Evaluating agreement between evidence from randomised controlled trials and cohort studies in nutrition: a meta-research replication study.

This meta-research study aims to evaluate the agreement of effect estimates between bodies of evidence (BoE) from RCTs and cohort studies included in the same nutrition evidence synthesis, to identify factors associated with disagreement, and to replicate the findings of a previous study. We searched Medline, Epistemonikos and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for nutrition systematic reviews that included both RCTs and cohort studies for the same patient-relevant outcome or intermediate-disease marker. We rated similarity of PI/ECO (population, intervention/exposure, comparison, outcome) between BoE from RCTs and cohort studies.

An empirical evaluation of the impact scenario of pooling bodies of evidence from randomized controlled trials and cohort studies in medical research.

Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies are the most common study design types used to assess treatment effects of medical interventions. We aimed to hypothetically pool bodies of evidence (BoE) from RCTs with matched BoE from cohort studies included in the same systematic review.

Methods: BoE derived from systematic reviews of RCTs and cohort studies published in the 13 medical journals with the highest impact factor were considered.

Evaluating agreement between bodies of evidence from randomized controlled trials and cohort studies in medical research: a meta-epidemiological study.

Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies are the most common study design types used to assess the treatment effects of medical interventions. To evaluate the agreement of effect estimates between bodies of evidence (BoE) from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies and to identify factors associated with disagreement.

Methods: Systematic reviews were published in the 13 medical journals with the highest impact factor identified through a MEDLINE search.

The use of the GRADE dose-response gradient domain in nutrition evidence syntheses varies considerably.

Objectives: This study aimed to identify and describe the use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) dose-response gradient domain to upgrade the certainty of evidence (CoE) in nutrition systematic reviews (SRs).

Study Design And Setting: We searched for SRs of observational studies of nutrition topics that used GRADE and upgraded the CoE of at least one outcome for a dose-response gradient or reported reasons for not upgrading.

Results: Within eligible SRs (21/281), 123 of 371 outcomes were upgraded for a dose-response gradient.

Approach bias modification training in bulimia nervosa and binge-eating disorder: A pilot randomized controlled trial.

Objective: Bulimia nervosa (BN) and binge-eating disorder (BED) are associated with poorly controlled approach behavior toward food resulting in binge eating. Approach bias modification (ABM) may reduce these automatic action tendencies (i.e.

Food cue-induced craving in individuals with bulimia nervosa and binge-eating disorder.

Individuals with bulimia nervosa (BN) or binge-eating disorder (BED) experience more frequent and intense food cravings than individuals without binge eating. However, it is currently unclear whether they also show larger food cue-induced increases in craving (i.e.