Lowering the statistical significance threshold of randomized controlled trials in three major general anesthesiology journals.

Purpose: The primary objective of our study was to determine how lowering a P value threshold from 0.05 to 0.005 would affect the statistical significance of previously published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in major anesthesiology journals.

Assessing the reporting of harms in systematic reviews focused on platelet-rich plasma therapy: a cross-sectional analysis.

Our objectives are: to evaluate the completeness of harms reporting in systematic reviews (SRs) on platelet-rich plasma therapy; to assess the overall methodological quality of the SR using AMSTAR-2 tool; to assess harms reporting overlap in primary studies between SRs. The authors searched five database systems for relevant literature on platelet rich plasma therapy. The authors screened and extracted in masked, duplicate fashion.

Assessing the Reporting of Harms in Systematic Reviews Focused on the Therapeutic and Cosmetic Uses of Botulinum Toxin.

Background And Objective: The expanding use of botulinum toxin (BoNT) in medical practice demonstrates the need to highlight whether there is adequate information regarding its safety profile. The aim of our study was to identify completeness of harms reporting for BoNT treatment within systematic reviews (SRs), assess quality of SRs using the AMSTAR-2 tool, and determine the degree of overlap among primary studies within each SR.

Methods: On May 31, 2022, we searched Embase, Epistemonikos, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for SRs on BoNT therapy.

Harms reporting by systematic reviews for functional endoscopic sinus surgery: a cross-sectional analysis.

Objectives: To evaluate the completeness of harms reporting in systematic reviews (SRs) pertaining to functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS).

Methods: Using a cross-sectional study design, we performed a comprehensive search using MEDLINE (PubMed and Ovid), EMBASE, Epistemonikos, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases for SRs regarding FESS on May 15th, 2022. Returns were screened and data were extracted in a masked, duplicate manner.

Assessing the Reporting and Frequency of Harms in Systematic Reviews Focused on Minimally Invasive Hysterectomies: A Cross-sectional Analysis.

Objective: To assess the quality of harms reporting in systematic reviews (SRs) regarding minimally invasive hysterectomies (MIHs).

Data Sources: We performed a cross-sectional analysis on SRs addressing MIHs to assess completeness of harms reporting. Hysterectomies are common gynecologic procedures and are associated with complications.

An analysis of harms reporting in systematic reviews regarding ketorolac for management of perioperative pain.

Background: Owing to the frequent perioperative use of ketorolac tromethamine and its ability to minimise postoperative opioid requirements, it is important to continually reassess harms associated with its use. Our primary objective was to investigate the extent of harms reporting in systematic reviews (SRs) on ketorolac for perioperative pain.

Methods: In May 2022, we conducted a search of major databases, MEDLINE (PubMed and Ovid), Embase, Epistemonikos, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify eligible SRs on ketorolac for perioperative pain.

The impact of COVID-19 on otolaryngology research: a cross-sectional analysis of discontinued trials.

Context: The COVID-19 pandemic has reduced the capacity to conduct medical research due to recruitment difficulties, supply chain shortages, and funding deficits. The clinical practice of otolaryngology was especially impacted due to a reduction in elective procedures, such as facial plastic surgeries and vocal fold injections.

Objectives: The primary objective was to examine the extent of clinical trial (CTs) disruption secondary to the COVID-19 pandemic in the field of otolaryngology.

Influence of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Clinical Trial Discontinuation in Anesthesiology: Cross-sectional Analysis.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic drastically altered perioperative medical practice owing to safety concerns, postponing elective or nonemergent procedures, supply chain shortages, and reallocating perioperative staff to care for patients with COVID-19. However, the impact of the pandemic on the conduct on anesthesiology clinical research is unknown.

Objective: The primary objective was to quantify the magnitude of the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on anesthesiology clinical research.

The use of telecommunication and virtualization among ongoing and discontinued COVID-19 clinical trials: A cross-sectional analysis.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted clinical research due to safety measures such as social distancing and lockdowns. However, developing treatments for COVID-19 relies on conducting clinical trials. Using telemedicine or virtual methods may support ongoing trials and limit the pandemic's impact on clinical research.

Tonsillar-related pathologies: An analysis of the evidence underpinning management recommendations.

Objective: Evidence-based decision making is crucial in reducing the health and economic burdens imposed by tonsillar-related pathologies. Clinical practice guidelines are used to guide these decisions; however, uptake of recommendations in these guidelines is low. Systematic reviews are the highest level of evidence used to influence guideline recommendations; therefore, improving the reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews related to tonsillar-related pathologies may improve guideline uptake and patient care.

Evaluation of Spin in the Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Focused on Tinnitus.

Hypothesis: The objective was to investigate the prevalence of spin in abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses covering the treatment of tinnitus. We hypothesized that spin would be present in these articles and a significant relationship would exist between spin usage and extracted study characteristics.

Background: Spin, the misrepresentation of study findings, can alter a clinician's interpretation of a study's results, potentially affecting patient care.