Background: Although cannabis and cannabinoids are widely used with therapeutic purposes, their claimed efficacy is highly controversial. For this reason, medical cannabis use is a broad field of research that is rapidly expanding. Our objectives are to identify, characterize, appraise, and organize the current available evidence surrounding therapeutic use of cannabis and cannabinoids, using evidence maps. Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and CINAHL, to identify systematic reviews (SRs) published from their inception up to December 2017. Two authors assessed eligibility and extracted data independently. We assessed methodological quality of the included SRs using the AMSTAR tool. To illustrate the extent of use of medical cannabis, we organized the results according to identified PICO questions using bubble plots corresponding to different clinical scenarios. Results: A total of 44 SRs published between 2001 and 2017 were included in this evidence mapping with data from 158 individual studies. We extracted 96 PICO questions in the following medical conditions: multiple sclerosis, movement disorders (e.g. Tourette Syndrome, Parkinson Disease), psychiatry conditions, Alzheimer disease, epilepsy, acute and chronic pain, cancer, neuropathic pain, symptoms related to cancer (e.g. emesis and anorexia related with chemotherapy), rheumatic disorders, HIV-related symptoms, glaucoma, and COPD. The evidence about these conditions is heterogeneous regarding the conclusions and the quality of the individual primary studies. The quality of the SRs was moderate to high according to AMSTAR scores. Conclusions: Evidence on medical uses of cannabis is broad. However, due to methodological limitations, conclusions were weak in most of the assessed comparisons. Evidence mapping methodology is useful to perform an overview of available research, since it is possible to systematically describe the extent and distribution of evidence, and to organize scattered data.

Good mental health is related to mental and psychological well-being, and there is growing interest in the potential role of the built environment on mental health, yet the evidence base underpinning the direct or indirect effects of the built environment is not fully clear. The aim of this overview is to assess the effect of the built environment on mental health-related outcomes. Methods. This study provides an overview of published systematic reviews (SRs) that assess the effect of the built environment on mental health. We reported the overview according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Databases searched until November 2019 included the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, MEDLINE (OVID 1946 to present), LILACS, and PsycINFO. Two authors independently selected reviews, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of included reviews using the Assessing Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2). Results. In total, 357 records were identified from a structured search of five databases combined with the references of the included studies, and eleven SRs were included in the narrative synthesis. Outcomes included mental health and well-being, depression and stress, and psychological distress. According to AMSTAR-2 scores, the quality assessment of the included SRs was categorized as “high” in two SRs and as “critically low” in nine SRs. According to the conclusions of the SRs reported by the authors, only one SR reported a “beneficial” effect on mental health and well-being outcomes. Conclusion. There was insufficient evidence to make firm conclusions on the effects of built environment interventions on mental health outcomes (well-being, depression and stress, and psychological distress). The evidence collected reported high heterogeneity (outcomes and measures) and a moderate- to low-quality assessment among the included SRs.

Background. Leukocytes contained in the allogeneic packed red blood cell (PRBC) are the cause of certain adverse reactions associated with blood transfusion. Leukoreduction consists of eliminating leukocytes in all blood products below the established safety levels for any patient type. In this systematic review, we appraise the clinical effectiveness of allogeneic leukodepleted (LD) PRBC transfusion for preventing infections and death in patients undergoing major cardiovascular surgical procedures.Methods. We searched randomized controlled trials (RCT), enrolling patients undergoing a major cardiovascular surgical procedure and transfused with LD-PRBC. Data were extracted, and risk of bias was assessed according to Cochrane guidelines. In addition, trial sequential analysis (TSA) was used to assess the need of conducting additional trials. Quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.Results. Seven studies met the eligibility criteria. Quality of the evidence was rated as moderate for both outcomes. The risk ratio for death from any cause comparing the LD-PRBC versus non-LD-PRBC group was 0.69 (CI 95% = 0.53 to 0.90;I2 = 0%). The risk ratio for infection in the same comparison groups was 0.77 (CI 95% = 0.66 to 0.91;I2 = 0%). TSA showed a conclusive result in this outcome.Conclusions. We found evidence that supports the routine use of leukodepletion in patients undergoing a major cardiovascular surgical procedure requiring PRBC transfusion to prevent death and infection. In the case of infection, the evidence should be considered sufficient and conclusive and hence indicated that further trials would not be required.

Abstract Background Leptospirosis is a zoonotic disease that is considered an important public health problem in tropical regions and the world's poorest countries. Methods In this ecological study, we included cases of leptospirosis reported in Ecuador from 2013 to 2018. Spatial autocorrelation was evaluated through the global Moran I index and spatial-temporal scan statistics were used to identify high-risk clusters. Results In Ecuador, the leptospirosis incidence rates decreased from 3.3 cases per 100 000 population in 2013 to 0.8 cases per 100 000 population in 2018. The global Moran I index for the study period showed a positive spatial autocorrelation (0.68; p=0.001). We identified three significant spatial-temporal clusters for a high occurrence of leptospirosis incidence located in cantons of the Coast and Amazon regions. Conclusions The clusters identified could be targeted by policymakers and stakeholders in order to direct surveillance and understand the dynamics of the distribution of leptospirosis in Ecuador.

Few Orthopaedics and Traumatology journals from Latin America and Spain are indexed in major databases; controlled clinical trials published in these journals cannot be exhaustively retrieved using electronic literature searches. We aimed to identify, describe and assess the quality of controlled clinical trials published in Orthopaedics and Traumatology journals from Latin America and Spain through handsearching and evidence mapping methods. We identified controlled clinical trials published in eligible Orthopaedics/Traumatology journals in Spanish until July 2017 by handsearching. Data were extracted for controlled clinical trials main characteristics and the Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the controlled clinical trials methodological quality. In addition, we mapped the main findings of these trials. As a result, we assessed 5631 references in 29 eligible journals of which 57 were controlled clinical trials (1.0%). Controlled clinical trials were published between 1995 and 2017 at a rate of 2.5 per year. Journals from Spain and Mexico published around 63% of the controlled clinical trials identified. The median sample size of patients enrolled was 60 (range = 30–300 participants). About conditions assessed, 38.5% of controlled clinical trials assessed issues related to knee conditions, 15.7% about hip and 10.5% about trauma or spine. The risk of bias domains most affected was selective reporting bias and random sequence generation. In addition, only two and seven trials had low risk of bias in all items related to participant/personnel and outcome assessment blindings, respectively. More than 40% of studies did not report differences on benefits/harms between the interventions assessed. As a conclusion, the number of controlled clinical trials published in Orthopaedics/Traumatology journals from Latin America and Spain is low. These controlled clinical trials had important methodological shortcomings and were judged as unclear or high risk of bias. These trials are now available in CENTRAL for their potential inclusion in systematic reviews and other documents of synthesis.