No abstract

No abstract

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Morinda officinalis oligosaccharide (MOO) capsules for depressive disorder. Methods: Eight electronic databases were searched for relevant studies from inception to April 19, 2020. Randomized controlled trials comparing MOO capsules with antidepressants were included. Data analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.3 software. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, and the quality of the studies was evaluated by two researchers using the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) software. Results: Seven studies involving 1,384 participants were included in this study. The effect of MOO capsules for moderate depressive disorder was not different from that of antidepressants (risk ratio [RR] = 0.99, 95%CI 0.92-1.06). Regarding adverse events, no significant difference was found between MOO capsules and antidepressants (RR = 0.84, 95%CI 0.65-1.07). In addition, the quality of evidence related to these adverse events was rated as low. Conclusion: This systematic review suggests that the efficacy of MOO capsules in the treatment of mild to moderate depression is not inferior to that of conventional antidepressants, which may provide a new direction for clinical alternative selection of antidepressants. However, more high-quality research and detailed assessments are needed.

Background:Burnout negatively impacts the mental and physical health doctors. More seriously, it leads to poor patient care. In China, the situation is severe and more efforts are needed to reveal the epidemiological characteristics of doctor burnout to develop improved strategies of alleviating it. Due to the large number of heterogeneous and sample size-restricted surveys currently published, meta-analysis and systematic reviews are critical to a thorough understanding of burnout among Chinese doctors.Methods:The Cochrane Collaboration criteria and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) will be followed to conduct and report the systematic review. We will conduct a comprehensive search on the data bases of China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang, PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library from their inception to December 2018. Prospective cohort and cross-sectional studies that described the prevalence of Chinese doctors’ prevalence will be eligible for inclusion. The risk of bias and methodological quality of the included studies will be assessed using a risk of bias tool and the Cochrane guidelines for observational studies. A generalized linear mixed model framework with the Poisson likelihood and the log link function will be used to access the incidence rate ratio. Multivariate Poisson regression framework will be conducted to adjust modeling heterogeneity and confounders, like difference regions and time periods. The risk of bias, heterogeneity, and quality of evidence will be assessed in accordance with the aforementioned guidelines.Results:The primary outcome will be the prevalence and distribution of 3 dimension of burnout in Chinese doctors, and the second will be the difference of prevalence between difference regions and time periods.Discussion:This systematic review and meta-analysis will help us to reveal the prevalence, characteristics, timeline, and correlation between these factors in burnout; we expect our work may provide a scientific basis for further prevention and intervention of burnout in Chinese doctors, eventually to improve the quality of health care.PROSPERO registration number:CRD42018104249.