No abstract

OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to identify the frequency of Cochrane systematic reviews and Cochrane systematic reviews protocols using (or planning to use) the risk of bias 2.0 tool to assess the risk of bias of the included randomized clinical trials. STUDY DESIGN: This is a meta-research study. METHODS: We included Cochrane systematic reviews or Cochrane systematic reviews protocols that planned to include randomized clinical trials. We assessed the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and screened for issues published after the launch of risk of bias 2.0 tool (2019)(2020)(2021)(2022). Two independent investigators performed the study selection and data extraction. RESULTS: We analyzed 440 Cochrane systematic reviews and 536 Cochrane systematic reviews protocols. Overall, 4.8% of the Cochrane systematic reviews and 28.5% of the Cochrane systematic reviews protocols used or planned to use risk of bias 2.0 tool. Although low, adherence is increasing over time. In 2019, 0% of Cochrane systematic reviews used risk of bias 2.0 tool, compared to 24.1% in 2022. In Cochrane systematic reviews protocols, adherence increased from 6.9% in 2019 to 41.5% in 2022. A total of 274 (62.1%) Cochrane systematic reviews had their protocols published before 2018; only one used risk of bias 2.0 tool and reported the change of versions in the "Differences between protocol and revision" section. CONCLUSION: The Cochrane's risk of bias 2.0 tool has low adherence among Cochrane protocols and systematic reviews. Further efforts are necessary to facilitate the implementation of this new tool.

ABSTRACT. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most frequent childhood psychiatric problems. Objective: The objective of this study was to identify, synthesize the results, and critically evaluate all Cochrane systematic reviews (SRs) on the pharmacological interventions for children and adolescents (up to age 18) diagnosed with ADHD. Methods: The search was performed in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (via Wiley) in July 2020. Results: The search strategy resulted in four SRs of high methodological quality, analyzing 51 randomized clinical trials (9,013 participants). Compared to placebo, treatment with tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) (desipramine), amphetamine, and methylphenidate showed improvement in symptoms such as difficulty concentrating, impulsivity, and hyperactivity in the short term (up to 6 months). There was an increase in the occurrence of adverse events, such as reduced appetite, difficulty sleeping, and abdominal pain. Insufficient evidence was found to support the effects of supplementation with polyunsaturated fatty acids. Conclusions: The use of TCAs, amphetamine, and methylphenidate in children and adolescents with ADHD seems to present positive effects and higher rates of minor adverse events when compared to placebo.

No abstract

Introducción: El angioedema hereditario es una enfermedad genética autosómica dominante, asociada con aumento de las concentraciones de bradicinina. Se clasifica en tres tipos, de acuerdo con la enzima C1-INH. El diagnóstico se establece por las manifestaciones clínicas y los estudios de laboratorio. El tratamiento consiste profilaxis a corto y largo plazo, y protocolo para el control de las crisis. Reporte del caso: Paciente femenina de 40 años, que acudió al servicio de Urgencias por edema labial, sin reacción al tratamiento con corticosteroides. Se detectaron concentraciones bajas de IgE, C4 e inhibidores de la esterasa C1. Se estableció el diagnóstico de angioedema hereditario. Actualmente se mantiene en tratamiento profiláctico con danazol y plasma fresco congelado para el control de las crisis. Conclusiones: El angioedema hereditario es una enfermedad que afecta considerablemente la calidad de vida; por tanto, debe diagnosticarse de forma oportuna y establecer un plan de tratamiento eficaz, con la intención de prevenir o reducir las complicaciones.