Explore the vast range of titles available.

This evidence mapping aims to describe and assess the quality of available evidence in systematic reviews (SRs) on treatments for oral cancer. We followed the methodology of Global Evidence Mapping. Searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Epistemonikos and The Cochrane Library were conducted to identify SRs on treatments for oral cancer. The methodological quality of SRs was assessed using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews-2 tool. We organized the results according to identified Population-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome (PICO) questions and presented the evidence mapping in tables and a bubble plot. Fifteen SRs met the eligibility criteria, including 118 individual reports, of which 55.1% were randomized controlled clinical trials. Ten SRs scored \"Critically low\" methodological quality. We extracted 30 PICOs focusing on interventions such as surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy; 18 PICOs were for resectable oral cancer, of which 8 were reported as beneficial. There were 12 PICOs for unresectable oral cancer, of which only 2 interventions were reported as beneficial. There is limited available evidence on treatments for oral cancer. The methodological quality of most included SRs scored \"Critically low\". The main beneficial treatment reported by authors for patients with resectable oral cancer is surgery alone or in combination with radiotherapy or chemotherapy. Evidence about the benefits of the treatments for unresectable oral cancer is lacking. These findings highlight the need to address future research focused on new treatments and knowledge gaps in this field, and increased efforts are required to improve the methodology quality and reporting process of SRs on treatments for oral cancer.

Background Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumours (GISTs) are the most common mesenchymal tumours. Currently, different pharmacological and surgical options are used to treat localised and metastatic GISTs, although this research field is broad and the body of evidence is scattered and expanding. Our objectives are to identify, describe and organise the current available evidence for GIST through an evidence mapping approach. Methods We followed the methodology of Global Evidence Mapping (GEM). We searched Pubmed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and Epistemonikos in order to identify systematic reviews (SRs) with or without meta-analyses published between 1990 and March 2016. Two authors assessed eligibility and extracted data. Methodological quality of the included systematic reviews was assessed using AMSTAR. We organised the results according to identified PICO questions and presented the evidence map in tables and a bubble plot. Results A total of 17 SRs met eligibility criteria. These reviews included 66 individual studies, of which three quarters were either observational or uncontrolled clinical trials. Overall, the quality of the included SRs was moderate or high. In total, we extracted 14 PICO questions from them and the corresponding results mostly favoured the intervention arm. Conclusions The most common type of study used to evaluate therapeutic interventions in GIST sarcomas has been non-experimental studies. However, the majority of the interventions are reported as beneficial or probably beneficial by the respective authors of SRs. The evidence mapping is a useful and reliable methodology to identify and present the existing evidence about therapeutic interventions.

This study is to systematically evaluate the efficacy of acupuncture for PHN and provide a visual overview of treatment landscape. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Scientific Journals Database (VIP), and Wanfang Database for systematic reviews (SRs) on acupuncture for PHN up to Apr 18, 2025. Studies were included if they were SRs of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing traditional Chinese acupuncture interventions for PHN, and excluded if they involved non-traditional acupuncture, herpes zoster, or PHN prevention research. Two independent reviewers utilized Excel, EndNote 20, and R software for data analysis and assessed the quality of included studies using the AMSTAR2 tool. Of 351 identified records, 40 SRs met inclusion criteria, encompassing 926 RCTs, 63,493 patients, 13 types of acupuncture interventions and 29 outcomes. Acupuncture interventions, particularly fire needling, CPBLC, Fu's subcutaneous needling, plum-blossom needle, multi-acupuncture and multi-acupuncture + pharmacotherapy, showed the most robust benefits in improving effective rate, reducing visual analog scale (VAS) scores, and decreasing adverse reactions in PHN treatment. Despite most SRs reporting positive outcomes, the quality was generally low by AMSTAR2. Acupuncture could be a valuable adjunct to standard PHN treatment, offering benefits in overall efficacy, pain management and treatment safety. However, high-quality clinical trials and systematic reviews are needed to confirm these preliminary results and guide clinical practice.

Different methods to examine research gaps have been described, but there are still no standard methods for identifying, prioritizing, or reporting research gaps. This study aimed to describe the methods used to identify, prioritize, and display gaps in health research. A scoping review using the Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework was carried out. We included all study types describing or reporting on methods to identify, prioritize, and display gaps or priorities in health research. Data synthesis is both quantitative and qualitative. Among 1,938 identified documents, 139 articles were selected for analysis; 90 (65%) aimed to identify gaps, 23 (17%) aimed to determine research priorities, and 26 (19%) had both aims. The most frequent methods in the review were aimed at gap identification and involved secondary research, which included knowledge synthesis (80/116 articles, 69%), specifically systematic reviews and scoping reviews (58/80, 73%). Among 49 studies aimed at research prioritization, the most frequent methods were both primary and secondary research, accounting for 24 (49%) reports. Finally, 52 (37%) articles described methods for displaying gaps and/or priorities in health research. This study provides a mapping of different methods used to identify, prioritize, and display gaps or priorities in health research.

To assess the reporting and methodological quality of COVID-19 systematic reviews, and to analyze trends and gaps in the quality, clinical topics, author countries, and populations of the reviews using an evidence mapping approach. A structured search for systematic reviews concerning COVID-19 was performed using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Campbell Library, Web of Science, CBM, WanFang Data, CNKI, and CQVIP from inception until June 2020. The quality of each review was assessed using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) checklist and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. In total, 243 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria, over 50% of which (128, 52.7%) were from 14 developing countries, with China contributing the most reviews (76, 31.3%). In terms of methodological quality of the studies, 30 (12.3%) were of moderate quality, 63 (25.9%) were of low quality, and 150 (61.7%) were of critically low quality. In terms of reporting quality, the median (interquartile range) PRISMA score was 14 (10–18). Regarding the topics of the reviews, 24 (9.9%) focused on the prevalence of COVID-19, 69 (28.4%) focused on the clinical manifestations, 30 (12.3%) focused on etiology, 43 (17.7%) focused on diagnosis, 65 (26.7%) focused on treatment, 104 (42.8%) focused on prognosis, and 25 (10.3%) focused on prevention. These studies mainly focused on general patients with COVID-19 (161, 66.3%), followed by children (22, 9.1%) and pregnant patients (18, 7.4%). This study systematically evaluated the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews of COVID-19, summarizing and analyzing trends in their clinical topics, author countries, and study populations.

Introduction: Globally, the COVID-19 pandemic has affected older people disproportionately. Prior to the pandemic, some studies reported that telehealth was an efficient and effective form of health care delivery, particularly for older people. There has been increased use of telehealth and publication of new literature on this topic during the pandemic, so we conducted a scoping review and evidence synthesis for telehealth use in geriatric care to summarize learning from these new data. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the World Health Organization’s COVID-19 global research database for articles published between 1 January and 20 August 2020. We included 79 articles that met our inclusion criteria. The information collected has been synthesized and presented as descriptive statistics. Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) have also been discussed. Results: The articles included in our review provide some evidence of effective provision of preventive, curative, and rehabilitative telehealth services for older people, but they highlight a greater focus on curative services and are mostly concentrated in high-income countries. We identified convenience and affordability as the strengths of telehealth use in geriatric care. Weaknesses identified include the inability of telehealth to cater to the needs of older people with specific physical and cognitive limitations. While the threats of increasing inequity and the lack of standardization in the provision of age-friendly telehealth services remain, we identified opportunities for technologic advancements driven by simplicity and user-friendliness for older people. Conclusion: Telehealth offers futuristic promise for the provision of essential health care services for older people worldwide. However, the extent of these services via telehealth appears to be currently limited in low and low-middle income countries. Optimizing telehealth services that can be accessed by older people requires greater government investments and active engagement by broader participation of older people, their caregivers, physicians and other health care providers, technology experts, and health managers.

Background and objective: Cancer is a life-threatening disease worldwide and current standard therapy cannot fulfill all clinical needs. Chinese herbal injections have been widely used for cancer in Chinese and Western hospitals in China. This study aimed to apply evidence mapping in order to provide an overview of the clinical application of Chinese herbal injections in cancer care based on randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Methods and results: Seven databases were systematically searched for eligible randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses for ten Chinese herbal injections used in cancer treatment and covered in the Chinese national essential health insurance program. Excel 2016 and RStudio were used to integrate and process the data. In total 366 randomized controlled trials and 48 systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included in the evidence mapping of herbal medicines including; Compound Kushen, Shenqi Fuzheng, Aidi, Kangai, Kanglaite, Xiaoaiping, Cinobufacin, Brucea javanica oil emulsion, Polyporus polysaccharide injection, and Astragalus polysaccharide for injection. Health insurance restricts the scope of clinical application for these herbal injections. The numbers of studies published increased, especially around 2013–2015. The most studied cancer types were lung cancer (118, 32.2%), colorectal cancer (39, 10.7%), and gastric cancer (39, 10.7%), and the most used injections were Compound Kushen (78, 21.3%), Shenqi Fuzheng (76, 20.8%), and Aidi (63, 17.2%). The most consistently reported benefits were observed for Compound Kushen, Shenqi Fuzheng, Aidi, and Kangai for tumor response, quality of life, myelosuppression, and enhancing immunity. Conclusion: The current evidence mapping provides an overview of the outcomes and effects of Chinese herbal injections used in cancer care, and offers information on their clinical application which warrants further evidence-based research in order to inform clinical and policy decision-making.

This study systematically reviewed the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for depression in children and adolescents and assessed the quality and recommendation consistency of those CPGs. Evidence mapping was presented to illustrate the research trends and identify gaps to guide future research. Literature on CPGs for depression was systematically collected from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, guideline databases, and psychiatric association/ society websites. The basic information, recommendations, methodological quality, and reporting quality of CPGs were extracted, and the supporting evidence strength for the included CPGs was analyzed in Excel. Four appraisers independently assessed the eligible CPGs using AGREE II instrument and the RIGHT checklist. All recommendations from the CPGs were summarized and analyzed, and the evidence mapping bubble charts were plotted in Excel. After excluding 15,184 records, 12 depression CPGs were eventually proved eligible, six of which were of high quality and six medium quality. A total of 39 major recommendations were summarized, 35 of which were supported by high-quality CPGs. Although direct comparisons are challenging due to differences in grading schemes and research quality, most CPGs share many pivotal recommendations that can help guide clinical practice. However, the evidence for some clinical problems is still lacking. Thus, more research is necessary on the screening and treatment of children and adolescents to put forward more evidence-based and high-quality recommendations.

Background and Objective Considering that physicians and patients widely use acupuncture, it is necessary to explore its adverse effects during treatment. Herein, an evidence map was generated based on published studies to identify acupuncture-induced adverse effects and assess their severity, with the overarching goal of providing references for safe and effective implementation. Methods A comprehensive literature search was performed in four public databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of science, and the Cochrane Library) to identify relevant studies published up to 15 th June 2022. In addition, relevant studies were explored in the Epistemonikos database and reference lists were retrieved as a supplement. A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews, Version 2 (AMSTAR-2) quality assessment tool was applied to determine the methodological quality of included systematic reviews (SRs) and/or meta-analysis (MAs), whereas Microsoft Excel 2019 tool was used for data extraction and coding. Heatmaps were generated to display disease type, countries of origin for the first authors, and the sample sizes of original studies. Moreover, bubble charts comprehensively presented intervention categories, adverse reaction types, and evidence levels. Results A total of 535 SRs involving 33 adverse reactions were included. Among them, 22 studies were rated as high quality, 28 as moderate, 106 as low, and the rest were of critically-low quality. Numerous adverse effects were described in the studies, including syncope (86 SRs), organ or tissue injury (233 SRs), systemic reactions (113 SRs), infection (19 SRs), and other adverse events (373 SRs). Importantly, these adverse reactions were mainly associated with 19 acupuncture techniques, including electroacupuncture (n = 67), manual acupuncture (n = 47) and acupoint catgut embedding (n = 41). Furthermore, the 535 SRs described 23 diseases, among which symptoms, signs or clinical findings (83 SRs), mental, behavioral or neurodevelopmental disorders (67 SRs), and diseases of the nervous system (66 SRs) had the highest incidence. Conclusion This evidence mapping explores the adverse effects of acupuncture, showing that there are multiple types of adverse reactions to acupuncture, with milder symptoms. The methodological assessment revealed that most of the included studies were of low- or critically low-quality. Therefore, there is a need for future randomized controlled trials and SRs to comprehensively analyze acupuncture-related adverse events in order to provide reliable and credible evidence.

Background The effectiveness of mammography screening in reducing breast cancer mortality and the accuracy of various mammography techniques have been widely studied. However, the quality and findings of existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses require comprehensive evaluation. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted in the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed for systematic reviews published up until December 20, 2022. A total of 28 systematic reviews with meta-analyses were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality using the Risk Of Bias In Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) tool. Results Of the 28 systematic reviews included, only 17.9% were rated as low risk of bias. The pooled estimates for breast cancer mortality reduction due to mammography screening ranged from 0.51 (95% CI 0.46–0.55) to 1.04 (95% CI 0.84–1.27). The results were influenced by study design, age, and follow-up duration, with an overall trend indicating that mammography screening reduces breast cancer mortality. Sensitivity of mammography techniques ranged from 55 to 91%, and specificity from 84 to 97%. Digital breast tomosynthesis combined with synthetic contrast-enhanced spectral mammography, digital mammography, and film mammography demonstrated relatively high cancer detection rates and low false positives. Conclusion Mammography screening appears effective in reducing breast cancer mortality. The accuracy of various mammography techniques is generally reliable, with certain combinations showing high detection rates. However, the methodological quality of most included reviews was at high risk of bias, indicating a need for higher-quality studies in the future.