Effects of Caffeine Supplementation on Physical Performance of Soccer Players: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 194173812199871
Author(s):  
Raphael Einsfeld Simões Ferreira ◽  
Rafael Leite Pacheco ◽  
Carolina de Oliveira Cruz Latorraca ◽  
Rachel Riera ◽  
Ricardo Guilherme Eid ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Perceived Exertion ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Rating Of Perceived Exertion ◽  
Soccer Players ◽  
Meta Analyses

Context: Caffeine is 1 of the most popular supplements consumed by athletes, and the evidence for improving soccer performance remains limited. Objective: To investigate and update the effects (benefits and harms) of caffeine to improve performance on soccer players. Data Sources: Electronic search in Medline (via PubMed), CENTRAL, Embase, SPORTDiscus, and LILACS, from inception to March 28, 2020. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of caffeine on the performance of soccer players. Study Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis. Level of Evidence: Level 1. Data Extraction: Data extraction was conducted independently by 2 authors using a piloted form. We assessed methodological quality (Cochrane risk-of-bias [RoB] table) and the certainty of the evidence (GRADE [Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation] approach). Results: Sixteen RCTs were included. Overall methodological quality was classified as unclear to low risk of bias. When assessing aerobic endurance, meta-analyses did not demonstrate the differences between caffeine and placebo (mean difference [MD], 44.9 m; 95% confidence interval [CI], −77.7 to 167.6). Similarly, no difference was observed during time to fatigue test (MD, 169.8 seconds; 95% CI, −71.8 to 411.6). Considering anaerobic power, meta-analyses also did not find differences for vertical jump (MD, 1.01 cm; 95% CI, −0.68 to 2.69) and repeated sprint tests (MD, −0.02 seconds; 95% CI, −0.09 to 0.04), as well as reaction time agility test (MD, 0.02 seconds; 95% CI, −0.01 to 0.04) and rating of perceived exertion (MD, 0.16 points; 95% CI, −0.55 to 0.87). Regarding safety, a few minor adverse events were reported. Based on the GRADE approach, the certainty of this evidence was classified as very low to low. Conclusions: We found no significant improvement in soccer-related performance with caffeine compared with placebo or no intervention. However, caffeine appears to be safe.

scholarly journals Racecadotril for acute diarrhoea in children: systematic review and meta-analyses

2015 ◽  
Vol 101 (3) ◽  
pp. 234-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morris Gordon ◽  
Anthony Akobeng
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Acute Diarrhoea ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Duration Of Symptoms ◽  
Duration Of Illness ◽  
Significant Difference

ObjectiveRacecadotril is an antisecretory agent that can prevent fluid/electrolyte depletion from the bowel as a result of acute diarrhoea without affecting intestinal motility. An up-to-date systematic review is indicated to summarise the evidence on racecadotril for the treatment of acute diarrhoea in children.DesignA Cochrane format systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Data extraction and assessment of methodological quality were performed independently by two reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool.PatientsChildren with acute diarrhoea, as defined by the primary studies.InterventionsRCTs comparing racecadotril with placebo or other interventions.Main outcome measursDuration of illness, stool output/volume and adverse events.ResultsSeven RCTs were included, five comparing racecadotril with placebo or no intervention, one with pectin/kaolin and one with loperamide. Moderate to high risk of bias was present in all studies. There was no significant difference in efficacy or adverse events between racecadotril and loperamide. A meta-analysis of three studies with 642 participants showed significantly shorter duration of symptoms with racecadotril compared with placebo (mean difference −53.48 h, 95% CI −65.64 to −41.33). A meta-analysis of five studies with 949 participants showed no significant difference in adverse events between racecadotril and placebo (risk ratio 0.99, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.34).ConclusionsThere is some evidence that racecadotril is more effective than placebo or no intervention in reducing the duration of illness and stool output in children with acute diarrhoea. However, the overall quality of the evidence is limited due to sparse data, heterogeneity and risk of bias. Racecadotril appears to be safe and well tolerated.

scholarly journals Aromatherapy for Symptom Relief in Patients with Burn: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Hye Won Lee ◽  
Lin Ang ◽  
Jung Tae Kim ◽  
Myeong Soo Lee
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Symptom Relief ◽  
Routine Care ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Review Author ◽  
Beneficial Effects ◽  
Study Selection ◽  
Meta Analyses

Background and Objectives: This review aimed to provide an updated review of evidence regarding the effects of aromatherapy in relieving symptoms of burn injuries, focusing on pain and physiological distress. Materials and Methods: Fifteen databases (including five English databases, four Korean medical databases, and four Iranian databases) and trial registries were searched for studies published between their dates of inception and July 2021. Two review authors individually performed study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment, and any discrepancies were solved by a third review author. Results: Eight RCTs met our inclusion criteria and were analyzed in this updated systematic review. Our meta-analyses revealed that inhaled aromatherapy plus routine care showed beneficial effects in relieving pain after dressing, as compared to placebo plus routine care (p < 0.00001) and routine care alone (p = 0.02). Additionally, inhaled aromatherapy plus routine care (p < 0.00001) and aromatherapy massage plus routine care (p < 0.0001) also showed superior effects in calming anxiety, as compared to routine care alone. None of the included studies reported on AEs. Overall, the risk of bias across the studies was concerning. Conclusions: This updated review and synthesis of the studies had brought a more detailed understanding of the potential application of aromatherapy for easing the pain and anxiety of burn patients.

scholarly journals Vaccines to prevent COVID-19: a protocol for a living systematic review with network meta-analysis including individual patient data (The LIVING VACCINE Project)

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Kwasi Korang ◽  
Sophie Juul ◽  
Emil Eik Nielsen ◽  
Joshua Feinberg ◽  
Faiza Siddiqui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Individual Patient Data ◽  
Viral Vector ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Harmful Effects

Abstract Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) which has rapidly spread worldwide. Several human randomized clinical trials assessing potential vaccines are currently underway. There is an urgent need for a living systematic review that continuously assesses the beneficial and harmful effects of all available vaccines for COVID-19. Methods/design We will conduct a living systematic review based on searches of major medical databases (e.g., MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL) and clinical trial registries from their inception onwards to identify relevant randomized clinical trials. We will update the literature search once a week to continuously assess if new evidence is available. Two review authors will independently extract data and conduct risk of bias assessments. We will include randomized clinical trials comparing any vaccine aiming to prevent COVID-19 (including but not limited to messenger RNA; DNA; non-replicating viral vector; replicating viral vector; inactivated virus; protein subunit; dendritic cell; other vaccines) with any comparator (placebo; “active placebo;” no intervention; standard care; an “active” intervention; another vaccine for COVID-19) for participants in all age groups. Primary outcomes will be all-cause mortality; a diagnosis of COVID-19; and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes will be quality of life and non-serious adverse events. The living systematic review will include aggregate data meta-analyses, trial sequential analyses, network meta-analyses, and individual patient data meta-analyses. Within-study bias will be assessed using Cochrane risk of bias tool. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) and Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) approaches will be used to assess certainty of evidence. Observational studies describing harms identified during the search for trials will also be included and described and analyzed separately. Discussion COVID-19 has become a pandemic with substantial mortality. A living systematic review assessing the beneficial and harmful effects of different vaccines is urgently needed. This living systematic review will regularly inform best practice in vaccine prevention and clinical research of this highly prevalent disease. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020196492

scholarly journals Acupuncture for Managing Cancer-Related Insomnia: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tae-Young Choi ◽  
Jong In Kim ◽  
Hyun-Ja Lim ◽  
Myeong Soo Lee
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Sleep Quality ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sham Acupuncture ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
The Other ◽  
Level Of Evidence

Background. Insomnia is a prominent complaint of cancer patients that can significantly affect their quality of life and symptoms related to sleep quality. Conventional drug approaches have a low rate of success in alleviating those suffering insomnia. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of acupuncture in the management of cancer-related insomnia. Methods. A total of 12 databases were searched from their inception through January 2016 without language restriction. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs were included if acupuncture was used as the sole intervention or as an adjunct to another standard treatment for any cancer-related insomnia. The data extraction and the risk of bias assessments were performed by 2 independent reviewers. Results. Of the 90 studies screened, 6 RCTs were included. The risk of bias was generally unclear or low. Three RCTs showed equivalent effects on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and 2 RCTs showed the similar effects on response rate to those of conventional drugs at the end of treatment. The other RCT showed acupuncture was better than hormone therapy in the numbers of hours slept each night and number of times woken up each night. The 3 weeks of follow-up in 2 RCTs showed superior effects of acupuncture compared with conventional drugs, and a meta-analysis showed significant effects of acupuncture. Two RCTs tested the effects of acupuncture on cancer-related insomnia compared with sham acupuncture. One RCT showed favourable effects, while the other trial failed to do so. Conclusion. There is a low level of evidence that acupuncture may be superior to sham acupuncture, drugs or hormones therapy. However, the number of studies and effect size are small for clinical significance. Further clinical trials are warranted.

Associations between anger and chronic primary pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomonori Adachi ◽  
Keiko Yamada ◽  
Haruo Fujino ◽  
Kiyoka Enomoto ◽  
Masahiko Shibata
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Negative Emotion ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Perceived Injustice ◽  
Qualitative Synthesis ◽  
Action Tendency ◽  
Comprehensive Search ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Objectives Anger is a negative emotion characterized by antagonism toward someone or something, is rooted in an appraisal or attribution of wrongdoing, and is accompanied by an action tendency to undo the wrongdoing. Anger is prevalent in individuals with chronic pain, especially those with chronic primary pain. The associations between anger and pain-related outcomes (e.g., pain intensity, disability) have been examined in previous studies. However, to our knowledge, no systematic review or meta-analysis has summarized the findings of anger-pain associations through a focus on chronic primary pain. Hence, we sought to summarize the findings on the associations of anger-related variables with pain and disability in individuals with chronic primary pain. Methods All studies reporting at least one association between anger-related variables and the two pain-related outcomes in individuals with chronic primary pain were eligible. We searched electronic databases using keywords relevant to anger and chronic primary pain. Multiple reviewers independently screened for study eligibility, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment. Results Thirty-eight studies were included in this systematic review, of which 20 provided data for meta-analyses (2,682 participants with chronic primary pain). Of the included studies, 68.4% had a medium methodological quality. Evidence showed mixed results in the qualitative synthesis. Most anger-related variables had significant positive pooled correlations with small to moderate effect sizes for pain and disability. Conclusions Through a comprehensive search, we identified several key anger-related variables associated with pain-related outcomes. In particular, associations with perceived injustice were substantial.

P14.71 An assessment of the reporting and methodological quality of meningioma systematic reviews and meta-analyses

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. ii51-ii52
Author(s):  
A M George ◽  
S Gupta ◽  
S M Keshwara ◽  
M A Mustafa ◽  
C S Gillespie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Neurofibromatosis Type ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Measurement Tool ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract BACKGROUND Systematic reviews and meta-analyses constitute the highest level of research evidence and for a disease with limited clinical trial activity, are often relied upon to help inform clinical practice. This review of reviews evaluates both the reporting & methodological quality of meningioma evidence syntheses. MATERIAL AND METHODS Potentially eligible meningioma reviews published between 1st January 1990 and 31st December 2020 were identified from eight electronic databases. Inclusion required the study to meet the Cochrane guideline definition of a systematic review or meta-analysis. Reviews concerning neurofibromatosis type 2, spinal and pediatric meningiomas were excluded. The reporting and methodological quality of articles were assessed against the following modified guidelines: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA), A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR2) and the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) guidelines. RESULTS 117 systematic reviews were identified, 57 of which included meta-analysis (48.7%). The number of meningioma systematic reviews published each year has increased with 63 studies (53.9%) published between 01/2018 and 12/2020. A median of 17 studies (IQR 9–29) were included per review. Impact factor of journals publishing a systematic review with or without a meta-analysis was similar (median 2.3 vs 1.8, P=0.397). The mean PRISMA scores for systematic reviews with a meta-analysis was 21.11 (SD 4.1, 78% adherence) and without was 13.89 (SD 3.4, 63% adherence). Twenty-nine systematic reviews with meta-analysis (51%) and 11 without meta-analysis (18%) achieved greater than 80% adherence to PRISMA recommendations. Methodological quality assessment using AMSTAR2 revealed one study (0.9%) as high quality whilst 111 (94.8%) studies were graded as critically low. One hundred and two articles (87.2%) did not utilize a comprehensive search strategy as defined by the AMSTAR2 tool. Ninety-nine studies (84.6%) obtained a high level of concern for potential bias as per the ROBIS assessment. One hundred and eight articles (92.3%) failed to present information that a protocol had been established prior to study commencement and 76 articles (65.0%) did not conduct a risk of bias assessment. Across the three tools, domains relating to the establishment of a protocol prior to review commencement and conducting appropriate risk of bias assessments were frequently low scoring. CONCLUSION Overall reporting and methodological quality of meningioma systematic reviews was sub-optimal. Established critical appraisal tools and reporting guidelines should be utilized a priori to assist in producing high-quality systematic reviews.

scholarly journals Association between vision impairment and mortality: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. e037556
Author(s):  
Joshua R Ehrlich ◽  
Jacqueline Ramke ◽  
David Macleod ◽  
Bonnielin K Swenor ◽  
Helen Burn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Global Health ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Vision Impairment ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Assessment Development ◽  
Evaluation Approach ◽  
Meta Analyses

IntroductionDue to growth and ageing of the world’s population, the number of individuals worldwide with vision impairment (VI) and blindness is projected to increase rapidly over the coming decades. VI and blindness are an important cause of years lived with disability. However, the association of VI and blindness with mortality, including the risk of bias in published studies and certainty of the evidence, has not been adequately studied in an up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis.Methods and analysisThe planned systematic review and meta-analysis will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Databases, including MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid and Global Health, will be searched for relevant studies. Two reviewers will then screen studies and review full texts to identify studies for inclusion. Data extraction will be performed, and for included studies, the risk of bias and certainty of the evidence will be assessed using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The prognostic factor in this study is visual function, which must have been measured using a standard objective ophthalmic clinical or research instrument. We will use standard criteria from WHO to categorise VI and blindness. All-cause mortality may be assessed by any method one or more years after baseline assessment of vision. Results from included studies will be meta-analysed according to relevant sections of the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist.Ethics and disseminationThis review will only include published data; therefore, ethics approval will not be sought. The findings of this review and meta-analysis will be published in an open-access, peer-reviewed journal and will be included in the ongoing Lancet Global Health Commission on Global Eye Health.

scholarly journals The Effects of Caffeine Ingestion on Measures of Rowing Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Nutrients ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jozo Grgic ◽  
Francisco Javier Diaz-Lara ◽  
Juan Del Coso ◽  
Michael J. Duncan ◽  
Jason Tallis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Perceived Exertion ◽  
Minute Ventilation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Rating Of Perceived Exertion ◽  
Caffeine Ingestion ◽  
Rowing Performance ◽  
Rowing Ergometer

The purpose of this paper was to conduct a systematic review and a meta-analysis of studies examining the acute effects of caffeine ingestion on measures of rowing performance. Crossover and placebo-controlled experiments that investigated the effects of caffeine ingestion on measures of rowing performance were included. The PEDro checklist was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Seven studies of good and excellent methodological quality were included. None of the included studies examined on-water rowing. The majority of studies that were included in the meta-analysis used a 2000m rowing distance with only one using 1000m distance. Results of the main meta-analysis indicated that caffeine enhances performance on a rowing ergometer compared to placebo with a mean difference of −4.1 s (95% confidence interval (CI): −6.4, −1.8 s). These values remained consistent in the analysis in which the study that used a 1000m distance was excluded (mean difference: −4.3 s; 95% CI: −6.9, −1.8 s). We also found a significant increase in mean power (mean difference: 5.7 W; 95% CI: 2.1, 9.3 W) and minute ventilation (mean difference: 3.4 L/min; 95% CI: 1.7, 5.1 L/min) following caffeine ingestion. No significant differences between caffeine and placebo were found for the rating of perceived exertion, oxygen consumption, respiratory exchange ratio, and heart rate. This meta-analysis found that acute caffeine ingestion improves 2000m rowing ergometer performance by ~4 s. Our results support the use of caffeine pre-exercise as an ergogenic aid for rowing performance.

Is dental agenesis associated with craniofacial morphology pattern? A systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (5) ◽  
pp. 534-543
Author(s):  
Amanda Silva Rodrigues ◽  
Leonardo Santos Antunes ◽  
Liz Helena Moraes Pinheiro ◽  
Ludmila Silva Guimarães ◽  
José De Albuquerque Calansans-Maia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Craniofacial Morphology ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Manual Search ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background/objective Craniofacial discrepancies have been associated with congenital dental anomalies. The aim of this study was to determine if there is any scientific evidence in the literature regarding the association between dental agenesis and craniofacial morphology. Materials and methods A systematic review and meta-analysis following the PRISMA Statement were conducted and registered in PROSPERO database. A broad search was conducted on databases (PubMed, Virtual Health Library, Web of Science, and Scopus) and grey literature. Articles that were selected based on predetermined eligibility criteria were assessed for quality and risk of bias according to the guidelines described by Folkes and Fulton. Those articles with similarities were submitted to meta-analysis using the RevMan 5.3 program. The certainty of the evidence was tested using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Results An electronic search of 975 articles resulted in 12 articles. These and four articles identified through manual search were eligible to be assessed for methodological quality and the risk of bias. Eleven articles presented moderate to high methodological quality. The included articles observed a reduced mandibular plane, a smaller maxilla and more differences with the increase in the severity of dental agenesis. Seven articles were included in the meta-analyses. Dental agenesis presented smaller SNA angle (P &lt; 0.0001/CI −1.74 [−2.55, −0.92]) with moderate certainty of the evidence; and smaller ANB angle (P = 0.01/CI −0.80 [−1.44, −0.17]), with low certainty of the evidence. Conclusions This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that dental agenesis may be associated with specific craniofacial morphology. Further studies are necessary due to the variation of the certainty of the evidence. Conflict of interest none declared. Registration PROSPERO (CRD42017055882).

scholarly journals Use of corticoids and non-steroidal anti-inflammatories in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: Systematic review and network meta-analysis

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. e0248866
Author(s):  
Mariana Del Grossi Paglia ◽  
Marcus Tolentino Silva ◽  
Luciane Cruz Lopes ◽  
Silvio Barberato-Filho ◽  
Lauren Giustti Mazzei ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Active Controls ◽  
Better Than

Evidence on the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and corticoids for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is inconclusive and is not up to date. This systematic review assessed the effectiveness and safety of these anti-inflammatories (AI) in the treatment of RA. COCHRANE (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and Virtual Health Library were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT) with adults which used AI (dose represented in mg/day) compared with placebo or active controls and was carried out up to December of 2019. Reviewers, in pairs and independently, selected studies, performed the data extraction and assessed the risk of bias. The quality of the evidence was assessed by GRADE. Network meta-analyses were performed using the Stata v.14.2. Twenty-six articles were selected (NSAIDs = 21 and corticoids = 5). Naproxen 1,000 improved physical function, reduced pain and the number of painful joints compared to placebo. Etoricoxib 90 reduced the number of painful joints compared to placebo. Naproxen 750 reduced the number of swollen joints, except for etoricoxib 90. Naproxen 1,000, etoricoxib 90 and diclofenac 150 were better than placebo regarding patient assessment. Assessment physician showed that NSAIDs were better than placebo. Meta-analyses were not performed for prednisolone and prednisone. Naproxen 1,000 was the most effective drug and celecoxib 200 showed fewer adverse events. However, the low quality of the evidence observed for the outcomes with NSAIDs, the absence of meta-analyses to assess the outcomes with corticoids, as well as the risk of bias observed, indicate that future RCT can confirm such findings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document