IMPORTANCE Childhood anxiety is common. Multiple treatment options are available, but existing guidelines provide inconsistent advice on which treatment to use.OBJECTIVES To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and adverse events of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and pharmacotherapy for childhood anxiety disorders. DATA SOURCES We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and SciVerse Scopus from database inception through February 1, 2017.STUDY SELECTION Randomized and nonrandomized comparative studies that enrolled children and adolescents with confirmed diagnoses of panic disorder, social anxiety disorder, specific phobias, generalized anxiety disorder, or separation anxiety and who received CBT, pharmacotherapy, or the combination.DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool data. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESPrimary anxiety symptoms (measured by child, parent, or clinician), remission, response, and adverse events.RESULTS A total of 7719 patients were included from 115 studies. Of these, 4290 (55.6%) were female, and the mean (range) age was 9.2 (5.4-16.1) years. Compared with pill placebo, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) significantly reduced primary anxiety symptoms and increased remission (relative risk, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.37-3.04) and response (relative risk, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.60-2.40). Serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) significantly reduced clinician-reported primary anxiety symptoms. Benzodiazepines and tricyclics were not found to significantly reduce anxiety symptoms. When CBT was compared with wait-listing/no treatment, CBT significantly improved primary anxiety symptoms, remission, and response. Cognitive behavioral therapy reduced primary anxiety symptoms more than fluoxetine. The combination of sertraline and CBT significantly reduced clinician-reported primary anxiety symptoms and response more than either treatment alone. Head-to-head comparisons were sparse, and network meta-analysis estimates were imprecise. Adverse events were common with medications but not with CBT and were not severe. Studies were too small or too short to assess suicidality with SSRIs or SNRIs. One trial showed a statistically nonsignificant increase in suicidal ideation with venlafaxine. Cognitive behavioral therapy was associated with fewer dropouts than pill placebo or medications. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEEvidence supports the effectiveness of CBT and SSRIs for reducing childhood anxiety symptoms. Serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors also appear to be effective based on less consistent evidence. Head-to-head comparisons between various medications and comparisons with CBT represent a need for research in the field.

Sleep complaints are reported by 40–60 % of menopausal women. Poor sleep is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and obesity. The effect of menopausal hormone therapy on sleep quality is unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to summarize the efficacy of menopausal hormone therapy on self-reported sleep quality. Electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBM Reviews CENTRAL, and Psyclnfo) were searched from 2002 to October 2015. Randomized trials assessing the effect of menopausal hormone therapy with a minimum follow up of 8 weeks were included. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened independently and in duplicate. Primary outcome included sleep items within a questionnaire, scale or diary. Standardized mean differences across trials were pooled using random-effects models. The search identified 424 articles, from which 42 trials were included. Seven trials at a moderate to high risk of bias enrolling 15,468 women were pooled in meta-analysis. Menopausal hormone therapy improved sleep quality in women who had vasomotor symptoms at baseline [standardized mean difference −0. 54 (−0. 91 to −0. 18), moderate quality evidence]. No difference was noted when women without such symptoms were analyzed separately or combined. Across 31 sleep quality questionnaires, daytime dysfunction was the most evaluated sleep domain. Menopausal hormone therapy improves sleep in women with concomitant vasomotor symptoms. Heterogeneity of trials regarding study population, formulations, and sleep scales; limit overall certainty in the evidence. Future menopausal hormone therapy trials should include assessment of self-reported sleep quality using standardized scales and adhere to reporting guidelines.

No abstract

ObjectivesIn the care of patients with type 2 diabetes, self-management is emphasised and studied while theory and observations suggest that patients also benefit from social support. We sought to assess the effect of social network interventions on social support, glycaemic control and quality of life in patients with type 2 diabetes.Research design and methodsWe searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EBM Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL through April 2017 for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of social network interventions in patients with type 2 diabetes. Reviewers working independently and in duplicate assessed eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted data from eligible RCTs. We pooled estimates using inverse variance random effects meta-analysis.ResultsWe found 19 eligible RCTs enrolling 2319 participants. Social network interventions were commonly based on individual behaviour change rather than social or interpersonal theories of self-management, were educational, and sought to engage social network members for their knowledge and experience. Interventions improved social support (0.74 SD (95% CI 0.32 to 1.15), I2=89%, 8 RCTs) and haemoglobin A1c at 3 months (−0.25 percentage points (95% CI −0.40 to -0.11), I2=12%, 9 RCTs), but not quality of life.ConclusionsDespite a compelling theoretical base, researchers have only minimally studied the value of interventions targeting patients’ social networks on diabetes care. Although the body of evidence to date is limited, and based on individual behaviour change theories, the results are promising. This review challenges the scientific community to design and test theory-based interventions that go beyond self-management approaches to focus on the largely untapped potential of social networks to improve diabetes care.PROSPERO registrationCRD42016036117.