Effect of conventional combined orthodontic-surgical treatment on oral health-related quality of life: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Yi J, Lu W, Xiao J, Li X, Li Y, Zhao Z. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2019; 156:29-43.
Government National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant 81801018) and Orthodontic National Key Clinical Specialty Program of China, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University.
Systematic review with meta-analysis.

Combined Orthodontic-Surgical Treatment May Be an Effective Choice to Improve Oral Health-Related Quality of Life for Individuals Affected With Severe Dentofacial Deformities.

The variations in outcome and frequent occurrence of kidney allograft failure continue to pose important clinical and research challenges despite recent advances in kidney transplantation. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the current application of machine learning models in kidney transplantation and perform a meta-analysis of these models in the prediction of graft survival.
This review was registered with the PROSPERO database (CRD42021247469) and all peer-reviewed original articles that reported machine learning model-based prediction of graft survival were included. Quality assessment was performed by the criteria defined by Qiao and risk-of-bias assessment was performed using the PROBAST tool. The diagnostic performance of the meta-analysis was assessed by a meta-analysis of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic plot.
A total of 31 studies met the inclusion criteria for the review and 27 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Twenty-nine different machine learning models were used to predict graft survival in the included studies. Nine studies compared the predictive performance of machine learning models with traditional regression methods. Five studies had a high risk of bias and three studies had an unclear risk of bias. The area under the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.82 and the summary sensitivity and specificity of machine learning-based models were 0.81 (95 per cent c.i. 0.76 to 0.86) and 0.81 (95 per cent c.i. 0.74 to 0.86) respectively for the overall model. The diagnostic odds ratio for the overall model was 18.24 (95 per cent c.i. 11.00 to 30.16) and 29.27 (95 per cent c.i. 13.22 to 44.46) based on the sensitivity analyses.
Prediction models using machine learning methods may improve the prediction of outcomes after kidney transplantation by the integration of the vast amounts of non-linear data.

Machine learning models in predicting graft survival in kidney transplantation: meta-analysis.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a functional bowel disease characterized by abdominal pain or discomfort associated with altered bowel habits. Several clinical studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of acupuncture and moxibustion for IBS. Many systematic reviews of acupuncture and moxibustion for IBS have been published in recent years, but their results are not entirely consistent.
To evaluate the methodological, reporting, and evidence quality of systematic reviews of acupuncture and moxibustion for IBS.
Systematic reviews of acupuncture and moxibustion for IBS published before February 20, 2023 were searched in eight databases: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals, and China Biology Medicine. The keywords used for literature search were acupuncture, moxibustion, systematic review, meta-analysis, and irritable bowel syndrome.
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials of acupuncture and moxibustion for IBS were included.
Relevant information was independently extracted by two investigators. The A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2), Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA 2020), and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) were used to evaluate the methodological quality, reporting quality and evidence quality, respectively.
A total of 342 studies were retrieved and 15 systematic reviews were included. The results of AMSTAR 2 showed low methodological quality in 2 studies and very low methodological quality in the remaining 13 studies, with main issues being failure to register a protocol, incomplete search strategy, not providing a list of excluded studies, incomplete consideration of the risk of bias in the included studies, and a failure to assess the publication bias. The results of PRISMA 2020 showed seriously deficient reporting quality of 2 studies, somewhat deficient reporting quality of 12 studies, and relatively complete reporting quality of 1 study, with the main problems being lack of a complete search strategy, non-availability of a list of excluded studies with justification for their exclusion, not conducting heterogeneity and sensitivity analyses, not evaluating the credibility of the evidence, and not registering the protocol. The results of GRADE showed that the quality of the evidence is low or very low.
Most included systematic reviews interpreted findings to suggest that acupuncture and moxibustion have benefits for IBS. However, there is a need to improve the methodological, reporting and evidence quality of the systematic reviews. Larger, multicenter, rigorously designed randomized controlled trials and high-quality systematic reviews are required to obtain more robust evidence.
Ma YY, Hao Z, Chen ZY, Shen YX, Liu HR, Wu HG, Bao CH. Acupuncture and moxibustion for irritable bowel syndrome: An umbrella systematic review. J Integr Med. 2024; 22(1): 22-31.

Acupuncture and moxibustion for irritable bowel syndrome: An umbrella systematic review.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to spread worldwide. Integrated Chinese and Western medicine have had some successes in treating COVID-19.
This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of three traditional Chinese medicine drugs and three herbal formulas (3-drugs-3-formulas) in patients with COVID-19.
Relevant studies were identified from 12 electronic databases searched from their establishment to April 7, 2022.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs and cohort studies that evaluated the effects of 3-drugs-3-formulas for COVID-19. The treatment group was treated with one of the 3-drugs-3-formulas plus conventional treatment. The control group was treated with conventional treatment.
Two evaluators screened and selected literature independently, then extracted basic information and assessed risk of bias. The treatment outcome measures were duration of main symptoms, hospitalization time, aggravation rate and mortality. RevMan 5.4 was used to analyze the pooled results reported as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for continuous data and risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI for dichotomous data.
Forty-one studies with a total of 13,260 participants were identified. Our analysis suggests that compared with conventional treatment, the combination of 3-drugs-3-formulas might shorten duration of fever (MD = -1.39; 95% CI: -2.19 to -0.59; P < 0.05), cough (MD = -1.57; 95% CI: -2.16 to -0.98; P < 0.05) and fatigue (MD = -1.36; 95% CI: -2.21 to -0.51; P < 0.05), decrease length of hospital stay (MD = -2.62; 95% CI -3.52 to -1.72; P < 0.05), the time for nucleic acid conversion (MD = -2.92; 95% CI: -4.26 to -1.59; P < 0.05), aggravation rate (RR = 0.49; 95% CI: 0.38 to 0.64; P < 0.05) and mortality (RR = 0.34; 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.62; P < 0.05), and increase the recovery rate of chest computerized tomography manifestations (RR = 1.22; 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.3; P < 0.05) and total effectiveness (RR = 1.24; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.42; P < 0.05).
The 3-drugs-3-formulas can play an active role in treating all stages of COVID-19. No severe adverse events related to 3-drugs-3-formulas were observed. Hence, 3-drugs-3-formulas combined with conventional therapies have effective therapeutic value for COVID-19 patients. Further long-term high-quality studies are essential to demonstrate the clinical benefits of each formula. Please cite this article as: You LZ, Dai QQ, Zhong XY, Yu DD, Cui HR, Kong YF, Zhao MZ, Zhang XY, Xu QQ, Guan ZY, Wei XX, Zhang XC, Han SJ, Liu WJ, Chen Z, Zhang XY, Zhao C, Jin YH, Shang HC. Clinical evidence of three traditional Chinese medicine drugs and three herbal formulas for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Chinese population. J Integr Med. 2023; 21(5): 441-454.

Clinical evidence of three traditional Chinese medicine drugs and three herbal formulas for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Chinese population.

Papers