Cochrane Db Syst Rev
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Apr 2016
Review Meta AnalysisOral immunoglobulin for preventing necrotizing enterocolitis in preterm and low birth weight neonates.
Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) is the most common emergency involving the gastrointestinal tract occurring in the neonatal period. There have been published reports that suggest that oral immunoglobulins (Ig)A and IgG produce an immunoprotective effect in the gastrointestinal mucosa. ⋯ Based on the available trials, the evidence does not support the administration of oral immunoglobulin for the prevention of NEC. There are no randomized controlled trials of oral IgA alone for the prevention of NEC.
-
Dornase alfa is currently used as a mucolytic to treat pulmonary disease (the major cause of morbidity and mortality) in cystic fibrosis. It reduces mucus viscosity in the lungs, promoting improved clearance of secretions. This is an update of a previously published review. ⋯ There is evidence to show that, compared with placebo, therapy with dornase alfa improves lung function in people with cystic fibrosis in trials lasting one month to two years. There was a decrease in pulmonary exacerbations in trials of six months or longer. Voice alteration and rash appear to be the only adverse events reported with increased frequency in randomised controlled trials. There is not enough evidence to firmly conclude if dornase alfa is superior to hyperosmolar agents in improving lung function.
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Apr 2016
ReviewInterventions to prevent misconduct and promote integrity in research and publication.
Improper practices and unprofessional conduct in clinical research have been shown to waste a significant portion of healthcare funds and harm public health. ⋯ The evidence base relating to interventions to improve research integrity is incomplete and the studies that have been done are heterogeneous, inappropriate for meta-analyses and their applicability to other settings and population is uncertain. Many studies had a high risk of bias because of the choice of study design and interventions were often inadequately reported. Even when randomized designs were used, findings were difficult to generalize. Due to the very low quality of evidence, the effects of training in responsible conduct of research on reducing research misconduct are uncertain. Low quality evidence indicates that training about plagiarism, especially if it involves practical exercises and use of text-matching software, may reduce the occurrence of plagiarism.
-
This review has been withdrawn as it has been updated by way of a new protocol and then a review, as the scope of the review has substantially expanded. The citation for the new updated review is as follows: Abdel Hay R, Shalaby K, Zaher H, Hafez V, Chi CC, Dimitri S, Nabhan AF, Layton AM. Interventions for acne scars. ⋯ DOI: 10.1002/14651858. CD011946.pub2. The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Apr 2016
Review Meta AnalysisAntibiotics and antiseptics for pressure ulcers.
Pressure ulcers, also known as bedsores, decubitus ulcers and pressure injuries, are localised areas of injury to the skin or the underlying tissue, or both. A range of treatments with antimicrobial properties, including impregnated dressings, are widely used in the treatment of pressure ulcers. A clear and current overview is required to facilitate decision making regarding use of antiseptic or antibiotic therapies in the treatment of pressure ulcers. This review is one of a suite of Cochrane reviews investigating the use of antiseptics and antibiotics in different types of wounds. It also forms part of a suite of reviews investigating the use of different types of dressings and topical treatments in the treatment of pressure ulcers. ⋯ The relative effects of systemic and topical antimicrobial treatments on pressure ulcers are not clear. Where differences in wound healing were found, these sometimes favoured the comparator treatment without antimicrobial properties. The trials are small, clinically heterogenous, generally of short duration, and at high or unclear risk of bias. The quality of the evidence ranges from moderate to very low; evidence on all comparisons was subject to some limitations.