China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Cockroach and other inhalant insect allergens
Published in Richard F. Lockey, Dennis K. Ledford, Allergens and Allergen Immunotherapy, 2020
Given the high efficacy of properly implemented bait treatments, it is important to note several inadequacies in how they are treated in some reviews, meta-analyses, and even policy decisions [114,117]. First, pest control interventions that target different pests are often grouped as “multicomponent interventions,” with the tacit expectation of equivalent outcomes with all pests. In fact, acaricides targeting house dust mites are not nearly as effective as baits targeting cockroaches, and it is nearly impossible to eradicate mite populations with pesticides alone. It is not surprising therefore that acaricide-based interventions have contributed little to allergen reductions and clinical outcomes. Second, the requirements in randomized controlled trials of blinding participants and study personnel, and of placebo controls, severely limit the number of studies included in reviews and meta-analyses. The requirement for randomized controlled trials, in itself, disqualifies many excellent entomological interventions on the effectiveness of innovative tactics for cockroach control. Blinding participants is clearly required when they are the target of the intervention. But the target of cockroach interventions is the pest population, not participants, and blinding, while useful, is neither practical nor useful if unbiased assessment tools (e.g., sticky traps) are used to quantify effectiveness. Finally, placebo treatments with baits lacking insecticide are ill-advised, because they supplement the home environment with highly palatable cockroach food that can unintentionally increase the pest population.
Rate Ratios and Differences
Published in Peter Cummings, Analysis of Incidence Rates, 2019
Randomized controlled trials have the advantage that randomization, will, on average, create groups of subjects who are similar regarding not only measured confounding variables, but also similar regarding variables that we cannot measure or have not even considered. Thus, any comparison should, on average, be free of confounding bias. In any particular trial, of course, especially a small trial, confounding bias could be present. Selection bias can arise due to dropouts. Measurement error can also bias a randomized trial. For example, the outcome might be a pain score reported by trial subjects. If some patients deduce which arm of the trial they are in (treatment versus placebo), this might influence their reports of pain.
Quantitative approaches in sport-related concussion research
Published in Gordon A. Bloom, Jeffrey G. Caron, Psychological Aspects of Sport-Related Concussions, 2019
Meredith Rocchi, Camille Guertin, Scott Rathwell
Randomized controlled trials are preferred because, through randomization, they minimize the risk that confounding variables impact the conclusions of the study. The use of a control condition ensures that variations due to extraneous factors are accounted for within the study design. The prospective design also minimizes recall error and selection bias for participants, thus improving the fidelity of the results. Finally, the best advantage is that the study design allows for causal inferences. For instance, Swartz and colleagues (2015) conducted a randomized controlled trial in a concussion prevention setting to test a helmetless-tackling behavior intervention for collegiate football players. A sample of 50 players were randomized to either the intervention (25 players) or control (25 players) group. The intervention group participated in a five-minute tackling drill without their helmets or shoulder pads twice a week during the preseason and once per week throughout the season. During the same period, the control group performed noncontact football skills. Their frequency of head impacts was recorded with an impact sensor in all games. Differences between the two groups were examined, and the results supported that a helmetless-tackling training intervention reduced head impacts in collegiate football players within one football season.
Reduction of proteinuria in patients with diabetes kidney disease and dysautonomia through measures aimed at controlling supine hypertension
Published in Chronobiology International, 2022
Guilherme Palhares Aversa Santos, Douglas Inomata Cardoso da Silva, Vanessa Burgugi Banin, Silméia Garcia Zanati Bazan, Pasqual Barretti, Roberto Jorge da Silva Franco, Luis Cuadrado Martin
The current study has some limitations. This is not a randomized controlled trial, this is a pragmatic study, therefore, a hypothesis generator. We made the changes in therapy according to the need of the patients: bed inclination in parallel with changes in time of medications. For that reason, we do not can answer the question about what is the individual contribution of each therapeutic modality to the decrease in proteinuria. The small sample size emphasizes the need to confirm these results in a larger randomized controlled trial. Another limitation is the heterogeneity between groups in regard of blood pressure, sex and basal proteinuria. To overcome this issue, we perform a multiple regression analysis in which the intervention maintains the association with proteinuria reduction even when adjusted to these confounding variables.
Transitioning children from tube to oral feeding: a systematic review of current treatment approaches
Published in Speech, Language and Hearing, 2021
Sarah Ann Taylor, Javier Virues-Ortega, Rachel Anderson
In addition, prior reviews have focused on single-subject design studies only (Sharp, Jaquess, et al., 2010), or group design studies only (Lukens & Silverman, 2014; Sharp, Volkert, et al., 2016). Single-subject experimental designs typically involve small numbers of participants, with each participant serving as their own control (Kazdin, 2011). Visually displayed data from each participant are then compared across experimental phases in order to identify clinically important effects (see for example Smith, 2012). By contrast, group designs typically involve a relatively larger n and the use of statistics to evaluate changes in performance after treatment. The randomized controlled trial is the gold standard of group designs, and compares the performance of participants receiving the intervention with a control group that has not received the intervention. As the literature base for tube dependency has grown, it is important to survey both single-subject and group design studies, to obtain a broader view of available treatments. For example, behavioural interventions are often reported in single-subject experimental design studies (Sharp, Jaquess, et al., 2010). In comparison, approaches that include the reduction of tube feeds to stimulate hunger (Hunger Provocation) are more often reported in group-design studies (Lukens & Silverman, 2014).
The role of alpha lipoic acid in female and male infertility: a systematic review
Published in Gynecological Endocrinology, 2021
Chiara Di Tucci, Giulia Galati, Giulia Mattei, Valentina Bonanni, Oriana Capri, Renzo D’Amelio, Ludovico Muzii, Pierluigi Benedetti Panici
A literature search was performed in the PubMed database, spanning from 2001 to May 2020. The applied search heading included combinations of the following terms: ‘alpha lipoic acid’, ‘chronic pelvic pain’, ‘endometriosis’, ‘female infertility’, ‘follicular fluid’, ‘lipoic acid’, ‘male infertility’, ‘oocytes’, ‘semen’, ‘sperm’ and ‘subfertile man’. The total number of references found after automatically and manually excluding duplicates was 180. After primary and secondary screening, 28 articles were selected. The search was limited to clinical studies published in English. Titles and abstracts were screened to identify relevant articles. References and related articles were checked. Observational studies (such as cohort or case control studies), randomized controlled trials, prospective clinical trials and case reports were included. For multiple publications of the same data set, only the most relevant studies were included. Studies in animal models, in vitro studies of mechanisms of action, biochemical studies and pharmacological studies were included only if they have scientific relevance. Studies not printed in English language were excluded.