Explore the vast range of titles available.

Patients with hepatic encephalopathy (HE) suffer from significant symptoms and impaired quality of life. Improved understanding on the potential benefits of first-line HE therapies may aid patient-provider discussions regarding expected benefits of HE treatments. We aimed to perform a systematic review to assess the effects of lactulose and rifaximin on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for randomized trials or prospective cohort studies using lactulose and/or rifaximin for the management of HE and assessing changes in PRO using PRO instruments. Physician reviewers independently reviewed titles, abstracts, and full texts and extracted data independently. We performed random-effects meta-analyses to examine the effects of lactulose and rifaximin on PROs. We identified 16 studies representing 1,376 patients that met inclusion criteria. Most studies assessed treatment of covert HE. In patients with covert HE, lactulose significantly improved overall patient-reported health-related quality of life measured by the Sickness Impact Profile with an estimated pooled mean difference of 6.92 (95% confidence interval: 6.66-7.18) and showed improvements in several subscales. Conversely, rifaximin demonstrated a nonstatistically significant mean difference in the total Sickness Impact Profile of 4.76 (95% confidence interval: -4.23 to 13.76), with strong evidence of heterogeneity between these studies. Studies examining other PRO instruments showed improvements in overall health-related quality of life, social functioning, and sleep from both lactulose and rifaximin. Patients with HE treated with lactulose or rifaximin reported improvements in important PROs. These results may inform provider-patient communication and help manage patient expectations regarding the potential benefits of HE therapies.

To eliminate vertical transmission of HIV, global institutions recommend using a risk-guided approach for HIV prevention services in antenatal and postnatal settings. Identifying predictors of maternal HIV acquisition can inform the development of risk-guided approaches, but individual studies of predictors can have limited power and generalizability. We conducted a systematic review and narrative synthesis to identify common predictors of maternal HIV acquisition in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). We searched four databases for full-text articles that estimated associations between at least one predictor and risk of HIV acquisition among pregnant and/or lactating women (PLW) in SSA. We restricted our synthesis to predictors assessed in at least four study populations. For these predictors, we summarized how each predictor was defined and used vote counting and descriptive statistics to characterize overall trends. We identified 26 eligible publications that summarized results from 24 unique studies. Studies were implemented in 12 countries between 1988 and 2021 and enrolled a total of 164,480 PLW at risk of acquiring HIV. Of the 66 predictors evaluated, 16 met our inclusion criteria. Estimated associations tended to be imprecise and variability in how predictors were measured precluded meta-analyses. We observed trends towards a higher risk of maternal HIV acquisition among young women and women who reported early coital debut, multiple partnerships, sexually transmitted infections, being unaware of partner HIV status, or having a partner living with HIV. In most studies, PLW in stable, monogamous relationships experienced a lower risk of acquiring HIV than those who were single, separated, or in a polygynous marriage. HIV risk perception, condom use, and vaginal drying were also commonly associated with HIV acquisition risk. In our systematic review and narrative synthesis, we identified several easily measured characteristics that were associated with HIV acquisition among PLW in multiple study populations across SSA. Such findings can support the development and refinement of risk-guided approaches for HIV prevention in the region.

Deep learning (DL) has been widely investigated in breast ultrasound (US) for distinguishing between benign and malignant breast masses. This systematic review of test diagnosis aims to examine the accuracy of DL, compared to human readers, for the diagnosis of breast cancer in the US under clinical settings. Our literature search included records from databases including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. Test accuracy outcomes were synthesized to compare the diagnostic performance of DL and human readers as well as to evaluate the assistive role of DL to human readers. A total of 16 studies involving 9238 female participants were included. There were no prospective studies comparing the test accuracy of DL versus human readers in clinical workflows. Diagnostic test results varied across the included studies. In 14 studies employing standalone DL systems, DL showed significantly lower sensitivities in 5 studies with comparable specificities and outperformed human readers at higher specificities in another 4 studies; in the remaining studies, DL models and human readers showed equivalent test outcomes. In 12 studies that assessed assistive DL systems, no studies proved the assistive role of DL in the overall diagnostic performance of human readers. Current evidence is insufficient to conclude that DL outperforms human readers or enhances the accuracy of diagnostic breast US in a clinical setting. Standardization of study methodologies is required to improve the reproducibility and generalizability of DL research, which will aid in clinical translation and application.

Performance measurement is the process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting standardized measures of clinical performance that can be compared across practices to evaluate how well care was provided. We conducted a systematic review to identify stakeholder perceptions of key symptoms and health domains to test as patient-reported performance measures in oncology. Stakeholders included cancer patients, caregivers, clinicians, and healthcare administrators. Standard review methodology was used, consistent with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant studies through August 2020. Four coders independently reviewed entries and conflicts were resolved by a fifth coder. Efficacy and effectiveness studies, and studies focused exclusively on patient experiences of care (e.g., communication skills of providers) were excluded. Searches generated 1813 articles and 1779 were coded as not relevant, leaving 34 international articles for extraction. Patients, caregivers, clinicians, and healthcare administrators prioritize psychosocial care (e.g., distress) and symptom management for patient-reported performance measures. Patients and caregivers also perceive that maintaining physical function and daily activities are critical. Clinicians and administrators perceive control of specific symptoms to be critical (gastrointestinal symptoms, pain, poor sleep). Results were used to inform testing at six US cancer centers.

INTRODUCTION:Patients with hepatic encephalopathy (HE) suffer from significant symptoms and impaired quality of life. Improved understanding on the potential benefits of first-line HE therapies may aid patient-provider discussions regarding expected benefits of HE treatments. We aimed to perform a systematic review to assess the effects of lactulose and rifaximin on patient-reported outcomes (PROs).METHODS:We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for randomized trials or prospective cohort studies using lactulose and/or rifaximin for the management of HE and assessing changes in PRO using PRO instruments. Physician reviewers independently reviewed titles, abstracts, and full texts and extracted data independently. We performed random-effects meta-analyses to examine the effects of lactulose and rifaximin on PROs.RESULTS:We identified 16 studies representing 1,376 patients that met inclusion criteria. Most studies assessed treatment of covert HE. In patients with covert HE, lactulose significantly improved overall patient-reported health-related quality of life measured by the Sickness Impact Profile with an estimated pooled mean difference of 6.92 (95% confidence interval: 6.66-7.18) and showed improvements in several subscales. Conversely, rifaximin demonstrated a nonstatistically significant mean difference in the total Sickness Impact Profile of 4.76 (95% confidence interval: −4.23 to 13.76), with strong evidence of heterogeneity between these studies. Studies examining other PRO instruments showed improvements in overall health-related quality of life, social functioning, and sleep from both lactulose and rifaximin.DISCUSSION:Patients with HE treated with lactulose or rifaximin reported improvements in important PROs. These results may inform provider-patient communication and help manage patient expectations regarding the potential benefits of HE therapies.