Search

Objectives To identify prognostic models for melanoma survival, recurrence and metastasis among American Joint Committee on Cancer stage I and II patients postsurgery; and evaluate model performance, including overall survival (OS) prediction.Design Systematic review and narrative synthesis.Data sources Searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Science Citation Index and grey literature sources including cancer and guideline websites from 2000 to September 2021.Eligibility criteria Included studies on risk prediction models for stage I and II melanoma in adults ≥18 years. Outcomes included OS, recurrence, metastases and model performance. No language or country of publication restrictions were applied.Data extraction and synthesis Two pairs of reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias using the CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies checklist and the Prediction study Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Heterogeneous predictors prevented statistical synthesis.Results From 28 967 records, 15 studies reporting 20 models were included; 8 (stage I), 2 (stage II), 7 (stages I–II) and 7 (stages not reported), but were clearly applicable to early stages. Clinicopathological predictors per model ranged from 3–10. The most common were: ulceration, Breslow thickness/depth, sociodemographic status and site. Where reported, discriminatory values were ≥0.7. Calibration measures showed good matches between predicted and observed rates. None of the studies assessed clinical usefulness of the models. Risk of bias was high in eight models, unclear in nine and low in three. Seven models were internally and externally cross-validated, six models were externally validated and eight models were internally validated.Conclusions All models are effective in their predictive performance, however the low quality of the evidence raises concern as to whether current follow-up recommendations following surgical treatment is adequate. Future models should incorporate biomarkers for improved accuracy.PROSPERO registration number CRD42018086784.

Objective UK long-term care facility residents account for 185 000 emergency hospital admissions each year. Avoidance of unnecessary hospital transfers benefits residents, reduces demand on the healthcare systems but is difficult to implement. We synthesised evidence on interventions that influence unplanned hospital admissions or attendances by long-term care facility residents.Methods This is a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library were searched from 2012 to 2022, building on a review published in 2013. We included randomised controlled trials that evaluated interventions that influence (decrease or increase) acute hospital admissions or attendances of long-term care facility residents. Risk of bias and evidence quality were assessed using Cochrane Risk Of Bias-2 and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.Results Forty-three randomised studies were included in this review. A narrative synthesis was conducted and the weight of evidence described with vote counting. Advance care planning and goals of care setting appear to be effective at reducing hospitalisations from long-term care facilities. Other effective interventions, in order of increasing risk of bias, were: nurse practitioner/specialist input, palliative care intervention, influenza vaccination and enhancing access to intravenous therapies in long-term care facilities.Conclusions Factors that affect hospitalisation and emergency department attendances of long-term care facility residents are complex. This review supports the already established use of advance care planning and influenza vaccination to reduce unscheduled hospital attendances. It is likely that more than one intervention will be needed to impact on healthcare usage across the long-term care facility population. The findings of this review are useful to identify effective interventions that can be combined, as well as highlighting interventions that either need evaluation or are not effective at decreasing healthcare usage.PROSPERO registration number CRD42020169604.

Introduction The prevalence of diet-related non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are rapidly increasing in most parts of the world. In order to ameliorate the related public health burden, evidence-informed policies to improve diet need to be implemented. Financial subsidies that promote healthful consumption patterns have the potential to reduce NCD risk and may also reduce inequality if targeted at those of low socio-economic position. This protocol is for an updated systematic review of such evidence.Methods and analysis A systematic search strategy will be used to identify publications on fiscal intervention studies indexed in Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, EconLit and PubMed in between January 2013 to February 2019. Two reviewers will independently sift identified citations using prespecified inclusion and exclusion criteria to inform full-text review. The outcomes of interest are: consumption patterns (% change in targeted items and in overall dietary patterns), purchasing patterns (% change) or body mass index. Pretested data capture forms will be used for double data extraction. Any inconsistencies in citation sifting or data extraction will be resolved by a third investigator and study authors will be contacted if needed. Systematic searches will be supplemented by reference checking of key articles. Study quality will be assessed and a narrative summary of findings will be produced. Meta-analyses and exploration of heterogeneity will be completed if appropriate.Ethics and dissemination The review aims to strengthen findings of the primary studies it incorporates. It will synthesise existing published aggregated patient data and only present further aggregate data. Given this, no concerns are held relating to confidentiality and informed consent due to re-use of patient data.If publications or data with ethical concerns are identified, they will be excluded from the review.Results of the systematic review will be published in full and authors will engage directly with research audiences and key stakeholders to share findings.PROSPERO registration number CRD42019125013

Introduction Prevalence of overweight, obesity and diabetes are high and rising across the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries (Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates). In parallel, physical activity (PA) levels are low relative to international standards. PA aids weight control and reduces risk of non-communicable diseases including diabetes and cardiovascular disease. It is likely interventions developed elsewhere will not translate to GCC countries due to unique environmental, social and cultural factors. This protocol is for a systematic review assessing the efficacy of interventions promoting PA within GCC countries among generally healthy adults and children. The primary outcome of interest is change in objectively measured or self-reported PA levels, the secondary outcomes of interest are changes in anthropometry or chronic disease risk factors (eg, blood pressure). Interventions will be compared with no intervention or those of differing PA intensity or duration. The relationships between PA change and the following will be assessed: intervention intensity or duration, season in which intervention occurs, sex, age, nationality and sustainability over time.Methods and analysis A systematic search strategy will identify indexed publications on the efficacy of interventions promoting PA. Randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies recruiting predominantly healthy children and adults will be included. Studies of exercise rehabilitation will be excluded. Medline, Embase, Cinahl, Cochrane Library, SportDiscus, Web of Science, Index Medicus for the Eastern Mediterranean Region and Qscience will be searched. Clinical trial registries including the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov will be searched for ongoing and unpublished studies. Searches will be ran from database inception until 1 May 2020 and be supplemented by checking references of key articles. Two reviewers will independently screen identified citations then full texts using prespecified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Piloted data extraction forms will be used in duplicate. Inconsistencies in screening or data extraction will be resolved by a third investigator or study author contact. Risk of bias will be independently assessed by two reviewers using validated tools. A narrative summary of findings will be produced supplemented with meta-analyses and exploration of heterogeneity as appropriate.Ethics and Dissemination The review aims to strengthen the findings of the primary studies it incorporates and explore the impact of setting. It will synthesise existing published aggregate patient data. If publications or data with ethical concerns are identified, they will be excluded from the review. Results of the systematic review will be published in full and authors will engage directly with research audiences and key stakeholders to share findings.PROSPERO registration number 131817.