheway, Reyna and Elena Aburto, Liz Wiseman, Stephen M. R. Covey, Elder Alvin F. Meredith III, Julie Beck, Brad Wilcox, Jody Moore, Tony Overbay, John H. Groberg, Elaine Dalton, Tad R. Callister, Lynn G. Robbins, J. Devn Cornish, Bonnie Oscarson, Dennis B. Neuenschwander, Kirby Heyborne, Taysom Hill Anthony Sweat, John Hilton III, Barbara Morgan Gardner, Blair Hodges, Whitney Johnson, Ryan Gottfredson, Greg McKeown, Ganel-Lyn Condie, Michael Goodman, Wendy Ulrich, Richard Ostler,

Interview with Pim Cuijpers, PhD, author of Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Mental Disorders in Adults: A Unified Series of Meta-Analyses. Hosted by John Torous, MD Related Content: Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Mental Disorders in Adults

Interview with Pim Cuijpers, PhD, author of Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Mental Disorders in Adults: A Unified Series of Meta-Analyses. Hosted by John Torous, MD Related Content: Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Mental Disorders in Adults

In this episode of Iron Culture, hosts Eric Helms and Eric Trexler engage in a lively discussion with Dr. James Steele about the evolving landscape of sports science, particularly focusing on the critiques of periodization and the importance of scientific theory in exercise research. They explore the philosophical underpinnings of scientific inquiry, the challenges of conducting robust research, and the implications of recent studies on training effects. The conversation emphasizes the need for a more theory-driven approach in exercise science to enhance the validity and applicability of research findings. In this conversation, James Steele and Eric Helms discuss the intricacies of designing meaningful studies in hypertrophy research, emphasizing the importance of collaboration, causal inference, and the need for high-powered studies. They explore the challenges of resistance training research, the significance of theory corroboration, and the future directions for the field. The discussion highlights the necessity of passion and purpose in research, advocating for a focus on practical applications and the importance of understanding the underlying mechanisms of training effects. Time stamps: 00:00 Introduction 03:55 The Role of Periodization in Sports Science 11:45 Critique of Periodization and Scientific Methodology 24:50 Philosophy of Science in Exercise Science 33:12 Understanding Sports Science Models 35:56 Philosophy of Science in Sports Research 40:00 The Importance of Critical Thinking 44:35 Diving into the Study 48:38 Theory of Adaptation in Resistance Training 54:47 Intervention Effects and Practical Implications 59:10 Meta-Analysis and Evidence in Sports Science 01:19:50 The Value of Individual Studies vs. Meta-Analyses 01:24:03 Understanding Causal Inference in Research 01:27:41 The Importance of Baseline Theory in Training 01:29:28 Identifying Small Effects in Research 01:33:16 The Role of Collaboration in Sports Science 01:38:38 Leveraging Data for Performance Insights 01:41:08 The Distinction Between Sports Science and Exercise Science 01:44:59 Learning from Other Fields: Causal Inference in Sports 01:47:29 Passion and Purpose in Research 01:50:02 Concluding Thoughts on the Future of Research

Dr. Jason Deck discusses the #5 article of 2023, “Ultrasound-Guided Interventions for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses,” which was originally published in Diagnostics in March 2023. Dr. Jeremy Schroeder serves as the series host. Dr. Deck is a member of the AMSSM Top Articles Subcommittee, and this episode is part of an ongoing mini journal club series highlighting each of the Top Articles in Sports Medicine from 2023, as selected for the 2024 AMSSM Annual Meeting. Ultrasound-Guided Interventions for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/13/6/1138

Protein — how much do we need? What's the healthiest way to consume it? Can we get enough from plant-based diets? Until recent decades, protein hasn't been quite as prominent in public health discussions as sugar and fats.  However, with longer lifespans emphasizing the importance of protein for long-term health, and growing confusion around the quality and quantity of protein needed, it has become a highly debated macronutrient. In ‘Your Brain On… Protein', we explore: • The brain health benefits (and general health benefits) of protein • Plant-based protein vs. meat protein, and supplements like protein powders • How much protein we really need to eat every day • Ways we can all introduce more protein into our diets • Why ‘health' influencers are suddenly recommending unusually  high levels of protein consumption • How we measure the quality of proteins, including digestibility and absorption In this episode, we're joined by two fantastic nutrition experts: DR. MATTHEW NAGRA, nutritionist and science communicator. DR. ALAN FLANAGAN, esteemed nutrition scientist (previously featured in ‘Your Brain On… Sugar' and ‘Your Brain On… Fats' ‘Your Brain On' is hosted by neurologists, scientists and public health advocates Ayesha and Dean Sherzai. Drs. Ayesha and Dean are now welcoming patients via the Brain Health Institute: https://brainhealthinstitute.com/ ‘Your Brain On... Protein' • SEASON 3 • EPISODE 10 (SEASON 3 FINALE!) ——— LINKS: Dr. Matt Nagra Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/dr.matthewnagra Website: https://drmatthewnagra.com/  Dr. Alan Flanagan Alan on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thenutritionaladvocate Alinea Nutrition: https://www.alineanutrition.com/ ——— REFERENCES: Dietary Patterns and Risk of Dementia: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12035-015-9516-4 Dietary fat composition and dementia risk. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2014.03.038 Dietary Protein and Amino Acids in Vegetarian Diets—A Review. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6893534/ Animal vs Plant-Based Meat: A Hearty Debate. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38934982/ High-Protein Plant-Based Diet Versus a Protein-Matched Omnivorous Diet to Support Resistance Training Adaptations: A Comparison Between Habitual Vegans and Omnivores. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33599941/ Vegan and Omnivorous High Protein Diets Support Comparable Daily Myofibrillar Protein Synthesis Rates and Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy in Young Adults. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36822394/ Digestibility issues of vegetable versus animal proteins: protein and amino acid requirements--functional aspects. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23964409/ Soy and Isoflavone Consumption and Multiple Health Outcomes: Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies and Randomized Trials in Humans. https://doi.org/10.1002/mnfr.201900751 No Difference Between the Effects of Supplementing With Soy Protein Versus Animal Protein on Gains in Muscle Mass and Strength in Response to Resistance Exercise. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29722584/ Neither soy nor isoflavone intake affects male reproductive hormones: An expanded and updated meta-analysis of clinical studies. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33383165/ The health effects of soy: A reference guide for health professionals. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9410752/ The Effect of Plant-Based Protein Ingestion on Athletic Ability in Healthy People—A Bayesian Meta-Analysis with Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/16/16/2748 Effects of high-quality protein supplementation on cardiovascular risk factors in individuals with metabolic diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2024.06.013 Vegan and Omnivorous High Protein Diets Support Comparable Daily Myofibrillar Protein Synthesis Rates and Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy in Young Adults. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36822394/

Omega-3 fatty acids are often viewed as beneficial or, at worst, neutral supplements when it comes to supporting cardiovascular health, lowering triglycerides, and offering anti-inflammatory effects. Much of the focus in recent years has centered on understanding how significant these benefits are, particularly for heart health, with many studies highlighting the potential for omega-3s to play a positive role in reducing cardiovascular risk. However, an emerging concern has complicated the conversation around omega-3 supplementation. Several large trials, including the REDUCE-IT and STRENGTH trials, have suggested that omega-3 supplementation might be linked to an increased risk of atrial fibrillation (AF), a common cardiac arrhythmia characterized by an irregular and often rapid heart rate. These findings have sparked debate over whether omega-3s could contribute to this potentially serious heart condition, leaving clinicians and health-conscious individuals uncertain about the safety of these supplements. However, not all the research supports this elevated risk. This discrepancy raises important questions about how we interpret the data from various studies, the design of those trials, and whether other factors might be influencing these results. Understanding this issue in depth is crucial for making informed decisions about omega-3 supplementation and its potential risks and benefits. In this episode we walk through the studies and the key points to consider. Timestamps: 00:30 Updates on Alan's upcoming study 05:06 Atrial Fibrillation and Omega-3 14:52 RCTs and AFib: Key Studies 29:14 Meta-Analyses and Dose-Response 46:46 Practical Implications and Recommendations 53:53 Key Ideas Segment (Premium-only) Links: Join the Sigma email newsletter for free Subscribe to Sigma Nutrition Premium Go to episode page

In this episode of RAPM Focus, Editor-in-Chief Brian Sites, MD, is delighted to be joined by Ryan D'Souza, MD, and Nasir Hussain, MD, following the February 2024 publication of their review, “Methodological and Statistical Characteristics of Meta-Analyses on Spinal Cord Stimulation for Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review.” Both of these anesthesiologists are prolific in their research and contributions to the regional anesthesia and pain medicine community. Best practice advisories and policies tend to stem from the results of systematic reviews and metanalysis, thus the stakes are very high for a journal to ensure that the results are meaningful and valid. The mathematical principles and assumptions of systematic reviews and meta-analyses are quite complex, which often exceeds the capacity of many journals to truly adjudicate. To further complicate matters, there are emerging techniques that include network meta-analyses that take even more expertise to review. Therefore, better understanding content areas where there are strengths and weaknesses around systematic reviews is critical to best informing clinical practice. Dr. D'Souza is a pain medicine physician and anesthesiologist at the Mayo Clinic. He is an associate professor, director of neuromodulation, and director of the in-patient pain service. He is an associate editor and social media editor for RAPM. Dr. Hussain is a pain medicine physician and anesthesiologist at the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center. He is an assistant professor, associate program director for anesthesiology residency, and assistant program director of the chronic pain fellowship. *The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. The content of this podcast does not constitute medical advice, and it is not intended to function as a substitute for a healthcare practitioner's judgement, patient care, or treatment. The views expressed by contributors are those of the speakers. BMJ does not endorse any views or recommendations discussed or expressed on this podcast. Listeners should also be aware that professionals in the field may have different opinions. By listening to this podcast, listeners agree not to use its content as the basis for their own medical treatment or for the medical treatment of others. Podcast and music produced by Dan Langa. Find us on X @RAPMOnline, Facebook @Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine, and Instagram @RAPM_Online.

The ACFT has been a hot topic since the day it was announced. Even now, after a few years, myths and misconceptions persist. We've seen a lot of these in our comments and messages, and we thought it was time to address a few. In this episode we break down a little bit of the history behind how the test was developed, the reasoning behind a few of the events, and the validity (or lack thereof) of some of the common criticisms of the test. Here are some of the references mentioned, if you want to dive deeper: "Prediction of simulated battlefield physical performance from field-expedient tests" (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18251329/ ) Pilot testing of two proposed alternative fitness tests, the APRT and the ACRT (https://www.army.mil/article/55446/new-army-pt-tests-army-physical-readiness-test-army-combat-readiness-test/) "Correlations between Physical Fitness Tests and Performance of Military Tasks: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA607688.pdf ) "Development of a New Army Standardized Physical Readiness Test" (https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/AD1011066.pdf ) Final report of the BSPRRS study published (https://www.iadlest.org/Portals/0/AD1097586%20Baseline%20Soldier%20Physical%20Readiness%20Requirements%20Study.pdf ) Our episode with Dr. East, who was involved in much of the work linked above: https://open.spotify.com/episode/0vjeGEOqUwnkokRrSrgJKL

Get on the waitlist for journal club here: https://www.dentaldigestpodcast.com/contact-4  Follow @dental_digest_podcast Instagram Follow @dr.melissa_seibert on Instagram Connect with Melissa on Linkedin  DOT - Use the Code DENTALDIGEST for 10% off Specialty Orofacial Pain Diplomate of the American Board of Orofacial Pain Fellow of the American Academy of Orofacial Pain Practicing since 1990 Education Doctor of Dental Surgery, University of Costa Rica, 1989 Specialty Certificate in Orofacial Pain, University of California, Los Angeles, 1998 Master of Education, Latin University, 2005 Professional memberships American Academy of Orofacial Pain International Association for the Study of Pain American Headache Society American Dental Education Association Dr. Padilla's Publications  Repurposing lectures and reviews into educational blogs J Dent Educ. 2023 06; 87 Suppl 1:895-896. . View in PubMed Temporomandibular joint findings in CBCT images: A retrospective study Cranio. 2021 Dec 11; 1-6. . View in PubMed Deploying a curated glossary: An orofacial pain wiki J Dent Educ. 2021 Dec; 85 Suppl 3:2016-2017. . View in PubMed Efficacy of cannabis-based medications compared to placebo for the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 2021 Dec; 21(6):479-506. . View in PubMed Efficacy of medications in adult patients with trigeminal neuralgia compared to placebo intervention: a systematic review with meta-analyses J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 2021 Oct; 21(5):379-396. . View in PubMed Efficacy of topical interventions for temporomandibular disorders compared to placebo or control therapy: a systematic review with meta-analysis J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 2020 Dec; 20(6):337-356. . View in PubMed Trigeminal neuralgia management after microvascular decompression surgery: two case reports J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 2020 Dec; 20(6):403-408. . View in PubMed Clinical skills evaluation and examination center: From demos to competence validation J Dent Educ. 2020 Oct 02. . View in PubMed A modern web-based virtual learning environment for use in dental education J Dent Educ. 2020 Sep 11. . View in PubMed Efficacy of Antidepressants in the Treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea Compared to PlaceboA Systematic Review with Meta-Analyses. Sleep Breath. 2020 Jun; 24(2):443-453. . View in PubMed Effects of respiratory muscle therapy on obstructive sleep apnea: a systematic review and meta-analysis J Clin Sleep Med. 2020 05 15; 16(5):785-801. . View in PubMed Empathy Levels of Dental Faculty and Students: A Survey Study at an Academic Dental Institution in Chile J Dent Educ. 2019 Oct; 83(10):1134-1141. . View in PubMed Prevalence of trismus in patients with head and neck cancer: A systematic review with meta-analysis Head Neck. 2019 09; 41(9):3408-3421. . View in PubMed Local Anesthetic Injections for the Short-Term Treatment of Head and Neck Myofascial Pain Syndrome: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis J Oral Facial Pain Headache. 2019; 33(2):183–198. . View in PubMed Use of platelet-rich plasma, platelet-rich growth factor with arthrocentesis or arthroscopy to treat temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis: Systematic review with meta-analysesJ Am Dent Assoc. 2018 Nov; 149(11):940-952. e2. . View in PubMed Chilean Dentistry students, levels of empathy and empathic erosion: Necessary evaluation before a planned intervention: Levels of empathy, evaluation and intervention Saudi Dent J. 2018 Apr; 30(2):117-124. . View in PubMed Effects of CPAP and mandibular advancement device treatment in obstructive sleep apnea patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis Sleep Breath. 2018 09; 22(3):555-568. . View in PubMed Effectiveness of Intra-Articular Injections of Sodium Hyaluronate or Corticosteroids for Intracapsular Temporomandibular Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis J Oral Facial Pain Headache. 2018 Winter; 32(1):53–66. . View in PubMed Reconsidering the ‘Decline' of Dental Student Empathy within the Course in Latin America Acta Med Port. 2017 Nov 29; 30(11):775-782. . View in PubMed Medication Treatment Efficacy and Chronic Orofacial Pain Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2016 Aug; 28(3):409-21. . View in PubMed  

„Je mehr ich weiß, desto mehr weiß ich, dass ich nichts weiß!“ Kein anderer Satz beschreibt das Wissenschaftsdilemma der deutschsprachigen Physiotherapie und Sportwissenschaft so gut. Gerade sonnten wir uns noch im Licht der letzten Studie, die unseren Bias füttert, da kommt Daniel Kadlec mit seiner aktuellen Arbeit "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility: Common Errorsin Meta‑Analyses and Meta‑Regressions in Strength & Conditioning Research“ um die Ecke und berichtet davon, dass in den letzten zwanzig meist zitierten Meta-Analysen signifikante Rechenfehler enthalten sind… und wir dachten, sie wären der Goldstandard. Warum man trotzdem nicht, dem nihilistischen Impuls nachgeben sollte, sämtliche Forschung über Bord zu werfen, darüber unterhalten wir uns mit Tabea Arens, angehende PhDlerin an der MSH Hamburg und Thomas Kott, seines Zeichens Doktor der Mathematik und Schwager von Heppi. Welchen Einfluss haben Publikationszwang, Gate Keeper Phänomene im Agenda Setting der Journals und die Tücken der Statistik auf den Einfluss unserer Studien? Wir wünschen Euch viel Spaß mit der Folge! Shownotes: Daniel Kadlec et al: "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility: Common Errors in Meta‑Analyses and Meta‑Regressions in Strength & Conditioning Research“ https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-022-01766-0 Natalie Bittencourt et al: "Complex systems approach for sports injuries: Moving from risk factor identification to injury pattern recognition-narrative review and new concept" https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305518394_Complex_systems_approach_for_sports_injuries_Moving_from_risk_factor_identification_to_injury_pattern_recognition-narrative_review_and_new_concept Roald Bahr et al: "Why screening tests to predict injury do not work—and probably never will…: a critical review“ https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/50/13/776

Evidence-based practice has unfortunately become a meme, and its meaning, role, and utility are less understood than they were just a handful of years ago. In this episode we dive deep, discussing how to incorporate study findings into practice. If you don't have the ability to gauge the impact of a study's findings, how do you stay up to date? We answer critical questions like: How does the hierarchy of evidence operate in a field where many meta-analyses have errors? What is the role of mechanistic research compared to applied research, and when should you look to each to inform what you do in the trenches? At a time when many seem ready to simply throw in the towel on the evidence - despite it actually being of a higher quality, than it ever has been, we are here. We are going to bring you back from the brink so that you can make those sweet, sweet evidence-based gains. 00:00 Revealing some of the mystery of the cult https://massresearchreview.com/  Iron Culture Ep. 263- Is Protein Timing Debunked? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AyX9Uzek2U 08:41 Getting into it before the 10 minute mark 12:23 Actually kicking it off… The hierarchy of evidence and meta-analyses Kadlec 2023 With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility: Common Errors in Meta-Analyses and Meta-Regressions in Strength & Conditioning Research https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36208412/ 32:44 So what actually is a meta-analysis? And which ones to read 42:57 Changes in paradigms Schoenfeld 2017 Strength and Hypertrophy Adaptations Between Low- vs. High-Load Resistance Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28834797/ Baz-Valle 2022 A Systematic Review of The Effects of Different Resistance Training Volumes on Muscle Hypertrophy https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35291645/ Enes 2024 Effects of Different Weekly Set Progressions on Muscular Adaptations in Trained Males: Is There a Dose-Response Effect? https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37796222/  Damas 2016 Resistance training-induced changes in integrated myofibrillar protein synthesis are related to hypertrophy only after attenuation of muscle damage https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27219125/  Robinson 2023 Exploring the Dose-Response Relationship Between Estimated Resistance Training Proximity to Failure, Strength Gain, and Muscle Hypertrophy: A Series of Meta-Regressions https://sportrxiv.org/index.php/server/preprint/view/295  57:17 Sources of information and the carrot of capitalism  1:09:19 The research chain and when it should be broken 1:26:26 What we do when we don't get the study that we want Smith 2003 Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: systematic review of randomised controlled trials https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14684649/ 1:41:32 The final thoughts and a teaser for next time

Ever pondered how to navigate the vast sea of research on diets and blood pressure without losing your way? Join us as we uncover the layers of a recent Advances in Nutrition paper, presenting a valuable guide for healthcare professionals in the integrative medicine field. Embarking on systematic reviews in dietary research often feels like embarking on a quest for the Holy Grail. In this installment, we express appreciation for the diligence required to scrutinize thousands of studies. Balancing admiration with a critical eye, we meticulously examine the utilization of tools such as AMSTAR and the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias to separate valuable insights from less substantial findings.Aljuraiban GS, Gibson R, Chan DS, Van Horn L, Chan Q. The Role of Diet in the Prevention of Hypertension and Management of Blood Pressure: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses of Interventional and Observational Studies. Adv Nutr. 2024 Jan;15(1):100123. doi: 10.1016/j.advnut.2023.09.011. Epub 2023 Oct 1. PMID: 37783307; PMCID: PMC10831905.Learn more and become a member at www.DrJournalClub.comCheck out our complete offerings of NANCEAC-approved Continuing Education Courses.

What does the research say about small group reading instruction?ResourcesEpisode 142: Structured Literacy in Small Group TimeEpisode 143: Maximizing Small Group Reading Instruction Maximizing Small Group Reading Instruction (Conradi-Smith, Amendum, Williams, 2022)Differentiated Literacy Instruction: Boondoggle or Best Practice? (Puzio, Colby, Nichols, 2020)Meta-Analyses of the Effects of Tier 2 Type Reading Interventions in Grades K-3 (Wanzek, et. al, 2016)  Connect with us Facebook and join our Facebook Group Twitter Instagram Don't miss an episode! Sign up for FREE bonus resources and episode alerts at LiteracyPodcast.com Helping teachers learn about science of reading, knowledge building, and high quality curriculum.

Systematic reviews such as these are just one of many ways in academic writing to accumulate the current state-of-the-art in a relevant field of research. But fear not, we've got PRISMA as our guiding star. PRISMA stands for “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.” In this episode, we will embark on a journey to let you understand what systematic reviews are and how you could use this extraordinary tool to capture an aerial photo from your research. We will also introduce the PRISMA guidelines to equip you with the relevant toolbox to start using this methodology in your own research.References:Higgins, J., Altman, D., Gøtzsche, P., Jüni, P., Moher, D., Oxman, A., Savović, J., Schulz, K. F., Weeks, L., & Sterne, J. A. C. (2011). The Cochrane collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ, 343(oct18 2), d5928-d5928. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d5928 Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 10(1), 89. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01626-4Stang, A. (2010). Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. European Journal of Epidemiology, 25(9), 603-605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-010-9491-zUncover even more insights and valuable information by visiting the blog profmanagement.de. Thank you for tuning in! If you enjoyed this episode, we'd be thrilled if you could leave us a glowing review on Apple Podcasts. Got a thought or opinion about this episode? Have a suggestion for a future topic? Send an audio file or voice note to hi@profmanagement.de. For all other comments, send us a tweet or DM at @profmanagement on Twitter or Instagram.

In episode seven, Daisy and Clare chat about all things related to fish - from where to obtain those all important essential omega 3 fatty acids, to whether fishing really is sustainable and what you can eat as an alternative on a plant based diet if you decide to leave fish alone. Further references are linked below: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/public-health-nutrition/article/are-we-running-out-of-fish-fish-health-and-sustainability/3D836148DDB47B8F1D2E790872533B90 Li N, et al. Fish consumption and multiple health outcomes: Umbrella review. Trends in Food Science and Technology 2020. doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2020.02.033 Song M,et al. Association of animal and plant protein intake with all-cause and cause-specific mortality. JAMA Intern Med 2016. doi10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.4182 Jayedi A, Shab-Bidar S. Fish Consumption and the Risk or Chronic Disease: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses of Prospective Cohort Studies. Advances in Nutrition 2020; 11:. Burns-Whitmore B, Froyen E, Heskey C, Parker T, Pablo GS. Alpha-linolenic and linolenic fatty acids in the vegan diet: Do they require dietary reference intake/ adequate intake special considerations? Nutrients 2019; 11:. Statement on the benefits of fish/seafood consumption compared to the risks of methlymercury in fish/seafood. EFSA J 2015. doi:10.2903/j.efsa2015.3982 Update on the monitoring of levels of dioxins and PCB's in food and feed. EFSA J 2012. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2832 Xue B, et al. Underestimated Microplastics Pollution Derived from Fishery Activities and ‘Hidden' in Deep Sediment. Environ Sci Technol 2020. doi:10.1021/acs.est.9b04850 Cohen L, Jefferies A. Environmental Exposure and Cancer. Using the Precautionary Principle. Ecancermedicalscience 2019. doi:10.3332/ecancer.2019.ed91 Chen J, et al. Antibiotics and Food Safety in Aquaculture. J Agric Food Chem 2002.doi:10.1021/es011287i Courtenay M, et al. Tackling antimicrobial resistance 2019-2024- The UK's five year national action plan. J Hosp Infec 2019. doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2019.02.019 Manyi-Loh C, Mamphweli S, Meyer E, Okoh A. Antibiotic use in agriculture and its consequential resistance in environmental sources: Potential public health implications. Molecules 2018; 23(4):795,doi:10.3390/molecules23040795  Milanovic V,  Osimani A, Aquilanti L, et al Occurrence of antibiotic resistant genres in the faecal DNA of healthy omnivores, ovo-lacto vegetarians and vegans. Mol Nutr Food Res 2017; 61(9) doi:10.1002/mnfr.201601098 The Gospel of the Eels - book by Patrik Svensson https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-64814781 https://marine-conservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Sala-et-al_Nature_2021.pdf Financial Times articles (behind a pay wall) Missing ice and bleached coral: the sudden warming of the oceans | Financial Times 7/8/23   Use of horseshoe crabs' blue blood puts pharma groups under scrutiny | Financial Times (ft.com) 23/8/23 Seagrass beds | WWT  https://www.vegansociety.com/resources/nutrition-and-health/nutrients/omega-3-and-omega-6-fats?gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjw38SoBhB6EiwA8EQVLr47EqsO8r6_-9XuzhPk1rWVqZm4V1FtXDUD_FWKiTxINNDBNTM4RxoCWRwQAvD_BwE

Bezglutenowa, bezlaktozowa, bezmleczna, bezmięsna to tylko przykłady diet eliminacyjnych, które zyskują coraz większą popularność wśród Polaków. Medycznym wskazaniem do eliminacji określonych produktów spożywczych są przed wszystkim alergie i nietolerancje pokarmowe, a także choroby przewodu pokarmowego jak zespół jelita nadwrażliwego, SIBO czy celiakia. Jednak coraz więcej osób wyklucza różne pokarmy ze swoje diety aby wyeliminować objawy takie wzdęcia, biegunki lub wręcz zatrzymać postąp choroby. Jednak czy w każdym przypadku jest to słuszne? Gość: mgr Joanna Rojkowicz – dietetyk kliniczny, specjalistka od diet eliminacyjnych. Na co dzień współpracuje z osobami cierpiącymi na zespół jelita drażliwego, SIBO, choroby zapalne jelit i inne zaburzenia związane z przewodem pokarmowym. Oprócz tego Asia jest autorką szkoleń i e-booków z zakresu chorób układu pokarmowego i mikrobioty jelitowej. Asię znajdziecie na instagramie pod nickiem @love_fodmap oraz stronie internetowej: www.joannarojkowicz.pl W odcinku znajdziesz odpowiedzi m. in. na następujące pytania: Co to są diety eliminacyjne i kiedy je stosujemy? Czym różni się alergia od nietolerancji pokarmowej? Czym jest nietolerancja laktozy i histaminy? Czym jest mikrobiota jelitowa i jak wpływa na nasze zdrowie? Czym jest dieta low FODMAP? Czy diety eliminacyjne są niebezpieczne? Co możemy zrobić, żeby zmniejszyć ryzyko skutków ubocznych diet eliminacyjnych? Jakie są najczęściej popełniane błędy na dietach eliminacyjnych? Czy musimy eliminować gluten i nabiał w chorobach autoimmunologicznych? Czym jest efekt placebo i nocebo? Czym jest mimikra molekularna? Czy osoby z chorobami tarczycy powinny unikać goitrogenów? Lista publikacji o których wspominamy w podcaście: Vernia P. i wsp. Diagnosis of lactose intolerance and the "nocebo" effect: the role of negative expectations. Dig Liver Dis. 2010 Sep;42(9):616-9. Petroski W. i Minich D.M. Is There Such a Thing as “Anti-Nutrients”? A Narrative Review of Perceived Problematic Plant Compounds. Nutrients. 2020 Oct; 12(10): 2929. Moosavian S.P. i wsp. Effects of dairy products consumption on inflammatory biomarkers among adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2020 Jun 9;30(6):872-888. Cavero-Redondo I. i wsp. Milk and Dairy Product Consumption and Risk of Mortality: An Overview of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Adv Nutr. 2019 May 1;10(suppl_2):S97-S104. Soedamah-Muthu S.S. i de Goede J. Dairy Consumption and Cardiometabolic Diseases: Systematic Review and Updated Meta-Analyses of Prospective Cohort Studies. Curr Nutr Rep. 2018 Dec;7(4):171-182. Gao D. i wsp. Dairy products consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2013 Sep 27;8(9):e73965. Companys J. i wsp. Fermented dairy foods rich in probiotics and cardiometabolic risk factors: a narrative review from prospective cohort studies. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2021;61(12):1966-1975. Van Buiten Ch. i Elias R.J. Gliadin Sequestration as a Novel Therapy for Celiac Disease: A Prospective Application for Polyphenols. Int J Mol Sci. 2021 Jan 8;22(2):595. Calabriso N. i wsp. Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity and Protective Role of Dietary Polyphenols. Nutrients. 2022 Jul; 14(13): 2679. Pi X. i wsp. A review on polyphenols and their potential application to reduce food allergenicity. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2022 May 23;1-18. Camilleri M. Leaky gut: mechanisms, measurement and clinical implications in humans. Gut. 2019 Aug;68(8):1516-1526. Lerner A. i Matthias T. Changes in intestinal tight junction permeability associated with industrial food additives explain the rising incidence of autoimmune disease. Autoimmun Rev. 2015 Jun;14(6):479-89. Ihnatowicz P. i wsp. The importance of gluten exclusion in the management of Hashimoto's thyroiditis. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2021 Dec 29;28(4):558-568.

A meta-analysis of co-teaching showed that it benefits students to have more than one adult in the classroom, regardless of the specifics. We reflect on what it could mean to successfully build a co-teaching classroom based on trust among the teachers and students. Later, we read another meta-analysis that is sharply critical of the current research on growth mindset. We consider what their critiques mean for our past support of growth mindset research and what elements of growth mindset we want to keep (for now).

If you find yourself grappling with gym confidence—or confidence in any area of your life—this episode is for you. In this episode, I delve deep into the intricate nexus of biology, psychology, and social factors, unraveling the secrets to cultivating unwavering confidence across all aspects of life. I finish this episode with a guided breath sequence designed to recalibrate your nervous system, acting as a lifeline when you're feeling stressed, overwhelmed, or lacking in confidence. To fully appreciate the power and nuances of this potent tool, I would definitely advise listening through the entire episode before giving it a try. As always, I'm leaving you with some enriching homework, but rest assured, it's the kind that will catapult your confidence to new heights and, in turn, reshape the trajectory of your life (sounds like a big call, but I've seen it work both with my own clients and in the literature). References: Kazantzis, N., Luong, H.K., Usatoff, A.S. et al. The Processes of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: A Review of Meta-Analyses. Cogn Ther Res 42, 349–357 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-018-9920-y --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thevertuepodcast/message

We're back into critical appraisal of unpronounceable medicines! Using eptinezumab as an example, how does it work to treat migraines, how well does it work, and most importantly, how did NICE use a network meta-analysis to look at how good it is compared to its equally unpronounceable friends? What is a network meta-analysis, and what are the key points? Enjoy!

On this episode we were joined by special guest researcher Dr. Kristin Sainani from Stanford University. With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility: Common Errors in Meta-Analyses and Meta-Regressions in Strength & Conditioning Research. Kadlec D, Sainani KL, Nimphius S. Sports Med. 2023;53(2):313-325. doi:10.1007/s40279-022-01766-0 Due to copyright laws, unless the article is open source we cannot legally post the PDF on the website for the world to download at will. Brought to you by CSMi – https://www.humacnorm.com/ptinquest Learn more about/Buy Erik's courses – The Science PT Support us on the Patreons! Music for PT Inquest: “The Science of Selling Yourself Short” by Less Than Jake Used by Permission Other Music by Kevin MacLeod – incompetech.com: MidRoll Promo – Mining by Moonlight

This is the Weight and Healthcare newsletter! If you like what you are reading, please consider subscribing and/or sharing!In part 1 we talked about a request that has been submitted for the World Health Organization (WHO) to add diet drugs (specifically GLP1 agonists like Novo Nordisk's Saxenda and Wegovy) to their list of “essential medicines.” We discussed who was making this request and the justification that they were using. In part 2 we took a deeper dive into the research that they used to try to support this request, and in this final installment, we will look at the research around efficacy, harm, and cost-effectiveness.First I'll offer a summary for each issue and then I'll give a breakdowns of the research that they cite.  Just a quick reminder that this request is asking the World Health Organization (WHO) to add these drugs to their list of “essential medications” globally.Before we get into the sections, I want to mention two overarching issues that are found throughout the entirety of this request and the studies that are used to support it.First, in general, a belief has been fomented (predominantly by those in the weight loss industry) that being higher-weight is so terrible then it's worth “throwing anything at the problem.” This leads to acceptance of poor, short-term, and/or incomplete data as “good enough” to foist recommendations onto higher-weight people, which means that part of weight stigma in healthcare is that higher-weight people are afforded less right to ethical, evidence-based medicine than thinner people.Second, is clinging to correlation (without any mechanism of causation) when it comes to weight, health, and health outcomes, including the abject failure to consider confounding variables. So throughout these studies “being higher-weight is associated with [health issue(s)]” stated uncritically in support of weight loss interventions. There is an utter failure to explore the idea that the reason for the outcome differences is not weight itself but, instead, exposure to weight stigma, weight cycling (which these medications actually perpetuate by their own admission,) and healthcare inequalities.  Issues with research supporting effectiveness, harms, and benefitsStudy Duration:This is the main issue. While there was one study that went up to 106 weeks, the vast majority of the studies are between 14 and 56 weeks. We know that these drugs can have significant, even life-threatening side effects (earning them the FDA's strongest warning.) 14-56 weeks is not not nearly enough time to capture the danger of long-term effects, or to capture long-term trends around weight loss/weight regain.Study PopulationMany of the studies included have small samples. Many have study populations are overwhelmingly white, which is a huge issue when making a global recommendations.Small effect and overlapMany of the studies show only a bit of weight loss (often 15lbs or less) and often there was overlap in weight lost between the treatment group and the placebo group. Even using the “ob*sity” construct that this request is based on, for many people, this amount of weight loss wouldn't even change their “class” of “ob*sity.”Failure to capture adverse eventsMuch of the research they use to support their claims of safety didn't actually capture individual adverse events or serious adverse events. Often they only captured subjects who reported leaving treatment due to side effects.Issues with research supporting cost effectivenessThe cost-effectiveness analyses they cite are based on Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). This is a measurement of the effectiveness of a medical intervention to lengthen and/or improve patients' lives.The calculation for this is [Years of Life * Utility Value = #QALY]So if a treatment gives someone 3 extra years of life with a Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQL) score of 0.7, then the treatment is said to generate 2.1 [3 x 0.7] QALYs.This is a complicated and problematic concept that deserves its own post sometime in the future, but looking just at this request I think it's important to note that they are working on two main unproven assumptions:1. That being higher weight causes lower health-related quality of life and/or shorter life span (rather than any lower HRQL being related to experiences that higher-weight people have including weight stigma, weight cycling, healthcare inequalities et al.) 2. That this treatment induces weight loss and/or health benefits that increase the life span and/or health-related quality of life of those who take it.I don't believe either of these assumptions are proven by the material cited in the request to the WHO. Specifically, it's very possible that it's not living in a higher-weight body, but rather the experiences that higher-weight people are more likely to have (weight stigma, weight cycling, healthcare inequalities) that impact their HRQL.Further, the short-term efficacy data available (and Novo Nordisk's own admission about high rates of regain) fall far short of proving any assumptions about these drugs ability to actually improve or extend life. Further, the failure of the literature to adequately capture negative side effects of the drugs, both short and long-term, means that this calculation cannot be properly made.Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER)ICER is how QALYs are turned into a monetary value. It is calculated by dividing the difference in total costs by the difference in the chosen measure of health outcome or effect.[(Cost of intervention A -Cost of Intervention B) / (Effectiveness of Intervention A – Effectiveness of Intervention B)]The result is a ratio of extra cost per extra unit of health effect of a more vs less expensive treatment which can then be measured in QALYs.Again, this is worthy of its own post because there are all kinds of ethical issues around things like how we value life, how we define “healthy” and the ethics of determining whether or not prolonging someone's life is “cost effective.” I'm not going to do a deep dive into that today, but I do want to note that it is a serious issue in these kinds of calculations.In this specific case, even if one was to get past the ethical issues, an accurate calculation is impossible to make on both of the measures of the equation.Cost of these drugs varies wildly between countries and sometimes within countries because, for example, Novo Nordisk is a for-profit corporation whose goal is to create as much profit as possible.  Per the WHO request letter, the monthly cost of liraglutide is $126 in Norway and $709 in the US. Semaglutide is $95 per 30 days in Turkey, but $804 per 30 days in US.When it comes to effectiveness of the treatment, again, there is virtually no long-term data. We do know that in Novo Nordisk's own studies, weight is regained rapidly and cardiometabolic benefits are lost when the drugs are discontinued and even when people stay on the drugs, weight loss levels off after about a year, at 68 weeks weight cycling begins, and at 104 weeks (when follow-up ended) weight was trending up. It's possible that these drugs are utterly ineffective over the long-term and/or that the prevalence of long-term side effects renders any treatment effects moot. We simply do not know.I do not think that this is a remotely appropriate basis from which to request that these drugs be declared globally essential by the WHO.Here are the citation breakdowns. These are not deep dives since there are enough issues with the research on a simple surface analysis.Breakdowns of evidence of comparative effectivenessEffects of liraglutide in the treatment of ob*sity: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, Astrup et al.)This is a 20-week study funded by Novo Nordisk. It included 564 people on various doses of liraglutide and a placebo group who didn't get the drug and a group on orlistat. There were no more than 90-98 people in each group.The study explains “Participants on liraglutide lost significantly more weight than did those on placebo” by which they meant that those on the highest dose of liraglutide lose about 9.7lbs more than those on the placebo over the 20 weeks.III LEAD studiesThese are four studies that look at liraglutide in combination with other drugs for the treatment of Type 2 Diabetes that also included some information on weight changes. One was 52 weeks, the others were  26, the maximum amount of weight lost was only about 5lbs.   The first [Liraglutide, a once-daily human GLP-1 analogue, added to a sulphonylurea over 26 weeks produces greater improvements in glycaemic and weight control compared with adding rosiglitazone or placebo in subjects with Type 2 diabetes (LEAD-1 SU), Marre et al] was a study that looked at the efficacy of adding liraglutide or rosiglitazone 4 to glimiperide in subjects with Type 2 Diabetes to test effects on blood sugar and body size.The study followed 1041 adults for 26 weeks. The study found that those on .6mg of liraglutide gained 0.7kg, those on 1.2mg gained 0.3kg, and those on 1.8mg of liraglutide lost 0.2kg, while those on placebo lost 0.1kg.The second [Efficacy and safety comparison of liraglutide, glimepiride, and placebo, all in combination with metformin, in type 2 diabetes: the LEAD (liraglutide effect and action in diabetes)-2 study. Diabetes Care, 2009. 32(1): p. 84-90. Nauck, M., et al.,]looked at the efficacy of adding liraglutide to metformin therapy for those with Type 2 Diabetes. They found that over the 26-week study those on liraglutide lost 1.8 ± 0.2, 2.6 ± 0.2, and 2.8 ± 0.2 kg for 0.6, 1.2, and 1.8 mg doses. Those on placebo lost 1.5 ± 0.3kg.The third [Liraglutide versus glimepiride monotherapy for type 2 diabetes (LEAD-3 Mono): a randomised, 52-week, phase III, double-blind, parallel-treatment trial. Lancet, 2009. 373(9662): p. 473-81. Garber, A., et al.,] This was a study of the comparative effectiveness of Liraglutide versus glimepiride for type 2 diabetes, with small weight loss as an ancillary finding. Those in the liraglutide group lost an average of 2kg.The final study [Efficacy and safety of the human glucagon-like peptide-1 analog liraglutide in combination with metformin and thiazolidinedione in patients with type 2 diabetes (LEAD-4 Met+TZD), Zinman et al.]  was a 26-week study with 533 total subjects. The goal was to study the efficacy of liraglutide when added to metformin and rosiglitazone for people with type 2 diabetes. They found that those on liraglutide lost between 0.7 and 2.3kg (1.5lbs to 5.1lbs) in 26 weeks.Meta-Analyses and Systematic Review FindingsEfficacy of Liraglutide in Non-Diabetic Ob*se Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Barboza, J.J., et al., None of the included studies were more than 56 weeks and one was only 14 weeks. One had as many as 3731 subjects, but one had only 40. Some had body weight loss as a primary outcome, but some did not. Maximum doses ranged from 1.8 to 3.0mg. The mean body weight reduction was  3.35 kg (7.4lbs) but in one study there was no difference in weight loss. The maximum difference was 6.3kg (13.9lbs)They also refer to Iqbal et al which we discussed in part 2.Effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists on weight loss: systematic review and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. Vilsbøll, T., et al.The included studies are between 20 and 53 weeks long, and include some of the studies they already cited individually above. Of the 25 included studies only 3 had “ob*sity” as the main inclusion criteria, the rest were Type 2 Diabetes.The mean weight loss for those on the highest dose of the drug was between 0.2kg and 7.2kg. For those in the control group it was 2.9 kg, so there was actually overlap between the treatment and placebo groups.Summary of evidence of safety and harmsThey begin with the claim “The safety profile of GLP-1 receptor agonists is also well studied”To support this they cite: Efficacy and Safety of Liraglutide 3.0 mg in Patients with Overweight and Ob*se with or without Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis, Konwar, M., et al.,This included 14 total studies, many of which the authors of the WHO request had cited individually and were included in other systematic reviews and meta-analyses above. The smallest study included 19 people, the largest included 2,487. The total number of subjects was 4,142.Their conclusion was “Liraglutide in 3.0 mg subcutaneous dose demonstrated significant weight reduction with a reasonable safety profile for patients with overweight or ob*sity regardless of diabetic status compared to placebo.”Their methodology says that they omitted studies from analysis due to “short duration.” They included studies that had a minimum of 12 weeks and a maximum of 56 weeks of follow-up.While they included 14 studies, only 11 of them actually included information about adverse events.In terms of adverse effects (AEs,) they found that the pooled estimate of nine studies in nondiabetic patients and two studies in diabetic patients revealed a significant proportion of patients experiencing the adverse events in liraglutide 3.0 mg group when compared with placebo., and the pooled estimate of the eleven studies showed that liraglutide 3.0 mg had higher risk of AEs compared to placebo.When it came to “serious adverse events” they found that there was a similar risk level between the drug and placebo groups, but remember that's for only 12 to 56 weeks, and Novo Nordisk is recommending that people take these drugs for the rest of their lives. A few months to a little over a year is not enough time to capture long-term serious adverse events.The efficacy and safety of liraglutide in the ob*se, non-diabetic individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Zhang, P., et al.,This included five RCTs (which were included in various of the above systemic reviews and meta-analyses) ranging in follow-up from 14 to 56 weeks.The only adverse event information captured was the number of people who withdrew from treatment due to adverse events (which they found was similar between drug and placebo) and nausea (which was experienced more by people on the drug.)So, in addition to being short in duration, this was far from a comprehensive list of side effects. They made no attempt to capture serious adverse side effects and their short-term nature would have made this difficult anyway.Association of Pharmacological Treatments for Ob*sity With Weight Loss and Adverse Events: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Khera, R., et al.This looked at weight loss and adverse events with a number of different weight loss drugs. Interestingly liraglutide did not show the highest amount of weight loss but was associated with the highest odds of adverse event–related treatment discontinuation. It should also be noted that high drop-out rates of 30-45% plagued all of the trials which the study authors admit means that “studies were considered to be at high risk of bias.“Given that those who drafted the WHO request are asking that these drugs be considered essential globally, it is disappointing that they included this study and didn't bother to mention this issue in their written request.This included 28 RCTs (most of which were included in other citations above) and only 3 that included liraglutide. They didn't capture individual adverse events, but only “Discontinuation of Therapy Due to Adverse Events.” They only evaluated a year of data so, again, while it is likely that these studies would have captured common adverse events had they bothered to try, there isn't long enough follow-up to have any information about serious (possibly life-threatening) long-term adverse events.Association of Glucagon-like Peptide 1 Analogs and Agonists Administered for Ob*sity with Weight Loss and Adverse Events: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. Vosoughi, K., et al.,This study included 64 RCTs with durations from 12 to 160 weeks, with a median of 26 weeks. As is common in these studies, the majority of the sample (74.9%) was white.Like those above, they only looked at treatment discontinuation from adverse events, they did not capture specific adverse events (common or serious.) Of the seven GLP-1 drugs they tested, liraglutide was tied with taspoglutide for the highest discontinuation of treatment due to adverse events.The study authors also note that “Risk of bias was high or unclear for random sequence generation (29.7%), allocation concealment (26.6%), and incomplete outcome data (26.6%).”Breakdowns for Comparative Cost-effectiveness StudiesFirst, the WHO request authors themselves admit that when it comes to cost-effectiveness, “the analyses have generally been performed only for high-income countries.” This is significant since they are asking the WHO to consider these drugs essential for the entire world.It's also important to understand that none of the data looks at a comparison of cost effectiveness for weight-neutral health interventions to these drugs. Without that information there is no way to calculate actual “cost effectiveness” since it's possible that weight-neutral health interventions would have greater benefits with less risk and dramatically lower cost.  NICE's guidance:  Liraglutide for managing overweight and ob*sity Technology appraisal guidance [TA664]Published: 09 December 2020.Do recall that NICE is involved in the current scandal with Novo Nordisk for influence peddling.These guidelines are created based on a submission of evidence by Novo Nordisk. The committee's understanding of “clinical need” was based on the testimony of a single “patient expert” who “explained that living with ob*sity is challenging and restrictive. There is stigma associated with being ob*se.”Once again we see a rush to blame body size for any “challenges” and “restrictions” of living in a higher-weight body, accompanied by the immediate decision that those bodies should be subjected to healthcare interventions that risk their lives and quality of life in order to be made (temporarily, by Novo and NICE's own admission) thinner.  There did not seem to be a patient expert to discuss the weight-neutral options.It was not immediately apparent if the patient expert was provided/paid by Novo Nordisk, but they certainly forwarded their narrative that simply living in a higher-weight body is a disease requiring treatment.It should be noted that while the trial Novo Nordisk submitted covered a wider range of people, they specifically submitted for this recommendation only the subgroup of that population who were diagnosed with “ob*sity,”  pre-diabetes, and a “high risk of cardiovascular disease based on risk factors such as hypertension and dyslipidaemia.”So, even if we accept this guidance as true, the WHO Essential Medicines request applies to a population much wider than this and so this fails to justify the cost-effectiveness for that population.This guidance is also based on the costs associated with obtaining the drugs through a “specialist weight management service” since an agreement is in place for Novo Nordisk to give a discount to these services.In calculating the ICER per QALY gained, the recommendations note that “Because of the uncertainties in the modelling assumptions, particularly what happens after stopping liraglutide and the calculation of long-term benefits, the committee agreed that an acceptable ICER would not be higher than £20,000 per QALY gained”Again, this recommendation is based on a trial submitted by Novo Nordisk that included 3,721 people and lasted for three years, but only 800 met the criteria for this cost-effectiveness recommendation. The trial failed to show a significant reduction in cardiovascular events. Novo's calculation of risk reduction was based on surrogate outcomes, which NICE points out “introduces uncertainty because causal inference requires direct evidence that liraglutide reduces cardiovascular events. This was not provided in the company submission because of lack of long-term evidence.”The NICE committee admits “relying on surrogates is uncertain but accepted that surrogate outcomes were the only available evidence to estimate cardiovascular benefits.”I just want to point out that another option would be to refuse to experiment on higher-weight people without appropriate evidence.These cost-effectiveness calculations are based on someone using the drug for two years, with no actual data on reduction in cardiovascular events, and with the admitted assumption that “any weight loss returned to the base weight 3 years after treatment discontinuation.” Said another way, this committee decided that it was cost effective to spend up to £20,000 per QALY for people to take a weight loss drug with significant side effects for two years, with no direct evidence of reduced cardiovascular events, and with the acknowledgment that people will be gaining all of their weight back when they stop taking it.Those who wrote the request for WHO to consider these drugs “essential” chose to characterize this as “At the chosen threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, the report concluded that liraglutide is cost-effective for the management of ob*sity.” I do not think that is an accurate characterization of the findings.The request cites “A report by the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) found that compared to standard care, the ICER for liraglutide was $196,876 per QALY gained”For the US, they cite a study that found that to achieve ICERs between $100,000 and $150,000 perQALY or evLY gained, the health-benefit price benchmark range for semaglutide was estimated as $7500 - $9800 per year, which would require a discount of 28-45% from the current US net price.They also cite “Cost-effectiveness analysis of semaglutide 2.4 mg for the treatment of adult patients with overweight and ob*sity in the United States, Kim et al.Let's take a look at their conflict of interest disclosure (emphasis mine)“Financial support for this research was provided by Novo Nordisk Inc. The study sponsor [that means Novo Nordisk] was involved in several aspects of the research, including the study design, the interpretation of data, the writing of the manuscript, and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.Dr Kim and Ms Ramasamy are employees of Novo Nordisk Inc. Ms Kumar and Dr Burudpakdee were employees of Novo Nordisk Inc at the time this study was conducted. Dr Sullivan received research support from Novo Nordisk Inc for this study. Drs Wang, Song, Wu, Ms Xie, and Ms Sun are employees of Analysis Group, Inc, who received consultancy fees from Novo Nordisk Inc in connection with this study.”Given that, you probably won't be shocked to learn that this concluded that Novo Nordisk's drug, semaglutide, was cost-effective. The reason I bolded the text above is that this study is based on modeling – they are taking what is, by their own admission, a “new drug” and making predictions for 30 years. Everything was simulated based on trial data (you know, those trials that we've been discussing that often have horrendous methodology…) and “other relevant literature.” The construction of the modeling and the interpretation of the results was directed by the company who stands to benefit financially from the findings, and carried out by that company's employees and consultants.  Also, and I'll just quote again here since I don't think I can improve on their text “Cost-effectiveness was examined with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained” I do not think that this WTP is based on a global assessment.In their (and by their I mean Novo Nordisk's) modeling they find that semaglutide was estimated to improve QALYs by 0.138 to 0.925 and incur higher costs by $3,254 to $25,086 over the 30-year time horizon vs comparators.And, again, this is without any kind of actual long-term data. I think that the best way to characterize this information is “back of the envelope calculations” at best.To sum up, I do not think that the research they cite comes anywhere close to proving that these drugs have levels of efficacy, safety, or cost-effectiveness that warrant their addition to the WHO list of essential medicines. I believe that if the WHO grants this request I think it will be an affront to medical science, it will cheapen the concept of “essential medicines,” and it will harm untold numbers of higher-weight people all over the world.Did you find this post helpful? You can subscribe for free to get future posts delivered direct to your inbox, or choose a paid subscription to support the newsletter and get special benefits! Click the Subscribe button below for details:Liked this piece? Share this piece:More research and resources:https://haeshealthsheets.com/resources/*Note on language: I use “fat” as a neutral descriptor as used by the fat activist community, I use “ob*se” and “overw*ight” to acknowledge that these are terms that were created to medicalize and pathologize fat bodies, with roots in racism and specifically anti-Blackness. Please read Sabrina Strings' Fearing the Black Body – the Racial Origins of Fat Phobia and Da'Shaun Harrison's Belly of the Beast: The Politics of Anti-Fatness as Anti-Blackness for more on this. Get full access to Weight and Healthcare at weightandhealthcare.substack.com/subscribe

Autor: Maristela Strufaldi • Ramos S, et al. Terapia Nutricional no Pré-Diabetes e no Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2. Diretriz Oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Diabetes (2022). Acesso em 28 de março de 2023. • Evert AB, et al. Nutrition Therapy for Adults With Diabetes or Prediabetes: A Consensus Report. Diabetes Care. 2019 May;42(5):731-754. • Schwingshackl L, et al. A network metaanalysis on the comparative efficacy of different dietary approaches on glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Eur J Epidemiol. 2018 Feb;33(2):157–70 • Toledo E, et al. Effect of the Mediterranean diet on blood pressure in the PREDIMED trial: results from a randomized controlled trial. BMC Med. 2013 Sep 19;11:207. • Salas-Salvadó J, et al. Effect of a Lifestyle Intervention Program With Energy-Restricted Mediterranean Diet and Exercise on Weight Loss and Cardiovascular Risk Factors: One-Year Results of the PREDIMED-Plus Trial. Diabetes Care. 2019 May;42(5):777-788. • Delgado-Lista J, et al. Long-term secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease with a Mediterranean diet and a low-fat diet (CORDIOPREV): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2022 May 14;399(10338):1876-1885. • Weber B, et al. Implementation of a Brazilian Cardioprotective Nutritional (BALANCE) Program for improvement on quality of diet and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events: A randomized, multicenter trial. Am Heart J. 2019 Sep;215:187-197. • Chiavaroli L, et al. DASH Dietary Pattern and Cardiometabolic Outcomes: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Nutrients. 2019 Feb 5;11(2):338. • Freire R. Scientific evidence of diets for weight loss: Different macronutrient composition, intermittent fasting, and popular diets. Nutrition. 2020 Jan;69:110549. • Davies MJ, et al. Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2022. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetologia. 2022 Dec;65(12):1925-1966.

Link to bioRxiv paper: http://biorxiv.org/cgi/content/short/2023.03.29.534795v1?rss=1 Authors: Dugre, J. R., Potvin, S. Abstract: A persistent effort in neuroscience has been to pinpoint the neurobiological substrates that support mental processes. The Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) aims to develop a new framework based on fundamental neurobiological dimensions. However, results from several meta-analysis of task-based fMRI showed substantial spatial overlap between several mental processes including emotion and anticipatory processes, irrespectively of the valence. Consequently, there is a crucial need to better characterize the core neurobiological processes using a data-driven techniques, given that these analytic approaches can capture the core neurobiological processes across neuroimaging literature that may not be identifiable through expert-driven categories. Therefore, we sought to examine the main data-driven co-activation networks across the past 20 years of published meta-analyses on task-based fMRI studies. We manually extracted 19,822 coordinates from 1,347 identified meta-analytic experiments. A Correlation-Matrix-Based Hierarchical Clustering was conducted on spatial similarity between these meta-analytic experiments, to identify the main co-activation networks. Activation likelihood estimation was then used to identify spatially convergent brain regions across experiments in each network. Across 1,347 meta-analyses, we found 13 co-activation networks which were further characterized by various psychological terms and distinct association with receptor density maps and intrinsic functional connectivity networks. At a fMRI activation resolution, neurobiological processes seem more similar than different across various mental functions. We discussed the potential limitation of linking brain activation to psychological labels and investigated potential avenues to tackle this long-lasting research question. Copy rights belong to original authors. Visit the link for more info Podcast created by Paper Player, LLC

https://psychiatry.dev/wp-content/uploads/speaker/post-12249.mp3?cb=1678886085.mp3 Playback speed: 0.8x 1x 1.3x 1.6x 2x Download: Psychosocial and behavioural interventions for the negative symptoms of schizophrenia: a systematic review of efficacy meta-analyses – Review Matteo Cella et al.Full EntryPsychosocial and behavioural interventions for the negative symptoms of schizophrenia: a systematic review of efficacy meta-analyses –

Podcast

I discuss the physical and mental health conditions that often exist alongside autism.Topics discussed also include:The overlap between autism and ADHDThe overlap between autism and being transThe reasons why it's important to discuss co-occurring conditions and autismCo-occurring conditions in autistic childrenIf you'd like to know more about topics discussed in this episode, check out: "Umbrella Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses on Comorbid Physical Conditions in People With Autism Spectrum Disorder" by Rydzewska et al."Prevalence of Comorbid Psychiatric Disorders Among People With Autism Spectrum Disorder: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses" by Hossain et al."Autism Spectrum Disorders and ADHD: Overlapping Phenomenology, Diagnostic Issues, and Treatment Considerations" by Antshel and Russo"Prevalence of Autism Spectrum Disorder and Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Amongst Individuals With Gender Dysphoria: A Systematic Review" by Thrower et al."Autism Medical Comorbidities" by Al-BeltagiEpisode intro and outro music: "Autumn Leaves" by Maarten Schellekens (no changes or modifications were made) Support the showThe Other Autism theme music: "Everything Feels New" by Evgeny Bardyuzha. All episodes written and produced by Kristen Hovet.If you would like to submit a question to possibly be answered in a future episode, please email kristen.hovet@gmail.comBecome a supporter of the show for as little as $3 a month!The Other Autism podcast on InstagramThe Other Autism podcast on FacebookBuy me a coffee!For transcripts, go to The Other Autism on Buzzsprout, click on an episode and then click on "Transcript" to the right of "Show Notes".

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are the main drivers of policy, evidence-based guidelines, and funding decisions, but many of them are fraught with errors, and the resources needed to peer-review them are massive. A recent systematic review examined the quality of the current published meta-analyses in order to inform the design and reporting of future studies. In this month's RAPM Focus, Editor-in-Chief Brian Sites, MD, joins John Kramer MSc, PhD, the senior author of “Quality of meta-analyses of non-opioid, pharmacological, perioperative interventions for chronic postsurgical pain: a systematic review,” first published in January 2022 (https://rapm.bmj.com/content/47/4/263). The systematic review explored the idea that surgery may represent an environment, known as a transitional pain state, that could result in a patient developing chronic pain following surgery. Dr. John Kramer is an associate professor in the faculty of medicine, department of anesthesiology, pharmacology and therapeutics, and principal investigator at ICORD at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada. His lab is focused on improving outcomes for individuals with spinal cord injury and neuropathic pain. *The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. The content of this podcast does not constitute medical advice, and it is not intended to function as a substitute for a healthcare practitioner's judgement, patient care, or treatment. The views expressed by contributors are those of the speakers. BMJ does not endorse any views or recommendations discussed or expressed on this podcast. Listeners should also be aware that professionals in the field may have different opinions. By listening to this podcast, listeners agree not to use its content as the basis for their own medical treatment or for the medical treatment of others. Podcast and music produced by Dan Langa. Find us on Twitter @RAPMOnline.

It's the start of a new era, as Omar and Eric sit down for episode 201. In this conversation, the two pick up where they left off from episode 200, tackling the Cult's questions that were too good, and too deep to cover last week. Specifically, we discuss how to compare the potential effects of dissimilar variables on hypertrophy, such as sleep, protein, and creatine using research. Further, we field questions on how you measure progress and deal with plateaus, and whether higher frequency training can provide unique advantages. 00:00 Introduction to a new era of Iron Culture (and reading comments) 15:11 Start of Q&A. Effect sizes in sport science research (protein, creatine, and sleep) and their application to practice Tagawa 2020 Dose-response relationship between protein intake and muscle mass increase: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33300582/ Morton 2018 A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of the effect of protein supplementation on resistance training-induced gains in muscle mass and strength in healthy adults https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28698222/ Lanhers 2015 Creatine Supplementation and Lower Limb Strength Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25946994/ Lanhers 2017 Creatine Supplementation and Upper Limb Strength Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27328852/ Branch 2003 Effect of creatine supplementation on body composition and performance: a meta-analysis https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12945830/  Craven 2022 Effects of Acute Sleep Loss on Physical Performance: A Systematic and Meta-Analytical Review https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35708888/ 44:55 Advice for people who love the iron game but may not necessarily have the best genetics and life situation for it (reframing our view of strength standards that we compare ourselves to) 56:58 Which variable(s) to adjust when strength plateaus 1:05:03 How important is it to have a high volume for a specific muscle group in a single session vs across the week? Iron Culture Ep. 40- Training Frequency For Strength & Hypertrophy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDNvJaNeDw4&t=13s Iron Culture Ep. 152-Effort vs Exertion, Frequency, and Qualitative Research (Q&A) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCg_4tQzbC0 Greg Nuckols' in-house Meta https://www.strongerbyscience.com/frequency-muscle/ James Krieger's in-house Meta https://weightology.net/the-members-area/evidence-based-guides/set-volume-for-muscle-size-the-ultimate-evidence-based-bible/ Schoenfeld 2017 Dose-response relationship between weekly resistance training volume and increases in muscle mass: A systematic review and meta-analysis https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27433992/ Baz-Valle 2022 A Systematic Review of The Effects of Different Resistance Training Volumes on Muscle Hypertrophy https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35291645/ 1:12:40 Closing out (and Iron Culture TikTok??)

In this episode, Marc and Mo discuss several recent articles that caught their eye. The first part of the discussion focuses on selected highlights from the recent meeting of the OTA (specifically, the treatment of humeral shaft fractures), and the second part focuses on genetic factors related to adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder. Links: OTA 2022: Key Findings from This Year’s RCTs and Meta-Analyses. OE Insights. 2022. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/Insight/Show/148 Kulm S, Langhans MT, Shen TS, Kolin DA, Elemento O, Rodeo SA. Genome-Wide Association Study of Adhesive Capsulitis Suggests Significant Genetic Risk Factors. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2022 Nov 2;104(21):1869-1876. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.21.01407. Epub 2022 Nov 2. PMID: 36223477. https://bit.ly/3URMnD6 OrthoJoe Episode 43: Physician Etiquette and Attire https://bit.ly/3Ak3gy9 Subspecialties: Basic Science Shoulder Trauma Orthopaedic Essentials

Welcome to The Fitness News hosted by Bill & Tom of Chat Sh*t Get Fit. Here's what's hot in health and fitness this week! Mushroom Power! (Lions Mane, Cordyceps, Jerky!) Are Meta-Analysis Golden Science? (New Paper Casts Doubt!) Thrive This Holiday Season! (Don't Fall Off The Rails!) FULL SHOW NOTES Articles & Studies Mentioned Mushroom Power With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility: Common Errors in Meta-Analyses and Meta-Regressions in Strength & Conditioning Research   More From Us Do you want to support our podcast and get some cool little bonuses too? We'd love to have you as a Patreon member! Don't miss out on the warm fuzzy feeling of helping us make wild content every week! Check it out!   Train Primal - Online Personal Training With Bill & His Team   Cannonball Coffee. Delicious tasting and super powerful that WILL give you a boost in the gym. You can listen to our podcast with Cannonball Coffee here to find out why we love them. If you want to help us out and get some tasty coffee, go to cannonballcoffee.co.uk and use code PRIMAL10 for 10% off.   Find us on Instagram @chatshitgetfitpodcast @bill_trainprimal @coachtomreardon  

Dr. Kimberly Blumenthal (@KimberlyBlumen1), Dr. Meghan Jeffres (@PharmerMeg), and Dr. Eric Macy (@EricMacyMD) join Dr. Julie Ann Justo (@julie_justo) to summarize the history of cephalosporin avoidance in penicillin allergies, evidence-based pros and cons of giving cephalosporins in penicillin allergy, how to leverage technology to improve treatment of patients with penicillin allergies, and much more! Learn more about the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists: https://sidp.org/About Twitter: @SIDPharm (https://twitter.com/SIDPharm) Instagram: @SIDPharm (https://www.instagram.com/sidpharm/) Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sidprx LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/sidp/ References Macy E. Why Was There Ever a Warning Not to Use Cephalosporins in the Setting of a Penicillin "Allergy"? J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2021 Nov;9(11):3929-3933. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2021.06.059. PMID: 34303019. Liang EH, et al. Adverse Reactions Associated with Penicillins, Carbapenems, Monobactams, and Clindamycin: A Retrospective Population-based Study. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2020 Apr;8(4):1302-1313.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2019.11.035. PMID: 31821919. Macy E, Contreras R. Adverse reactions associated with oral and parenteral use of cephalosporins: A retrospective population-based analysis. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2015 Mar;135(3):745-52.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2014.07.062. PMID: 25262461. Macy E, et al. Population-Based Incidence of New Ampicillin, Cephalexin, Cefaclor, and Sulfonamide Antibiotic "Allergies" in Exposed Individuals with and without Preexisting Ampicillin, Cephalexin, or Cefaclor "Allergies". J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2022 Feb;10(2):550-555. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2021.10.043. PMID: 34757066. Picard M, et al. Cross-Reactivity to Cephalosporins and Carbapenems in Penicillin-Allergic Patients: Two Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2019 Nov-Dec;7(8):2722-2738.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2019.05.038. PMID: 31170539. Romano A, et al. Cross-reactivity and tolerability of aztreonam and cephalosporins in subjects with a T cell-mediated hypersensitivity to penicillins. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2016 Jul;138(1):179-186. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2016.01.025. PMID: 27016799. Romano A, et al. Cross-Reactivity and Tolerability of Cephalosporins in Patients with IgE-Mediated Hypersensitivity to Penicillins. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2018 Sep-Oct;6(5):1662-1672. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2018.01.020. PMID: 29408440. Blumenthal KG, et al. The Impact of a Reported Penicillin Allergy on Surgical Site Infection Risk. Clin Infect Dis. 2018 Jan 18;66(3):329-336. doi: 10.1093/cid/cix794. PMID: 29361015. Blumenthal KG, et al. Risk of meticillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Clostridium difficile in patients with a documented penicillin allergy: population based matched cohort study. BMJ. 2018 Jun 27;361:k2400. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k2400. PMID: 29950489. Blumenthal KG, et al. Recorded Penicillin Allergy and Risk of Mortality: a Population-Based Matched Cohort Study. J Gen Intern Med. 2019 Sep;34(9):1685-1687. doi: 10.1007/s11606-019-04991-y. PMID: 31011962. Macy E, Contreras R. Health care use and serious infection prevalence associated with penicillin "allergy" in hospitalized patients: A cohort study. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2014 Mar;133(3):790-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2013.09.021. PMID: 24188976. AAAI. Choosing Wisely. 2014 Mar 3. https://www.choosingwisely.org/clinician-lists/american-academy-allergy-asthma-immunlogy-non-beta-lactam-antibiotics-penicillin-allergy/ Jeffres MN, et al. Systematic review of professional liability when prescribing β-lactams for patients with a known penicillin allergy. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2018 Nov;121(5):530-536. doi: 10.1016/j.anai.2018.03.010. PMID: 29551402. Macy E, et al. Association Between Removal of a Warning Against Cephalosporin Use in Patients With Penicillin Allergy and Antibiotic Prescribing. JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Apr 1;4(4):e218367. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.8367. PMID: 33914051. Blumenthal KG, et al. Addressing Inpatient Beta-Lactam Allergies: A Multihospital Implementation. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2017 May-Jun;5(3):616-625.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2017.02.019. PMID: 28483315. Jeffres M. Penicillin and/or Beta-Lactam Allergy Tip Sheet & Cross-reactivity Table. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cokYXnSDlO3vk8ke1LaalPz4iavuNSV8/view?usp=share_link Khan DA, et al. Drug allergy: A 2022 practice parameter update. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2022 Sep 17:S0091-6749(22)01186-1. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2022.08.028. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 36122788. Guyer AC, et al. Allergy Electronic Health Record Documentation: A 2022 Work Group Report of the AAAAI Adverse Reactions to Drugs, Biologicals, and Latex Committee. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2022 Nov;10(11):2854-2867. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2022.08.020. PMID: 36151034. Iammatteo M, et al. Safety and Outcomes of Oral Graded Challenges to Amoxicillin without Prior Skin Testing. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2019 Jan;7(1):236-243. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2018.05.008. PMID: 29802906. Bavbek S, et al. Determinants of nocebo effect during oral drug provocation tests. Allergol Immunopathol (Madr). 2015 Jul-Aug;43(4):339-45. doi: 10.1016/j.aller.2014.04.008. PMID: 25088674. DePestel DD, et al. Cephalosporin use in treatment of patients with penicillin allergies. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2008 Jul-Aug;48(4):530-40. doi: 10.1331/JAPhA.2008.07006. PMID: 18653431. Check out our podcast host, Pinecast. Start your own podcast for free with no credit card required. If you decide to upgrade, use coupon code r-7e7a98 for 40% off for 4 months, and support Breakpoints. Check out our podcast host, Pinecast. Start your own podcast for free with no credit card required. If you decide to upgrade, use coupon code r-7e7a98 for 40% off for 4 months, and support Breakpoints.

In this episode, Marc and Mo discuss several recent JBJS and OE articles that caught their eye. The first part of the discussion focuses on selected highlights from the recent meeting of the OTA (specifically, anti-sepsis approaches in open fracture management), and the second part focuses on the recently published JBJS Supplement on the use of large databases in orthopaedic research. Links: OTA 2022: Key Findings from This Year’s RCTs and Meta-Analyses. OE Insights. 2022. https://myorthoevidence.com/Insight/Show/147 JBJS Supplement on Large Database and Registry Research in Joint Arthroplasty and Orthopaedics. https://jbjs.org/collection.php?id=22 Khosravi B, Rouzrokh P, Erickson BJ. Getting More Out of Large Databases and EHRs with Natural Language Processing and Artificial Intelligence: The Future Is Here. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2022 Oct 19;104(Suppl 3):51-55. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.22.00567. Epub 2022 Oct 19. PMID: 36260045. https://bit.ly/3suFxqK Swiontkowski MF, Callaghan JJ, Lewallen DG, Berry DJ. Large Database and Registry Research in Joint Arthroplasty and Orthopaedics. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2022 Oct 19;104(20):1775-1777. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.22.00405. Epub 2022 Oct 19. PMID: 36260046. https://bit.ly/3TFAQ9o Subspecialties: Ethics Hip Infection Knee Orthopaedic Essentials Trauma

Date of Lecture: 3 November 2022 About the Lecture: Randomised clinical trials are the cornerstone of evidence-based medicine. Professor Parmar will present how the design of the randomised clinical trial has been changed to improve outcomes for patients more quickly. This will be exemplified throughout by the STAMPEDE trial. The trial was started in 2005 when men with metastatic prostate cancer had an expected survival of approximately 3 years and no new effective treatments had been identified for over 40 years. Over the subsequent 17 years, through the STAMPEDE trial (together with other contemporaneous trials) the expected survival period has grown to 7 years, testing and introducing 4 new treatments for men with this disease. Professor Parmar will show how this model is being applied worldwide to many diseases including neurodegenerative diseases such as motor neuron disease, progressive multiple sclerosis, Parkinsons disease and dementia where the outcomes for patients are poor and little or no progress has been made for decades. About the Speaker: Max Parmar is a Professor of Medical Statistics and Epidemiology and Director of both the MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL and the Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology at University College London.

Indirect comparisons and network-meta analyses play a rising role in our world. A pubmed search provides 240 hits for the term network meta-analysis in 2011. This increased to 3223 in ten years later 2021 – more than 13 times more! There are many problems you can solve using these approaches and statisticians overlook some on a regular basis. Don't miss out on providing your colleagues with great evidence (and with the ability to learn a lot about this interesting statistical approach). Listen to my short but informative discussion with Daniel Saure as we explore five different cases with which network meta-analyses are extensively affected. Our conversation defines the problem and solutions regarding these three primary cases:

In this podcast, we discuss the article 'Videolaryngoscopes versus direct laryngoscopes in children: Ranking systematic review with network meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials'. We hope you enjoy. 

What can go wrong with network meta-analyses? You often have multiple endpoints but these are not collected consistently across all the studies included in the NMA. How do you deal with this? Even with the same variables assessed over studies, they might be collected at different time points. This often has an effect on both efficacy and safety results. What do you do? Your placebo treatment might change over time and consequently your placebo response. Often placebo plays a crucial part in your network, but can you really pool all your placebo arms? The patient population differs between studies and hence between treatments. How do you control this bias? The pool of relevant treatments differs across countries when using network meta-analyses for HTA submissions. Should you adapt your NMA for each country's submission? You're not submitting all your HTA dossiers at once and thus the literature search needs to be updated repeatedly hence you input data into the NMA. How big are the differences and how long will it take to update everything (and what will it cost?)?

Fonte: Andrade, A., Siqueira, T. C., D'Oliveira, A., & Dominski, F. H. (2021). Effects of Exercise in the Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity, 30(3), 535-551. ISO-MARKKU, Paula, et al. Physical activity as a protective factor for dementia and Alzheimer's disease: systematic review, meta-analysis and quality assessment of cohort and case–control studies. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 2022, 56.12: 701-709. HUUHA, Aleksi M., et al. Can Exercise Training Teach Us How to Treat Alzheimer's disease?. Ageing Research Reviews, 2022, 101559. - Siga no Instagram: @fabiodominski https://www.instagram.com/fabiodominski/ Gostou do podcast? Você vai gostar mais ainda desse livro! - Livro Exercício Físico e Ciência: Fatos e mitos de Fábio Dominski https://www.amazon.com.br/dp/6586363187?ref=myi_title_dp - Grupo Exercício Físico e Ciência no Telegram: https://t.me/+VazaFBxgPq0y5v8p - Inscreva-se no canal no YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4Dwwly0tJa49CfHC0MSQ7A --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/fabio-dominski/support

Kaleidoscope live! Date aired: 16.03.2022 Title: A cure for MS; mindfulness debunked; and when Harry met Sally - is opposite sex friendship possible? Papers: Bjornevik, K. et al. Longitudinal analysis reveals high prevalence of Epstein-Barr virus associated with multiple sclerosis. Science 375, 296-301, doi:10.1126/science.abj8222 (2022). Goldberg, S. B., Riordan, K. M., Sun, S. & Davidson, R. J. The Empirical Status of Mindfulness-Based Interventions: A Systematic Review of 44 Meta-Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials. Perspect Psychol Sci 17, 108-130, doi:10.1177/1745691620968771 (2022). Szymkow, A. & Frankowska, N. Moderators of Sexual Interest in Opposite-sex Friends. Evol Psychol 20, 14747049211068672, doi:10.1177/14747049211068672 (2022). REGISTER FOR ALL FUTURE EPISODES HERE

Date: February 24th, 2022 Reference: Parish et al. An umbrella review of effect size, bias, and power across meta-analyses in emergency medicine. AEM 2021 Guest Skeptic: Professor Daniel Fatovich is an emergency physician and clinical researcher based at Royal Perth Hospital, Western Australia. He is Head of the Centre for Clinical Research in Emergency Medicine, […]

March 2022 Journal Club Podcast Systematic Analysis of Publication Bias in Neurosurgery Meta-Analyses Author: Minh-Son To, MD, PhD Faculty: Jay Riva-Cambrin, MD, MSc, FRCS(C) Resident Planner: Han Yan, MD Moderator: Rafael Vega, MD, PhD

welcome to the nonlinear library, where we use text-to-speech software to convert the best writing from the rationalist and ea communities into audio. this is: Donating money, buying happiness: new meta-analyses comparing the cost-effectiveness of cash transfers and psychotherapy in terms of subjective well-being, published by MichaelPlant, JoelMcGuire on the effective altruism forum. This is a cross-post from the website of the Happier Lives Institute. TL;DR: We estimate that StrongMinds is 12 times (95% CI: 4, 24) more cost-effective than GiveDirectly in terms of subjective well-being. This puts it roughly on a par with the top deworming charities recommended by GiveWell. [Edit 26/10/2021: Table 4 and accompanying text added] 1. Background and summary In order to do as much good as possible, we need to compare how much good different things do in a single ‘currency'. At the Happier Lives Institute (HLI), we believe the best approach is to measure the effects of different interventions in terms of ‘units' of subjective well-being (e.g. self-reports of happiness and life satisfaction). In this post, we discuss our new research comparing the cost-effectiveness of psychotherapy to cash transfers. Before we get to that comparison, we should first highlight the advantage of doing it in terms of subjective well-being; to illustrate that, it will help to flag some alternative methods. We could assess the effect each intervention has on wealth, but this would fail to capture the benefits of psychotherapy. It's implausible to think that treating depression is only good insofar as it helps you to earn more. We could assess their effects using standard measures of health, such as a Disability-Adjusted Life-Year (DALY), but it's similarly mistaken to think that alleviating extreme poverty is only good insofar as it helps you to become healthier. We could make some arbitrary assumptions about how much a given change in income and DALYs each contribute to well-being; this would allow us to ‘trade' between them. But this would just be a guess and could be badly wrong. If we measure the effects on subjective well-being, how individuals feel and think about their lives (e.g. "Overall, how satisfied are you with your life, nowadays?" 0-10), we can provide an evidence-based comparison in units that more fully capture what we think really matters. Efforts to work out the global priorities for improving subjective well-being are relatively new. Nevertheless, the recent push to integrate well-being in public policy-making in countries such as Scotland and New Zealand, as well as the reach of publications such as the World Happiness Report (which started in 2012), indicates that this is a viable approach. Earlier work conducted by HLI's Director, Michael Plant, suggested that using subjective well-being might reveal different priorities for individuals and organisations seeking to do the most good, with mental health standing out as one area that is crucial and potentially neglected. Plant's (2018, 2019 ch. 7) prior back-of-the-envelope calculations indicated that StrongMinds, a mental health charity that treats women with depression in Africa, could be as cost-effective as GiveWell's top charity recommendations. These initial findings motivated us to do a much more rigorous analysis of the same interventions in terms of subjective well-being, so we undertook meta-analyses in each case. These aimed to address three questions: Is assessing cost-effectiveness in terms of subjective well-being feasible: are there enough data that we can make these sorts of comparisons without making major assumptions to fill in the blanks? Is this approach worthwhile: does it indicate new or different priorities? Does this specific comparison between cash transfers and psychotherapy indicate that donors and decision-makers should change the way they allocate their resources, assuming they want to do the most good? Our research focused specifically on studies in low...

This episode's guest is Melissa from @sproutnutrition_ Melissa is an accredited dietitican based in Melbourne, Australia who has been vegan for 8 years. In this episode, Melissa and I talk about what it was like studying dietetics,  essential nutrients for a healthy diet and recommendations for vegan diets. Mentions on this episode: Plant Proof (podcast) So Good (soy & almond milk) Vitasoy Calci Plus (soy milk) Vegan Dairy Persian Feta (cheese) Rococo (restaurant) Studies on Soy: Soy Meta Analysis - Li, N. (2019) Soy and Isoflavone Consumption and Multiple Health Outcomes: Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies and Randomized Trials in Humans. Mol Nutr Food Res 64(4) Soy systematic review - Messina, M. (2016). Soy and health update: evaluation of the clinical and epidemiologic literature. Nutrients, 8(12), 754.  Soy & Men's Health - Messina M. Soybean isoflavone exposure does not have feminizing effects on men: a critical examination of the clinical evidence. Fertil Steril. 2010 Soy & Breast Cancer - Lee SA, Shu XO, Li H, Yang G, Cai H, Wen W, Ji BT, Gao J, Gao YT, Zheng W. Adolescent and adult soy food intake and breast cancer risk: results from the Shanghai Women's Health Study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Soy & Prostate Cancer - Applegate CC, Rowles JL, Ranard KM, Jeon S, Erdman JW. Soy Consumption and the Risk of Prostate Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Nutrients. 2018 Isoflavones & mental cognition - Ahmed T, Javed S, Tariq A, Budzyńska B, D'Onofrio G, Daglia M, Nabavi SF, Nabavi SM. Daidzein and its Effects on Brain. Curr Med Chem. 2017 Soy & bone health - Adachi, J. D., Rizzoli, R., Boonen, S., Li, Z., Meredith, M. P., & Chesnut, C. H., 3rd (2005). Vertebral fracture risk reduction with risedronate in post-menopausal women with osteoporosis: a meta-analysis of individual patient data. Ageing clinical and experimental research.

Fun fact, the only time I got a B throughout my college career was when I took cognitive psych (go figure) and statistics… And while statistics may not be my strongest area, that will not stop me from learning and improving, and sharing my progress with you! Dowdy and colleagues give a brilliant summary of the current state of meta-analyses and quantitative analysis in the field of ABA. This article reads like a how-to guide for applying statistics to your practice, and there are so many golden nuggets to glean from this. My key takeaway… Some statistics are better than none, because if we avoid statistics as a field, we will never disseminate our science as efficiently as we should be able to!

Welcome back to Chat Sh*t Get Fit - Chatting Supplements. This week we explore omega 3 & 6 supplementation. Both come with a wide range of benefits that we explore fully giving our thoughts and summarising the latest evidence as well. Do they help with cardiovascular health, brain health, exercise recovery? These are some of the things we dive into. The big question is though...Do you need to supplement extra into your diet?   We also look at the different types of omega 3 - ALA, EPA, DHA and go into why these types make all the difference when it comes to food containing "omega 3". Honestly it's all a bit crazy this week and this episode was certainly a headache to research so we hope you find some value in what we say.   Before taking a health supplement it's important you consult your doctor first in case of any underlying health issues.   Want to join our fitness community Train Primal? We have 3 different fitness programmes designed for different goals! Primal Life, Primal Fit, Primal Apex. You also have the opportunity to work with us on a 1-1 basis where we provide bespoke online personal training for those of you that are ready to make a real, lasting change and who want the support of expert, personal guidance to get you there. All details for this can be found here.   Want to support the Podcast? We have a discount code (PRIMAL10) for a fantastic coffee brand. Cannonball Coffee. Great tasting and super powerful which WILL give you a boost in the gym. We spoke to Cannonball Coffee on a previous podcast and you can listen to that here to see why we are such fans. So if you want to support us in some small way and get some great coffee head to cannonballcoffee.co.uk and use code PRIMAL10 for 10% off any order.   New to the show? Head back to episode 1 "Let's Chat, Covid & Fitness" where we give an introduction into who we are and talk about the current state of ourselves and the fitness industry during this covid pandemic   Find us on Instagram @bill_trainprimal @coachtomreardon   Website: www.chatshitgetfit.com Email: csgfpodcast@gmail.com   Studies Mentioned Alan Flanagan Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA) and Cognition throughout the Lifespan Red blood cell omega-3 fatty acid levels and markers of accelerated brain ageing Meta-analysis and meta-regression of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation for major depressive disorder Long-Chain Omega-3 Fatty Acids Eicosapentaenoic Acid and Docosahexaenoic Acid and Blood Pressure Impact of Varying Dosages of Fish Oil on Recovery and Soreness Following Eccentric Exercise Long-chain omega-3 fatty acids and the brain Increasing dietary linoleic acid does not increase tissue arachidonic acid content in adults consuming Western-type diets Effect of Dietary Linoleic Acid on Markers of Inflammation in Healthy Persons Cardiovascular Risk Reduction with Icosapent Ethyl for Hypertriglyceridemia Consumption of Fish and ω-3 Fatty Acids and Cancer Risk: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies Dietary intake and status of n–3 polyunsaturated fatty acids in a population of fish-eating and non-fish-eating meat-eaters, vegetarians, and vegans Cochrane Review

Confira mais sobre novo e incrível estudo publicado pelo LAPE/CEFID/UDESC sobre Alzheimer e exercícios! Fonte: Andrade, A., Siqueira, T. C., D'Oliveira, A., & Dominski, F. H. Effects of Exercise in the Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Journal of aging and physical activity, 1-17. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/fabio-dominski/support

Stroke and TBI Recovery with Dr. Robert Teasell MD: Part I Noggins And Neurons Facebook Group: CLICK HERE or scan below! PETE:  When I first got involved in clinical research, I remember there was this statistic that the lag time between bench and bedside and rehabilitation was 15-20 years and the idea was you know that in oncology you couldn't have that much lag time because people die of cancer whereas typically nobody dies of bad therapy. Do you think that the translation is still that long? What would you estimate is the, or is it impossible to estimate, it depends on the therapist kind of deal?   TEASELL: It depends on the treatment and it depends on the kind of support that the treatments got. A lot of it's cultural as well but I would say that 15-20 years...you know from moving into the research into regular clinical practice would be considered to be a very early adoption. That would be considered to be rapid. It's more than 15-20 years. In some cases, I think it's a couple generations. You know, when we sit down with our therapists and ask them, you know, ‘do you use the adjunct therapies?' the answer is usually not a lot and why? Well there's a number of reasons-timing, but it's just like it's not part of the culture. Like it's just not part of the culture. You know...And you ask them, ‘would you like to do it?' ‘Of course, we would, I mean, why wouldn't we? Right. I wouldn't mind trying something new or trying this new technology or this new treatment but I don't know where to start; it's not what we've traditionally done; it's not what we tend to do; I'm busy enough as it is' and so these treatments don't get incorporated or added. So, you know, the reasons are legit, they're fine, but I mean, if we're looking at ways that we might be able to further improve recovery and the next big step...cuz you know, one of the things that you get a feeling in stroke rehab is people just not sure where we're gonna go next. It strikes me that this is a lost opportunity that we could take advantage of.   EPISODE SUMMARY: This episode of NOGGINS & NEURONS: Stroke and TBI Recovery Simplified is Part 1 of a captivating interview with Dr. Robert Teasell and Marcus Saikaley of the Evidence-Based Review of Stroke Rehabilitation (EBRSR). Join us as we learn about: The history of EBRSR, including Teasell's original work: To demonstrate that chronic pain can be debilitating, the evidence supporting facts around chronic pain, patient advocacy and policy change. With the Ontario government to create and implement best practice guidelines for stroke recovery, therapists inability to agree on recommendations and Dr. Teasell's idea to duplicate his work in chronic pain research. With the Ontario government funded project of stroke evidence as the birth of the EBRSR. The growth of research and importance of using the research in practice. Evolution of additional research reviews for Traumatic Brain Injury and Spinal Cord Injury. Stroke rehab has more evidence than any other area of neuro rehabilitation. Behind the scenes look at how systematic reviews are completed, including PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Knowledge Translation and clinical practice change. Reasons why research tends to focus on the Upper Extremity Changes in stroke rehab over the years, Canadian and American processes and standardization of care and outcomes. Best practice includes: The right amount of intensity Task-Specific interventions Early intervention Adjunct therapies, brain primers and missed opportunities. Examples include mirror therapy, Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS), Robotics, Action Observation and Functional Electrical Stimulation (e-stim). NOTE: Despite the fact that adjunct therapies account for 85% of the research they are rarely used. Home programs, early supported discharge and best “patient handoff” to promote continued recovery and optimal results. We hope you find value in part 1 of our conversation to the extent you feel empowered to look at your current practice and discover possibilities to improve client and clinic outcomes. As always, we want to hear your top takeaways! LINKS TO ARTICLES, BOOKS AND OTHER IMPORTANT INFORMATION: Evidence-Based Review of Stroke Rehabilitation -  Evidence-Based Review of Moderate-to-Severe Acquired Brain Injury -  Spinal Cord Injury Research Evidence -  Collaboration of Rehabilitation Research Evidence Collaboration of Rehabilitation Research Evidence twitter Dr. Teasell's Google Scholar Page  Questions and Comments about the podcast? NogginsAndNeurons@gmail.com NogginsAndNeurons: The Website Noggins And Neurons Facebook Group Donate to The Noggins And Neurons Podcast with your PayPal app Pete's blog, book, Stronger After Stroke, and talks. Blog Book: Stronger After Stroke, 3rd edition Talks: Sept. 28, 11:10 AM.Recovery from Brain Injury: The Nexus of Neuroscience and Neurorehab. American College of Rehabilitation Medicine. *Virtual  October 28, 8:00 PM (ET) The Neuroplastic Model of Spasticity Reduction *Virtual.  Deb's OT Resources: Deb's OT resources The OT's Guide to Mirror Therapy Tri-Fold Mirror (US address only) Occupational Therapy Intervention: Scavenger Hunt Visual Scanning for Adults REQUEST TO BE A GUEST ON NOGGINS & NEURONS. If you're passionate about stroke recovery and have information or a story you believe will help others, we'd love help you share it on the show. Complete the guest request form below and let's see if we're a good fit!   Guest Request Form Music by scottholmesmusic.com

CanadiEM Journal Club E04 Systematic reviews and meta analyses show notes Welcome back to Journal Club by CanadiEM! In this episode we go over an approach to systematic reviews and meta analyses based on Oxford centre of EBM, and learn about diagnosing pneumothorax with ultrasound vs X-ray Using the Oxford centre of EBM tool, we will ask: What question(s) did the systematic review address? Is it likely that important, relevant studies were missed? Were the criteria used to select articles for inclusion appropriate? Were the included studies sufficiently valid for the type of question asked? Were the results similar from study to study? What were the results? What is the clinical significance of the results? and then a clinical pearl on pneumothorax!! Hosts:  Dakoda Herman Jayneel Limbachia Jake Domm Paper: “Chest ultrasonography versus supine chest radiography for diagnosis of pneumothorax in trauma patients in the emergency department” Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews by Chan KK, Joo DA, McRae AD, Takwoingi Y, Premji ZA, Lang E, Wakai A   What question(s) did the systematic review address? P: Trauma patients in the ER I: chest ultrasonography by non rad physicians C: Chest xray O: diagnosis of pneumothorax, improved patient safety  Secondary: investigate potential sources of hetero such as type of CUS operator, type of trauma, type of US probe on test accuracy T: inception to 10 April 2020   Is it unlikely that important, relevant studies were missed? This study included prospective, paired comparative  accuracy studies in which patients were suspected of having pneumothorax. Patients must have undergone both CUS by a frontline non-radiologist and CXR, as well as CT of the chest or tube thoracostomy as the reference standard. The authors carried out systematic searches in the following electronic databases: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE; Embase; Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) Plus; Database of Abstracts of Reviews of EIects; Web of Science core collection (which includes: Science Citation Index Expanded; Social Sciences Citation Index; Arts & Humanities Citation Index; Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science; Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Social Sciences & Humanities; and Emerging Sources Citation Index; and Clinicaltrials.gov from database creation to April 2020. The authors also handsearched reference lists of included articles and reviews, retrieved via electronic searching, for potentially eligible studies. Additionally, they carried out forward citation searching of relevant articles in Google Scholar and looked at the “Related articles” on PubMed. They did not limit the search to Englsih language only and included articles published in all languages. Their search strategy in volved the use of MeSH terms such as Pneumothorax, Radiography, Ultrasonography, and focused assessment with ultrasonography for trauma. They also used many text words. Using this search strategy 3473 records were identified. 1180 duplicated records were removed, leaving 2293 records to be screened. These records were screened by two of the authors for their relevance, when there was a discrepancy a third author decided whether to include the record or not. 2268 records were excluded, leaving 25 full-text articles that were assessed for eligibility. 12 studies were excluded - 5 missing CUS/CXR/CT chest/chest tube, 4 CUS not performed by frontline non-radiologist physicians, 2 wrong patient population, 1 wrong study design. A total of 13 studies were included in qualitative and quantitative analysis. 9 studies using patients as units of analysis included in primary analysis. 4 studies using lung fields as units of analysis included in secondary analysis. Authors provide a nice figure depicting this. Authors did not contact experts for unpublished data but were very thorough and transparent in their search strategy. I think it is unlikely that important, relevant studies were missed.   Were the criteria used to select articles for inclusion appropriate? The authors of this study clearly outlined their study inclusion and exclusion criteria. They included prospective, comparative accuracy studies in which patients were suspected of having pneumothorax.  They included trauma patients in the emergency department setting. Patients must have undergone both CUS by frontline non-radiologist physicians and CXR as index tests, as well as CT of the chest or tube thoracostomy as the reference standard. The two main index tests were CUS completed by a frontline nonradiologist physician and CXR, both being performed in the supine position. If data on specific CUS findings (such as the absence of lung sliding, absence of B-lines or comet-tail artefact, presence of lung point, and absence of lung pulse) were available, they planned to assess the diagnostic accuracy of these individual CUS findings. The target condition was traumatic pneumothorax of any severity. They defined a pneumothorax identified on CT scan of the chest or via clinical findings of a rush of air or bubbling in a chest drain after tube thoracostomy as the reference standard. The authors excluded studies involving participants with already diagnosed pneumothorax (i.e. case-control studies); studies involving participants with nontraumatic pneumothorax; studies involving participants who had already been treated with tube thoracostomy; and studies in which a frontline non-radiologist physician did not perform CUS. These criteria were appropriate for inclusion. However, many studies did differ in their units of measurement - lung fields vs. patients, which could introduce significant bias into the results of individual studies.   Were the included studies sufficiently valid for the type of question asked? The authors used the QUADAS-2 tool to assess risk of bias and the applicability of each included study.  This tool assesses risk of bias in four domains: patient selection; index tests; reference standard; and flow and timing. In addition, they examined concerns about applicability in the first three domains. They tailored the tool to their review question - one of the signalling questions in the patient selection domain was not applicable because they excluded case-control studies; therefore they deleted this question from the tool.  Two review authors performed the assessments independently. They discussed and resolved any disagreements that arose through consultation with a third review author. They included a figure describing their assessments of study quality. Of the nine studies that we included in the primary analysis: One had a low risk of bias, two had an unclear risk, and six had high risk of bias in the patient selection domain, mostly due to convenience sampling or inappropriate exclusion criteria, such as excluding haemodynamically unstable patients, lack of access to CUS, chest wall injuries precluding CUS, or if CT was not indicated.  The risk of bias in the interpretation of CUS results was low in five studies, unclear in two studies, and high in two studies; this was related to unclear blinding methodology of outcome assessors interpreting CUS and CXR results.  The risk of bias in the interpretation of CXR results was low in two studies, unclear in six studies, and high in one study; this was largely due to unclear blinding methodology of outcome assessors interpreting CXR and CT results, as in some studies it was not clear whether radiologists had access to both imaging results or not.  The risk of bias introduced in interpretation of the reference standard results was low in three studies but unclear in the remainder for similar concerns regarding blinding methodology.  The risk of bias in the flow and timing domain was low in two studies, unclear in four studies, and high in three studies; this was due to the exclusion of patients based on missing CT data or unclear/inappropriate time intervals between CUS, CXR, and CT. They judged applicability concerns regarding patient selection as low for six studies but high for three studies; this was due to the exclusion of haemodynamically unstable patients or lack of access to CUS despite the study focusing on comparing CUS.  They judged one included study to have unclear concern regarding applicability of the reference standard used as there was insuIicient reporting of the method of assessment.  They deemed all other domains for applicability concerns as low risk for all studies. Studies that used lung fields as their unit of analysis had several limitations including missing CUS data for some lung fields and using two CUS tests (one for each lung field) compared to one CXR (for both lungs) on the same patient. Inherently, there would be an inability to blind the CUS operator during collection of CUS data while performing the two CUS tests (one on each side of the patient), as well as during the interpretation of the CXR and CT results between the two lung fields. By analysing lung fields separately, it is diIicult to ascertain whether patient characteristics, past medical history, or traumatic injury pattern could have affected one or both lungs and may have confounded the diagnostic accuracy. Out of the four studies included in the secondary analysis:  The risk of bias in the patient selection domain was low in one study, unclear in two studies, and high in one study; this was due to inappropriate exclusion criteria, such as excluding haemodynamically unstable patients or chest wall injuries precluding CUS, or due to unclear sampling technique. The risk of bias introduced in interpreting CUS results was low in two studies and unclear in two studies due to lack of clarity about blinding of the outcome assessors interpreting CUS and CXR results.  The risk of bias introduced in interpreting CXR and CT results to be low in one study, unclear in two studies, and high in one study; this was again due to definite unblinded interpretation of test results or unclear blinding methodology of outcome assessors interpreting CXR and CT results. The risk of bias in the flow and timing domain was low in two studies and high in two studies due to missing patient data. They judged applicability concerns in the patient selection domain as low for two studies, unclear for one study, and high for one study, due to unclear patient selection methods and exclusion of haemodynamically unstable patients or chest wall injuries precluding CUS.  They judged one study to have unclear concern regarding applicability of the reference standard, as blinding of the outcome assessor interpreting the results of CUS, CXR, and CT was unclear. We deemed all other domains as 'low concern' for all studies. The authors were thorough in their assessment of each study's quality and discussed how this may have impacted the results. The most common area of bias seemed to be in patient selection where 11/13 studies were judged to be at unclear or high risk of bias. Were the results similar from study to study? Substantial heterogeneity in sensitivity analysis of supine CXR Based on Figure 4, Forest plot:  Sensitivity ranged from 0.09 to 0.75 Wide and non overlapping confidence intervals are suggestive of high variability between studies  Limits the evidence  But they do not list the reasons for why such heterogeneity exists Some possibilities for the heterogeneity include the high or unclear risk of bias of included studies  There is no I squared statistic shown - a statistical measure that confirms the presence of significant heterogeneity in a meta-analysis   Results of the study:  Included 13 studies, 1271 trauma patients with 410 who had a pneumothorax 9 studies used patients as unit of analysis 4 studies used lung field as unit of analysis Most studies were high or unclear risk of bias - 11/13  CUS sensitivity and specificity: 0.91 (95% CI: 0.85 - 0.94) and 0.99 (95% CI: 0.97 - 1.00) CXR sensitivity and specificity: 0.47 (95% CI: 0.31 - 0.63) and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.97 - 1.00)  Difference in sensitivity: 0.44 (95% CI: 0.27 - 0.61)    Practise Changing? This is an excellently executed Systematic Review that makes the most of the limited evidence available and presents such in a transparent way. The results of this study suggest that CUS has better sensitivity in detecting pneumothorax in the emergency department than CXR, and comparable specificity. This publication adds to the body of research that is building in support of US in the primary care setting, and promotes a change in culture as US adoption rates grow.    Clinical pearl:  Pneumothorax, or, air in the pleural space, is a fairly common complication of thoracic traumas, occurring 15-50% of the time. History: If you're able to get a history, and often you won't be able to, you'll hear about a Sudden, severe, chest pain, sometimes referred to shoulder and maybe associated pleuritic pain or SOB. On Exam: Exam findings range from nothing to respiratory distress and shock. May have decreased chest wall motion, subcutaneous emphysema, or poprock skin, hyperresonance, or decreased or absent breath sounds on the affected side. Imaging: traditionally via x-ray or US depending on physician. On xray: Absence of lung markings beyond the edge of the lung. The edge of the scapula or upper ribs are often mistaken for a pneumothorax. On US: Scan over the most upright part of the patient's chest. if supine go right over the top of their chest (third or fourth intercostal space in the midclavicular line and is repeated on both sides) and if upright scan the apices. Looking for lung sliding and the classic “seashore sign” in M-mode in normal lungs, or absence of lung sliding and “barcode sign” seen in pneumothorax. There are tons of good videos online to take a look at.  CT is gold standard, but rarely necessary - Rush of air on thoracostomy is also diagnostic. - Treatment: varies based on severity, from no treatment if patient tolerating well, to drains and chest tubes, to needle or finger thoracostomy for immediate decompression if pneumothorax clinically indicated and hypotension.

CanadiEM Journal Club E04 Systematic reviews and meta analyses show notes Welcome back to Journal Club by CanadiEM! In this episode we go over an approach to systematic reviews and meta analyses based on Oxford centre of EBM, and learn about diagnosing pneumothorax with ultrasound vs X-ray Using the Oxford centre of EBM tool, we will ask: What question(s) did the systematic review address? Is it likely that important, relevant studies were missed? Were the criteria used to select articles for inclusion appropriate? Were the included studies sufficiently valid for the type of question asked? Were the results similar from study to study? What were the results? What is the clinical significance of the results? and then a clinical pearl on pneumothorax!! Hosts:  Dakoda Herman Jayneel Limbachia Jake Domm Paper: “Chest ultrasonography versus supine chest radiography for diagnosis of pneumothorax in trauma patients in the emergency department” Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews by Chan KK, Joo DA, McRae AD, Takwoingi Y, Premji ZA, Lang E, Wakai A   What question(s) did the systematic review address? P: Trauma patients in the ER I: chest ultrasonography by non rad physicians C: Chest xray O: diagnosis of pneumothorax, improved patient safety  Secondary: investigate potential sources of hetero such as type of CUS operator, type of trauma, type of US probe on test accuracy T: inception to 10 April 2020   Is it unlikely that important, relevant studies were missed? This study included prospective, paired comparative  accuracy studies in which patients were suspected of having pneumothorax. Patients must have undergone both CUS by a frontline non-radiologist and CXR, as well as CT of the chest or tube thoracostomy as the reference standard. The authors carried out systematic searches in the following electronic databases: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE; Embase; Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) Plus; Database of Abstracts of Reviews of EIects; Web of Science core collection (which includes: Science Citation Index Expanded; Social Sciences Citation Index; Arts & Humanities Citation Index; Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science; Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Social Sciences & Humanities; and Emerging Sources Citation Index; and Clinicaltrials.gov from database creation to April 2020. The authors also handsearched reference lists of included articles and reviews, retrieved via electronic searching, for potentially eligible studies. Additionally, they carried out forward citation searching of relevant articles in Google Scholar and looked at the “Related articles” on PubMed. They did not limit the search to Englsih language only and included articles published in all languages. Their search strategy in volved the use of MeSH terms such as Pneumothorax, Radiography, Ultrasonography, and focused assessment with ultrasonography for trauma. They also used many text words. Using this search strategy 3473 records were identified. 1180 duplicated records were removed, leaving 2293 records to be screened. These records were screened by two of the authors for their relevance, when there was a discrepancy a third author decided whether to include the record or not. 2268 records were excluded, leaving 25 full-text articles that were assessed for eligibility. 12 studies were excluded - 5 missing CUS/CXR/CT chest/chest tube, 4 CUS not performed by frontline non-radiologist physicians, 2 wrong patient population, 1 wrong study design. A total of 13 studies were included in qualitative and quantitative analysis. 9 studies using patients as units of analysis included in primary analysis. 4 studies using lung fields as units of analysis included in secondary analysis. Authors provide a nice figure depicting this. Authors did not contact experts for unpublished data but were very thorough and transparent in their search strategy. I think it is unlikely that important, relevant studies were missed.   Were the criteria used to select articles for inclusion appropriate? The authors of this study clearly outlined their study inclusion and exclusion criteria. They included prospective, comparative accuracy studies in which patients were suspected of having pneumothorax.  They included trauma patients in the emergency department setting. Patients must have undergone both CUS by frontline non-radiologist physicians and CXR as index tests, as well as CT of the chest or tube thoracostomy as the reference standard. The two main index tests were CUS completed by a frontline nonradiologist physician and CXR, both being performed in the supine position. If data on specific CUS findings (such as the absence of lung sliding, absence of B-lines or comet-tail artefact, presence of lung point, and absence of lung pulse) were available, they planned to assess the diagnostic accuracy of these individual CUS findings. The target condition was traumatic pneumothorax of any severity. They defined a pneumothorax identified on CT scan of the chest or via clinical findings of a rush of air or bubbling in a chest drain after tube thoracostomy as the reference standard. The authors excluded studies involving participants with already diagnosed pneumothorax (i.e. case-control studies); studies involving participants with nontraumatic pneumothorax; studies involving participants who had already been treated with tube thoracostomy; and studies in which a frontline non-radiologist physician did not perform CUS. These criteria were appropriate for inclusion. However, many studies did differ in their units of measurement - lung fields vs. patients, which could introduce significant bias into the results of individual studies.   Were the included studies sufficiently valid for the type of question asked? The authors used the QUADAS-2 tool to assess risk of bias and the applicability of each included study.  This tool assesses risk of bias in four domains: patient selection; index tests; reference standard; and flow and timing. In addition, they examined concerns about applicability in the first three domains. They tailored the tool to their review question - one of the signalling questions in the patient selection domain was not applicable because they excluded case-control studies; therefore they deleted this question from the tool.  Two review authors performed the assessments independently. They discussed and resolved any disagreements that arose through consultation with a third review author. They included a figure describing their assessments of study quality. Of the nine studies that we included in the primary analysis: One had a low risk of bias, two had an unclear risk, and six had high risk of bias in the patient selection domain, mostly due to convenience sampling or inappropriate exclusion criteria, such as excluding haemodynamically unstable patients, lack of access to CUS, chest wall injuries precluding CUS, or if CT was not indicated.  The risk of bias in the interpretation of CUS results was low in five studies, unclear in two studies, and high in two studies; this was related to unclear blinding methodology of outcome assessors interpreting CUS and CXR results.  The risk of bias in the interpretation of CXR results was low in two studies, unclear in six studies, and high in one study; this was largely due to unclear blinding methodology of outcome assessors interpreting CXR and CT results, as in some studies it was not clear whether radiologists had access to both imaging results or not.  The risk of bias introduced in interpretation of the reference standard results was low in three studies but unclear in the remainder for similar concerns regarding blinding methodology.  The risk of bias in the flow and timing domain was low in two studies, unclear in four studies, and high in three studies; this was due to the exclusion of patients based on missing CT data or unclear/inappropriate time intervals between CUS, CXR, and CT. They judged applicability concerns regarding patient selection as low for six studies but high for three studies; this was due to the exclusion of haemodynamically unstable patients or lack of access to CUS despite the study focusing on comparing CUS.  They judged one included study to have unclear concern regarding applicability of the reference standard used as there was insuIicient reporting of the method of assessment.  They deemed all other domains for applicability concerns as low risk for all studies. Studies that used lung fields as their unit of analysis had several limitations including missing CUS data for some lung fields and using two CUS tests (one for each lung field) compared to one CXR (for both lungs) on the same patient. Inherently, there would be an inability to blind the CUS operator during collection of CUS data while performing the two CUS tests (one on each side of the patient), as well as during the interpretation of the CXR and CT results between the two lung fields. By analysing lung fields separately, it is diIicult to ascertain whether patient characteristics, past medical history, or traumatic injury pattern could have affected one or both lungs and may have confounded the diagnostic accuracy. Out of the four studies included in the secondary analysis:  The risk of bias in the patient selection domain was low in one study, unclear in two studies, and high in one study; this was due to inappropriate exclusion criteria, such as excluding haemodynamically unstable patients or chest wall injuries precluding CUS, or due to unclear sampling technique. The risk of bias introduced in interpreting CUS results was low in two studies and unclear in two studies due to lack of clarity about blinding of the outcome assessors interpreting CUS and CXR results.  The risk of bias introduced in interpreting CXR and CT results to be low in one study, unclear in two studies, and high in one study; this was again due to definite unblinded interpretation of test results or unclear blinding methodology of outcome assessors interpreting CXR and CT results. The risk of bias in the flow and timing domain was low in two studies and high in two studies due to missing patient data. They judged applicability concerns in the patient selection domain as low for two studies, unclear for one study, and high for one study, due to unclear patient selection methods and exclusion of haemodynamically unstable patients or chest wall injuries precluding CUS.  They judged one study to have unclear concern regarding applicability of the reference standard, as blinding of the outcome assessor interpreting the results of CUS, CXR, and CT was unclear. We deemed all other domains as 'low concern' for all studies. The authors were thorough in their assessment of each study's quality and discussed how this may have impacted the results. The most common area of bias seemed to be in patient selection where 11/13 studies were judged to be at unclear or high risk of bias. Were the results similar from study to study? Substantial heterogeneity in sensitivity analysis of supine CXR Based on Figure 4, Forest plot:  Sensitivity ranged from 0.09 to 0.75 Wide and non overlapping confidence intervals are suggestive of high variability between studies  Limits the evidence  But they do not list the reasons for why such heterogeneity exists Some possibilities for the heterogeneity include the high or unclear risk of bias of included studies  There is no I squared statistic shown - a statistical measure that confirms the presence of significant heterogeneity in a meta-analysis   Results of the study:  Included 13 studies, 1271 trauma patients with 410 who had a pneumothorax 9 studies used patients as unit of analysis 4 studies used lung field as unit of analysis Most studies were high or unclear risk of bias - 11/13  CUS sensitivity and specificity: 0.91 (95% CI: 0.85 - 0.94) and 0.99 (95% CI: 0.97 - 1.00) CXR sensitivity and specificity: 0.47 (95% CI: 0.31 - 0.63) and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.97 - 1.00)  Difference in sensitivity: 0.44 (95% CI: 0.27 - 0.61)    Practise Changing? This is an excellently executed Systematic Review that makes the most of the limited evidence available and presents such in a transparent way. The results of this study suggest that CUS has better sensitivity in detecting pneumothorax in the emergency department than CXR, and comparable specificity. This publication adds to the body of research that is building in support of US in the primary care setting, and promotes a change in culture as US adoption rates grow.    Clinical pearl:  Pneumothorax, or, air in the pleural space, is a fairly common complication of thoracic traumas, occurring 15-50% of the time. History: If you're able to get a history, and often you won't be able to, you'll hear about a Sudden, severe, chest pain, sometimes referred to shoulder and maybe associated pleuritic pain or SOB. On Exam: Exam findings range from nothing to respiratory distress and shock. May have decreased chest wall motion, subcutaneous emphysema, or poprock skin, hyperresonance, or decreased or absent breath sounds on the affected side. Imaging: traditionally via x-ray or US depending on physician. On xray: Absence of lung markings beyond the edge of the lung. The edge of the scapula or upper ribs are often mistaken for a pneumothorax. On US: Scan over the most upright part of the patient's chest. if supine go right over the top of their chest (third or fourth intercostal space in the midclavicular line and is repeated on both sides) and if upright scan the apices. Looking for lung sliding and the classic “seashore sign” in M-mode in normal lungs, or absence of lung sliding and “barcode sign” seen in pneumothorax. There are tons of good videos online to take a look at.  CT is gold standard, but rarely necessary - Rush of air on thoracostomy is also diagnostic. - Treatment: varies based on severity, from no treatment if patient tolerating well, to drains and chest tubes, to needle or finger thoracostomy for immediate decompression if pneumothorax clinically indicated and hypotension.

In Episode #133 I sit down with Dr Matthew Nagra to tackle the almighty protein topic! You know, the nutrient we are all fascinated by.What is protein? How much do we need? What's the difference between animal and plant protein? The best types of protein for good health? How do we optimise protein intake for promoting lean muscle and strength?We cover all of this and more - all through an evidence-based lens. Not what random folks are saying at the gym or online in the comments section. But what the highest quality science says.Specifically we cover:What protein isHow much protein we needHow much protein the average omnivore and vegetarian/vegan consumesIncomplete versus complete protein - how people are incorrectly using these termsProtein quality - how scoring systems workThe difference between animal and plant protein when it comes to quality - and what this means for your food selectionAnimal versus plant protein and health outcomesIs soy protein safe? (e.g tempeh, tofu and soy milk)Best protein swaps you could consider making todayAnimal versus plant protein and performance outcomes (e.g lean muscle and strength)Optimising protein intake for performanceTake home messagesResources:Follow Matt and Simon on InstagramCurrent Protein Intake Protein intake trends and conformity with the Dietary Reference Intakes in the United States: analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2001-2014Protein Intake in Western living Vegetarian and Vegans Nutrient Profiles of Vegetarian and Non Vegetarian Dietary PatternsChristopher Gardner's 2019 paper on protein Maximizing the intersection of human health and the health of the environment with regard to the amount and type of protein produced and consumed in the United StatesPlant's contain all amino acids Dietary Protein and Amino Acids in Vegetarian Diets—A Review Maximizing the intersection of human health and the health of the environment with regard to the amount and type of protein produced and consumed in the United StatesJoel Craddock's paper on scoring systems used to calculate protein quality Limitations with the Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score (DIAAS) with Special Attention to Plant-Based Diets: a ReviewThe study that Dr Nagra mentions where they fed cooked plant protein to pigs (rather than raw)True ileal amino acid digestibility and digestible indispensable amino acid scores (DIAASs) of plant-based protein foodsAnimal versus plant protein and health outcomes (risk of cardiovascular disease, mortality etc) Association Between Plant and Animal Protein Intake and Overall and Cause-Specific Mortality Dietary intake of total, animal, and plant proteins and risk of all cause, cardiovascular, and cancer mortality: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies Protein foods from animal sources, incident cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality: a substitution analysisSoy protein and health outcomes Neither soy nor isoflavone intake affects male reproductive hormones: An expanded and updated meta-analysis of clinical studies Soy and Isoflavone Consumption and Multiple Health Outcomes: Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies and Randomized Trials in HumansProtein source and performance outcomes The Effects of Whey vs. Pea Protein on Physical Adaptations Following 8-Weeks of High-Intensity Functional Training (HIFT): A Pilot Study High-Protein Plant-Based Diet Versus a Protein-Matched Omnivorous Diet to Support Resistance Training Adaptations: A Comparison Between Habitual Vegans and Omnivores No Difference Between the Effects of Supplementing With Soy Protein Versus Animal Protein on Gains in Muscle Mass and Strength in Response to Resistance ExercisePlant-based meat alternatives Dr Nagra's recent article on My Nutrition Science The SWAP-MEAT trial (Conducted by Christopher Gardner and his team at Stanford University)Support the show?If you are enjoying the Plant Proof podcast a great way to support the show is by leaving a review on the Apple podcast app. It only takes a few minutes and helps more people find the episodes.Simon Hill, Nutritionist, Sports PhysiotherapistCreator of Plantproof.com and host of the Plant Proof PodcastAuthor of The Proof is in the PlantsConnect with me on Instagram and TwitterDownload my two week meal plan

Giuliana Spadaro is a postdoc in the Amsterdam Cooperation Lab, directed by Daniel Balliet. Her research focuses on cooperation and prosociality. In this conversation, we talk about Giuliana's recent work on the Cooperation Databank (https://cooperationdatabank.org/), a database that contains around 2,600 studies on cooperation, coded by experts to facilitate meta-analyses and other tasks about cooperation research. BJKS Podcast is a podcast about neuroscience, psychology, and anything vaguely related, hosted by Benjamin James Kuper-Smith. New conversations every other Friday. You can find the podcast on all podcasting platforms (e.g., Spotify, Apple/Google Podcasts, etc.).Timestamps0:00:05: Giuliana's career before working on the Cooperation Databank (coda)0:13:09: What is coda and what can it do?0:18:58: Different payoff matrices in the Prisoner's Dilemma0:24:25: The benefits of annotating hundreds of studies0:28:57: Further uses of coda (e.g., search engine)0:33:28: How can people add their own studies to coda (including unpublished studies)?0:39:10: Coda in the long term0:45:15: What if I want a new feature added to coda?0:53:47: Learning to run and from a meta-analysis1:02:49: Working on coda1:11:38: What's next for Giuliana?1:15:03: Coda workshopsPodcast linksWebsite: https://bjks.buzzsprout.com/Twitter: https://twitter.com/BjksPodcastGiuliana's linksWebsite: https://amsterdamcooperationlab.com/giuliana_spadaro/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=ZuzhtPEAAAAJTwitter: https://twitter.com/g_spadaro90Ben's linksWebsite: www.bjks.blog/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=-nWNfvcAAAAJTwitter: https://twitter.com/bjks_tweetsReferencesKuper-Smith, B. J., Doppelhofer, L. M., Oganian, Y., Rosenblau, G., Korn, C. W. Risk perception and optimism during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. PsyArXiv.McShane, B. B., & Böckenholt, U. (2017). Single-paper meta-analysis: Benefits for study summary, theory testing, and replicability. Journal of Consumer Research.Scaffidi Abbate, C., Boca, S., Spadaro, G., & Romano, A. (2014). Priming effects on commitment to help and on real helping behavior. Basic and Applied Social Psychology.Spadaro, G., d'Elia, S. R., & Mosso, C. O. (2018). Menstrual knowledge and taboo TV commercials: effects on self-objectification among Italian and Swedish women. Sex Roles.Spadaro, G., Tiddi, I., Columbus, S., Jin, S., ten Teije, A., & Balliet, D. (2020). The cooperation databank. PsyArXiv.Thielmann, I., Spadaro, G., & Balliet, D. (2020). Personality and prosocial behavior: A theoretical framework and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin.

Depression wird die Krankheitsbelastung Nr 1 (im  Jahr 2030, laut WHO). Und, besonders während Krisen, ist es sehr wahrscheinlich, dass wir zumindest zeitweise eine depressive Verstimmung erleben. Was können wir machen? Hier kommen ein paar Anregungen. Hier die versprochenen Studien:Korrelation zwischen Sport und Depression, Marilisa Amorosi Marilisa Amorosi Mental Health Department, Pescara, Italy- Psychiatria Danubina, 2014; Vol. 26, Suppl. 1, pp 208–210 Conference paper © Medicinska naklada - Zagreb, Croatia Mirko Wegner, Ingo Helmich, Sergio Machado, Antonio Nardi, Oscar Arias-Carrion, Henning Budde. Effects of Exercise on Anxiety and Depression Disorders: Review of Meta- Analyses and Neurobiological Mechanisms. CNS & Neurological Disorders - Drug Targets, 2014Hast Du Fragen? Rückmeldungen? Wünschst du dir, dass wir über ein bestimmtes Thema sprechen, liegt dir etwas besonders am Herzen? Ich freue mich auf deine Nachricht, hier unten, oder auf www.sanalucia.de/anfrage  Motto: „Wahrlich, keiner ist weise, der nicht das Dunkel kennt.„ Hermann Hesse Musik: musicfox.com

Soy often gets a bad reputation in the nutrition world and today we will debunk these myth with Dr. Matthew Nagra Here is the Meta-Analyses we talked about: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/mnfr.201900751 Follow Dr. Matthew Nagra Instragram: https://www.instagram.com/dr.matthewnagra/ Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZQu95dIBQSvuP_0URa-jFA Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/dr.matthewnagra/ Website: https://drmatthewnagra.com/ Book your FREE Vegan Strategy Call with me at www.callwithluckie.com Simply fill out the form to give me an idea of where you are and where you want to go. Book your call, and let's strategize a game plan to determine if coaching would be a good fit for you. My name is Luckie Sigouin; I am the founder of Fit Vegan Coaching and the Fit Vegan Blueprint program's creator. Where I help vegans get lean, toned, thrive and become their best self on a whole foods plant-based lifestyle. If you found this content valuable, here are 3 more ways for me to help you become a Fit Vegan: 1. Download your FREE Fit Vegan Fat Loss Meal Plan ( https://www.fitvegan.ca/free ) 2. Join my FREE Facebook Group and connect with other like-minded vegans https://tinyurl.com/fitvegan-fbgroup (https://tinyurl.com/fitvegan-fbgroup) 3. Follow me on Instagram @luckiesigouin Leave us a 5 Star review if you enjoyed this episode so that I can bring in more influential people and add more value to the Fit Vegan Community.

Creatina é o suplemento que tem mais evidências científicas a favor. No entanto, o que você realmente pode esperar desse suplemento? Artigos citados:Lanhers C, Pereira B, Naughton G, Trousselard M, Lesage FX, Dutheil F. Creatine Supplementation and Lower Limb Strength Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses. Sports Med. 2015 Sep;45(9):1285-1294. doi: 10.1007/s40279-015-0337-4.Lanhers C, Pereira B, […]

Link to bioRxiv paper: http://biorxiv.org/cgi/content/short/2020.09.18.302943v1?rss=1 Authors: Garcia Guerra, S., Spadoni, A., Mitchell, J., Strigo, I. A. Abstract: Molecular mechanisms of the interaction between pain and reward associated with pain relief processes in the human brain are still incompletely understood. This is partially due to the invasive nature of the available techniques to visualize and measure metabolic activity. Positron Emission Tomography (PET) radioligand studies using radioactive substances are still the only available modality to date that allows for the investigation of the molecular mechanisms in the human brain. For pain and reward studies, the most commonly studied PET radiotracers are [11C]-carfentanil (CFN) and [11C]- or [18F]-diprenorphine (DPN), which bind to opioid receptors, and [11C]-raclopride (RAC) and [18F]-fallypride (FAL) tracers, which bind to dopamine receptors. The current meta-analysis looks at 15 pain-related studies using opioid radioligands and 8 studies using dopamine radioligands in an effort to consolidate the available data into the most likely activated regions. Our primary goal was to identify regions of shared opioid/dopamine neurotransmission during pain-related experiences. SDM analysis of previously published voxel coordinate data showed that opioidergic activations were strongest in the bilateral caudate, thalamus, right putamen, cingulate gyrus, midbrain, inferior frontal gyrus, and left superior temporal gyrus. The dopaminergic studies showed that the bilateral caudate, thalamus, right putamen, cingulate gyrus, and left putamen had the highest activations. We were able to see a clear overlap between opioid and dopamine activations in a majority of the regions during pain-related processing, though there were some unique areas of dopaminergic activation such as the left putamen. Regions unique to opioidergic activation include the midbrain, inferior frontal gyrus, and left superior temporal gyrus. By investigating the regions of dopaminergic and opioidergic activation, we can potentially provide more targeted treatment to these sets of receptors in patients with pain conditions. These findings could eventually assist in the development of more targeted medication in order to help treat pain conditions and simultaneously prevent physical dependency. Copy rights belong to original authors. Visit the link for more info

Description: After opening the final episode of the season with a Good News segment, Greg & Eric make SBS Podcast history with the first ever prospective Feats of Strength segment. After that, Greg & Eric have an extensive Research Roundup segment in which they cover some brand new highlights from the freshly-updated Meta-Analysis Master List on StrongerByScience.com. That’s followed by a lengthy Q&A segment in which Greg & Eric try to answer as many training and nutrition questions as possible before the current season of the show comes to a close. Finally, they answer a couple of professional development questions for aspiring trainers and research interpreters To Play Them Out. Summer break begins with the conclusion of this episode, but Greg & Eric will be back with regular episodes in the fall. In the meantime, keep an eye out for the bonus audio content that will be released throughout the summer. To access the full Meta-Analysis Master List, you can go to https://www.strongerbyscience.com/master-list/. If you’d like to submit a question for a future Q&A segment, please go to tiny.cc/sbsqa. If you’d like to recommend someone for a future “On the Rise” segment, please go to tiny.cc/creators. If you’d like to receive Research Roundup emails, please sign up for our email list at https://www.strongerbyscience.com/newsletter/. TIME STAMPSAnnouncements (0:01:30). Good news (0:02:13): Supreme court decision: employment discrimination for LGBTQ+ people ruled unconstitutional.Creative solution for library book delivery. Feats of Strength: Prediction Edition (0:03:56). Research Roundup: Meta-analysis update highlights (0:09:15). Greg’s metas (0:11:01): The effect of exercise interventions on resting metabolic rate: A systematic review and meta-analysis. MacKenzie-Shalders et al. (2020). The Placebo and Nocebo effect on sports performance: A systematic review. Hurst et al. (2019). A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Foam Rolling on Performance and Recovery. Wiewelhove et al. (2019). Acute Effects of Foam Rolling on Range of Motion in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review with Multilevel Meta-analysis. Wilke et al. (2019). Is tDCS an Adjunct Ergogenic Resource for Improving Muscular Strength and Endurance Performance? A Systematic Review. Machado et al. (2019). Eric’s metas (0:40:00): Acute Effects of Citrulline Supplementation on High-Intensity Strength and Power Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Trexler et al. (2019). Effects of vitamin C on oxidative stress, inflammation, muscle soreness, and strength following acute exercise: meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials. Righi et al. (2020). Effect of Betaine on Reducing Body Fat—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Xiang et al. (2019). Effects of Sodium Bicarbonate Supplementation on Muscular Strength and Endurance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Grgic et al. (2020). The Effects of Alcohol Consumption on Recovery Following Resistance Exercise: A Systematic Review. Lakićević. (2019). The Effect of L-Carnitine Supplementation on Exercise-Induced Muscle Damage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. Yarizadh et al. (2020). Effects of Arginine Supplementation on Athletic Performance Based on Energy Metabolism: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Viribay et al. (2020). Q&A (1:14:18): Based on its mercury content, how much canned tuna can you eat on a weekly basis? (1:14:26). https://www.fda.gov/food/consumers/advice-about-eating-fish. Can I spread my training throughout the entire day instead of doing everything within a 60-90 minute “workout” period? (1:17:37).  Does hypothalamic amenorrhea impact hypertrophy? If eating at maintenance (or in a caloric surplus), does hypothalamic amenorrhea still have a negative impact on hypertrophy and athletic performance?" (1:20:47). How should we approach kids/adolescents and resistance training? How young is too young? Are there additional safety concerns? (1:25:30). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5532191/Rapid fire Q&A for Eric (1:34:14): Is it likely that habitual intake of nitrate-rich vegetables can induce the same ergogenic benefits that highly-concentrated supplements can? L-citrulline dosing guidelines. What is the optimal speed for consumption of a protein bolus? Is there a link between high-protein diets and kidney stones? L-theanine: purpose and dosing guidelines. Rapid fire Q&A for Greg (1:45:53): Lifting belts. Does acetylsalicylic acid (Aspirin) blunt hypertrophy or strength gains? Does being younger (16-19 years old) affect strength negatively? Categorizing lifters as “beginner,” “intermediate,” and beyond. To play us out: professional development questions (2:00:48). I am a newly certified personal trainer, and I am planning to submit applications for personal trainer positions at commercial facilities in a couple weeks. How does a new trainer know when they are "ready" to take on clients? I'm a first year psychology student. We recently had a class on how to read research articles, and many course materials laid out processes that would take about 5-6 hours for every single paper. What is your process for reading research? Does this change when you’re trying to get acquainted with a whole new body of literature versus evaluating a single paper on a familiar topic? 

Form 1 of the European Society for Medical Oncology-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) serves to grade therapies with curative intent. Form 1 provided very reasonable grading and expert field testers confirmed the reasonableness of generated scores. Exploratory toxicity evaluation and annotation was feasible but problematic given inconsistent toxicity reporting and limited results of late toxicity. Moreover, the experts identified the inability of crediting improved convenience in non-inferiority trials as a shortcoming. Future revisions of Form 1 of the ESMO-MCBS will be cognoscente of these findings. Read the paper on the ESMO Open website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/esmoopen-2020-000681

This week on MIA Radio we turn our attention to electroconvulsive therapy (known as electroshock in the US). It’s fair to say that ECT remains a controversial subject with proponents and detractors regularly disagreeing on its safety and efficacy. The number of psychiatrists willing to administer ECT, particularly in the UK, is in decline but we are still using it to administer electric shocks to the brains of an estimated 2,000 people each year. In this interview, we discuss a recent paper from the journal Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry. The title is ‘Electroconvulsive Therapy for Depression: A Review of the Quality of ECT versus Sham ECT Trials and Meta-Analyses’ and it is written by John Read, Irving Kirsch and Laura McGrath. On MIA we have previously written about the study and its findings. We hear from two of the authors, Professor of Psychology John Read from the University of East London and Professor of Psychology Irving Kirsch from Harvard Medical School. We discuss: That the work aimed to review the quality of meta-analyses and any relevant clinical studies of ECT. How there have only ever been 11 studies that have compared ECT with sham ECT (SECT). Sham ECT is when the anaesthetic is administered but not followed by shocks to the brain. That in addition to reviewing the quality of the studies, the paper went on to consider the effect of placebo in the administration of ECT. That when reviewing the quality of studies, a 24-point scale was used and that the scorers were blinded to each other’s ratings. The 24-point scale included 5 basic Cochrane Collaboration criteria and an additional 19 quality indicators, some of which were specific to ECT procedures. The average quality score across all the studies was 12.3 out of a 24 maximum. One of the most important findings was that none of the studies reviewed were double-blind. The reason for this is that the patients can’t be blinded to the procedure because the adverse after-effects are very obvious. In reviewing the studies it was sometimes the case that only the treating psychiatrist was rating the effectiveness of the procedure, not the patient. The 5 meta-analyses themselves only contained between 1 and 7 of the eleven available studies. The recommendation from the paper is that the use of ECT should be suspended pending a properly controlled, rigorous clinical trial. That the UK’s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) has decided to review their ECT recommendations in their depression guidelines, considering the review. That the Royal College of Psychiatrists has indicated that they will update their ECT position statement in light of the review. It has come to light recently that NHS Trusts in the UK are sometimes using out of date or incorrect information in their ECT guidance leaflets, an example of this is referring to ECT correcting a ‘chemical imbalance in the brain’. How the expectations of the treating doctor can influence the condition of the person undergoing the treatment. That the placebo effect can be large and long-lasting and that the more invasive the procedure, the larger the effect. That one of the characteristics of depression is the feeling of hopelessness and that when you are given a new treatment, it can instil a sense of hope which counters the hopelessness. That the call to prohibit ECT is because the negative effects of ECT are so strong, the fact that the evidence supporting it is so weak (especially in the long-term and beyond the improvement due to placebo) and that there are other means of addressing the difficulties that the person is dealing with. That placebos are, in essence, a type of psychological therapy. Links and further reading: Electroconvulsive Therapy for Depression: A Review of the Quality of ECT versus Sham ECT Trials and Meta-Analyses Richard P. Bentall: ECT is a classic failure of evidence-based medicine NICE guidance on the use of electroconvulsive therapy

Commentary by Dr. Valentin Fuster

Dr Jamie Hartmann-Boyce discusses a case study of systematic reviews of electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation, looking across meta-analyses in this area. Dr Jamie Hartmann-Boyce is Senior Researcher, Health Behaviours team at the Nuffield Dept of Primary Care Health Sciences.

Dr Jamie Hartmann-Boyce discusses a case study of systematic reviews of electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation, looking across meta-analyses in this area. Dr Jamie Hartmann-Boyce is Senior Researcher, Health Behaviours team at the Nuffield Dept of Primary Care Health Sciences.

Season 2 of The Digital Orthodontist: Live! continues with internationally-known Invisalign speaker and Seinfeld Super Fan, Dr. Jonathan Nicozisis. We discuss the decade's Top 5 Biggest Moments in Orthodontics, what's wrong with Meta-Analyses?, Corporations vs. Academia, the true value of Orthodontic FB groups, and much, much more.

This podcast covers the JBJS December 4, 2019 issue. Featured are articles covering The Usefulness of Meta-Analyses to Hip and Knee Surgeons; recorded commentary by Dr. Stoney; Open Reduction and Plate Fixation of Proximal Humeral Fractures.

This podcast covers the JBJS December 4, 2019 issue. Featured are articles covering The Usefulness of Meta-Analyses to Hip and Knee Surgeons; recorded commentary by Dr. Stoney; Open Reduction and Plate Fixation of Proximal Humeral Fractures.

In this episode we talk about different approaches to creative insights research and the role they can play in brand strategy. Meta analysis has been used often to look back, but one of its most powerful uses is actually to look ahead and use it to drive brand strategy. Listen in as our co-hosts interview the Vice-President of Ameritest, Emily Higgins, as she talks about why regular broad analysis earlier in the process should be a dish that every advertiser puts on the strategy menu. Welcome to Brand Bytes!

Do you know why network meta-analyses (NMA) important? Do you wonder what steps are included in NMAs? Network meta-analysis is a very important field, especially for multiple treatment options where a direct comparison is impossible without using this systematic review and analysis.

This week we dive deep into an article in JAMA IM on falsified data in meta-analyses. We also discuss the recent JAMA viewpoint "Reducing the Expert Halo Effect on Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committees" with its author, Dr. Stephanie Halvorson of OHSU. Falsified data: doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.7774 Expert Halo Effect: doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.20789 Back us on Patreon! www.patreon.com/plenarysession

In this episode of Quah, sponsored by Organifi (organifi.com/mindpump, code "mindpump" for 20% off), Sal, Adam & Justin answer Pump Head questions about how to fix a weak pull up, the true importance of hydration, going to restaurants and enjoying a meal even knowing the food isn't ideal and what to do when you develop several food intolerances. Songs from the 80s, innuendos and the rise of abstinence. (4:30) Feel the burn! Bernie Sanders is running for president in 2020. (10:10) No shoes can contain Zion Williamson + the future of the NBA. (13:08) How our genes are trying to drive us towards the middle. (20:00) The ‘sneaky', balanced flavors of Smoothie Box. (25:12) Adam's ‘motivation' behind his new exercise routine. (31:58) Colorado Tops $6 Billion in Overall Marijuana Sales. (46:32) Nest's hidden microphone lands Google in hot water once again + the future of advertising on new media. Why you want to listen twice as much as you talk. (47:47) #Quah question #1 - How do I fix a weak pull up? (1:00:11) #Quah question #2 – How important is hydration? (1:10:18) #Quah question #3 – How can I go to a restaurant and enjoy a meal knowing the food isn't that ideal? (1:18:41) #Quah question #4 – Can you develop food intolerances from eating something too much? Can you develop one of not eating something enough? What should you do when you develop food intolerance's? (1:29:38) People Mentioned: Robert Oberst (@robertoberst)  Instagram Dr Gabrielle Lyon, DO (@drgabriellelyon)  Instagram Ben Greenfield (@bengreenfieldfitness)  Instagram Dr. Michael Ruscio (@drruscio)  Instagram Products Mentioned: February Promotion: MAPS Performance is ½ off!! **Code “GREEN50” at checkout** Smoothie Box Get $20 off your first 3 boxes ($60 off total) Organifi   **Code “mindpump” for 20% off** Nike's stock falls after Duke star is hurt as his sneaker comes apart Are athletes really getting faster, better, stronger? iGen: Why Today's Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy--and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood--and What That Means for the Rest of Us – Book by Jean M. Twenge PhD Mind Pump Episode 967: Dr. Gabrielle Lyon JBL Endurance DIVE Wireless Sports Headphones with MP3 Player Colorado Tops $6 Billion in Overall Marijuana Sales | Complex Google calls Nest's hidden microphone an 'error' - CNET Evidence from Meta-Analyses of the Facial Width-to-Height Ratio as an Evolved Cue of Threat Rubberbanditz Resistance Band Set Intuitive Nutrition Guide | Mind Pump Media Mind Pump Free Resources

JAACAP February 2019: Contributing Editor Dr. Christopher Hammond interviews Dr. Patty Leijten on identifying what parents need to be taught to reduce disruptive child behavior.

JAACAP February 2019: Contributing Editor Dr. Christopher Hammond interviews Dr. Patty Leijten on identifying what parents need to be taught to reduce disruptive child behavior.

A deceased donor's uterus is transplanted into a live woman, allowing a rare birth via (removable) uterine transplant. Apparently, you can get too much sleep, but we're soooo skeptical. A super cute little kid desperately needs to match with a very rare blood type. And orange juice gets way more nutritional credit than it should.Save a life with a simple cheek swab: https://www.giftoflife.org/registerThis week's health news: https://www.yahoo.com/news/first-baby-born-deceased-organ-donors-womb-heres-need-know-174321858.htmlhttps://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/ny-news-heart-sleep-cardiovascular-20181206-story.htmlhttps://people.com/health/florida-toddler-needs-rare-blood-cancer/https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-6470829/Drinking-orange-juice-slash-risk-dementia-50-cent-study-finds.html

Meta-analyses—structured analyses of many studies on the same topic—were once seen as objective and definitive projects that helped sort out conflicts amongst smaller studies. These days, thousands of meta-analyses are published every year—many either redundant or contrary to earlier metaworks. Host Sarah Crespi talks to freelance science journalist Jop de Vrieze about ongoing meta-analysis wars in which opposing research teams churn out conflicting metastudies around important public health questions such as links between violent video games and school shootings and the effects of antidepressants. They also talk about what clues to look for when trying to evaluate the quality of a meta-analysis. Sarah also talked with three other contributors to our “Research on Research” special issue. Pierre Azoulay of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, Ben Jones of Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, and MIT's Heidi Williams discuss the evidence for some hoary old scientific home truths. See whether you can guess who originally made these claims and how right or wrong they were: Do scientists make great contributions after age 30? How important is it to stand on the shoulders of giants? Does the truth win, or do its opponents just eventually die out? Read the rest of the package on science under scrutiny here. This week's episode was edited by Podigy. Download a transcript of this episode (PDF) Listen to previous podcasts. About the Science Podcast [Image: Davide Bonazzi/@SalzmanArt; Show music: Jeffrey Cook; additional music: Nguyen Khoi Nguyen]

Meta-analyses—structured analyses of many studies on the same topic—were once seen as objective and definitive projects that helped sort out conflicts amongst smaller studies. These days, thousands of meta-analyses are published every year—many either redundant or contrary to earlier metaworks. Host Sarah Crespi talks to freelance science journalist Jop de Vrieze about ongoing meta-analysis wars in which opposing research teams churn out conflicting metastudies around important public health questions such as links between violent video games and school shootings and the effects of antidepressants. They also talk about what clues to look for when trying to evaluate the quality of a meta-analysis. Sarah also talked with three other contributors to our “Research on Research” special issue. Pierre Azoulay of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, Ben Jones of Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, and MIT’s Heidi Williams discuss the evidence for some hoary old scientific home truths. See whether you can guess who originally made these claims and how right or wrong they were: Do scientists make great contributions after age 30? How important is it to stand on the shoulders of giants? Does the truth win, or do its opponents just eventually die out? Read the rest of the package on science under scrutiny here. This week’s episode was edited by Podigy. Download a transcript of this episode (PDF) Listen to previous podcasts. About the Science Podcast [Image: Davide Bonazzi/@SalzmanArt; Show music: Jeffrey Cook; additional music: Nguyen Khoi Nguyen]

I answer a listener question from Joey on how to identify good meta-analyses when reading the literature. LinksDan on TwitterDan on FacebookVideo episodes on InstagramVideo episodes on YouTube See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses with Prof Mike Clarke — Director of the MRC Methodology Hub at the Centre for Public Health in Queen's University Belfast. Virtual Journal Club Link: Investigation of bias in meta-analyses due to selective inclusion of trial effect estimates: empirical study bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/4/e011863.full

A doença cardiovascular é a principal causa de mortalidade em todo o mundo, com a pressão arterial elevada como o maior fator de risco. A medida da PA é o principal método para diagnóstico e manejo da hipertensão. Érika Campana, Doutora e Mestre em Medicina pela UERJ e Especialista em Cardiologia pela SBC/AMB, fala sobre a importância da acurácia na medida da PA. Ouça abaixo no PODCAST da PEBMED. - Para mais episódios como esse, acesse: https://pebmed.com.br/. - Visite também a página de Érika Campana em: www.linkedin.com/in/erika-campana-1b9302160/. Referências: Picone et al. Accuracy of Cuff-Measured Blood Pressure: Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Volume 70, Issue 5, 2017, ISSN 0735-1097 || https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.05.064

Tali and Erinn discuss the history and importance of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, and how they affect clinical practice in rehabilitation and beyond.   Love this episode? Dislike this episode? Want to chat about standardized guidelines in refereed journals? Email us at erinn@geroscollective.com and/or tali@geroscollective.com!   Link to the guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 Link to the website: http://www.prisma-statement.org/ QUORUM vs PRISMA: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.t002   ----------   This podcast is sponsored by GREAT Seminars And Books. As a fan of SRP, YOU can get $25 off by using promo code: SRP25 at http://SeniorRehabProject.com/GREAT

In psychology (e.g., Schooler, 2011) and other fields (e.g., Jennions & Møller, 2001), there are reported cases of effect sizes declining over time. Later studies of a given phenomenon report smaller effect sizes than earlier studies. This decline suggests a publication bias toward large effects and regression to the mean. In the current study, we examine whether evidence exists for such a decline effect. In Study 1, we analyzed 3,488 effect sizes across 70 meta-analytic tables, which were drawn from 33 Psychological Bulletin articles (1980–2010). A multilevel analysis revealed no evidence of a linear or quadratic decline effect over time (indexed by publication year). In Studies 2 and 3, we examined 50 meta-analyses each from social psychology and clinical psychology. In both studies, the modal meta-analysis showed no correlation between effect size and publication year. The decline effect in psychology appears to be less prevalent than earlier anecdotal reports suggest. For replications, this finding suggests that expectations that replications will have lower effect sizes than the original may be inaccurate and unfounded. (September 8, 2015)

In psychology (e.g., Schooler, 2011) and other fields (e.g., Jennions & Møller, 2001), there are reported cases of effect sizes declining over time. Later studies of a given phenomenon report smaller effect sizes than earlier studies. This decline suggests a publication bias toward large effects and regression to the mean. In the current study, we examine whether evidence exists for such a decline effect. In Study 1, we analyzed 3,488 effect sizes across 70 meta-analytic tables, which were drawn from 33 Psychological Bulletin articles (1980–2010). A multilevel analysis revealed no evidence of a linear or quadratic decline effect over time (indexed by publication year). In Studies 2 and 3, we examined 50 meta-analyses each from social psychology and clinical psychology. In both studies, the modal meta-analysis showed no correlation between effect size and publication year. The decline effect in psychology appears to be less prevalent than earlier anecdotal reports suggest. For replications, this finding suggests that expectations that replications will have lower effect sizes than the original may be inaccurate and unfounded. (September 8, 2015)

The 61st episode of Consilience is out! You can download the mp3 here (27mb) and the file’s page on Archive.org is here. Starring Owen Swart Patrick Till Deon Barnard Chris Sham Teaching Angela to Appreciate History 1851 – Discovery of Ariel and Umbriel, two … Continue reading →

Dr. Wei-Chih Liao discusses his manuscript, "Balloon Dilation With Adequate Duration Is Safer Than Sphincterotomy for Extracting Bile Duct Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-analyses." To view the print version of this abstract go to http://bit.ly/SuVHu

This podcast covers the JBJS issue for January 2010. Featured are articles covering Should an Ulnar Styloid Fracture Be Fixed Following Volar Plate Fixation of a Distal Radial Fracture?; The Relationship Between Time to Surgical Debridement and Incidence of Infection After Open High-Energy Lower Extremity Trauma; Outcomes of an Anatomic Posterolateral Knee Reconstruction; recorded commentary by Dr. Stannard; Periacetabular Osteotomy in Patients Fifty Years of Age or Older; Twenty Years of Meta-Analyses in Orthopaedic Surgery - Has Quality Kept up with Quantity?; Plantar Pressures in Patients with and without Lateral Foot Pain After Lateral Column Lengthening; Cognition Following Computer-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty - A Prospective Cohort Study.

This podcast covers the JBJS issue for January 2010. Featured are articles covering Should an Ulnar Styloid Fracture Be Fixed Following Volar Plate Fixation of a Distal Radial Fracture?; The Relationship Between Time to Surgical Debridement and Incidence of Infection After Open High-Energy Lower Extremity Trauma; Outcomes of an Anatomic Posterolateral Knee Reconstruction; recorded commentary by Dr. Stannard; Periacetabular Osteotomy in Patients Fifty Years of Age or Older; Twenty Years of Meta-Analyses in Orthopaedic Surgery - Has Quality Kept up with Quantity?; Plantar Pressures in Patients with and without Lateral Foot Pain After Lateral Column Lengthening; Cognition Following Computer-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty - A Prospective Cohort Study.