Clinicians use general practice guidelines as a source of support for their intervention, but how much confidence should they place on these recommendations? How much confidence should patients place on these recommendations? Various instruments are available to assess the quality of evidence of research, such as the revised Wong scale (R-Wong) which examines the quality of research design, methodology and data analysis, and the revision of the assessment of multiple systematic reviews (R-AMSTAR), which examines the quality of systematic reviews.The Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group developed an instrument called the GRADE system in order to grade the quality of the evidence in studies and to evaluate the strength of recommendation of the intervention that is proposed in the published article. The GRADE looks at four factors to determine the quality of the evidence: study design, study quality, consistency, and directness. After combining the four components and assessing the grade of the evidence, the strength of recommendation of the intervention is established. The GRADE, however, only makes a qualitative assessment of the evidence and does not generate quantifiable data.In this study, we have quantified both the grading of the quality of evidence and also the strength of recommendation of the original GRADE, hence expanding the GRADE. This expansion of the GRADE (Ex-GRADE) permits the creation of a new instrument that can produce tangible data and possibly bridge the gap between evidence-based research and evidence-based clinical practice.

Infection with the human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV) and the resulting acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) alter not only cellular immune regulation but also the bone metabolism. Since cellular immunity and bone metabolism are intimately intertwined in the osteoimmune network, it is to be expected that bone metabolism is also affected in patients with HIV/AIDS. The concerted evidence points convincingly toward impaired activity of osteoblasts and increased activity of osteoclasts in patients with HIV/AIDS, leading to a significant increase in the prevalence of osteoporosis. Research attributes these outcomes in part at least to the ART, PI, and HAART therapies endured by these patients. We review and discuss these lines of evidence from the perspective of translational clinically relevant complex systematic reviews for comparative effectiveness analysis and evidence-based intervention on a global scale.

No abstract

Current trends in bio-medicine include research synthesis and dissemination of bioinformation by means of health (bio) information technology (H[b] IT). Research must secure the validity and reliability of assessment tools to quantify research quality in the pursuit of the best available evidence. Our concerted work in this domain led to the revision of three instruments for that purpose, including the stringent characterization of inter-rater reliability and coefficient of agreement. It is timely and critical to advance the methodological development of the science of research synthesis by strengthening the reliability of existing measure of research quality in order to ensure H[b] IT efficacy and effectiveness.

The rate of preterm birth is a public health concern worldwide because it is increasing and efforts to prevent it have failed. We report a Clinically Relevant Complex Systematic Review (CSCSR) designed to identify and evaluate the best available evidence in support of the association between periodontal status in women and pregnancy outcome of preterm low birth weight. We hypothesize that the traditional limits of research synthesis must be expanded to incorporate a translational component. As a proof-of-concept model, we propose that this CSCSR can yield greater validity of efficacy and effectiveness through supplementing its recommendations with data of the proteomic signature of periodontal disease in pregnancy, which can contribute to addressing specifically the predictive validity for adverse outcomes. For this CRCSR, systematic reviews were identified through The National Library of MedicinePubmed, The Cochrane library, CINAHL, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and the American Dental Association web library. Independent reviewers quantified the relevance and quality of this literature with R-AMSTAR. Homogeneity and inter-rater reliability testing were supplemented with acceptable sampling analysis. Research synthesis outcomes were analyzed qualitatively toward a Bayesian inference, and converge to demonstrate a definite association between maternal periodontal disease and pregnancy outcome. This CRCSR limits heterogeneity in terms of periodontal disease, outcome measure, selection bias, uncontrolled confounders and effect modifiers. Taken together, the translational CRCSR model we propose suggests that further research is advocated to explore the fundamental mechanisms underlying this association, from a molecular and proteomic perspective.