139 research outputs found
A meta-analysis comparing the prognostic accuracy of six diagnostic tests for predicting perioperative cardiac risk in patients undergoing major vascular surgery
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the discriminatory value and compare the predictive
performance of six non-invasive tests used for perioperative cardiac risk
stratification in patients undergoing major vascular surgery. DESIGN:
Meta-analysis of published reports. METHODS: Eight studies on ambulatory
electrocardiography, seven on exercise electrocardiography, eight on
radionuclide ventriculography, 23 on myocardial perfusion scintigraphy,
eight on dobutamine stress echocardiography, and four on dipyridamole
stress echocardiography were selected, using a systematic review of
published reports on preoperative non-invasive tests from the Medline
database (January 1975 and April 2001). Random effects models were used to
calculate weighted sensitivity and specificity from the published results.
Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve analysis was used
to evaluate and compare the prognostic accuracy of each test. The relative
diagnostic odds ratio was used to study the differences in diagnostic
performance of the tests. RESULTS: In all, 8119 patients participated in
the studies selected. Dobutamine stress echocardiography had the highest
weighted sensitivity of 85% (95% confidence interval (CI) 74% to 97%) and
a reasonable specificity of 70% (95% CI 62% to 79%) for predicting
perioperative cardiac death and non-fatal myocardial infarction. On SROC
analysis, there was a trend for dobutamine stress echocardiography to
perform better than the other tests, but this only reached significance
against myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (relative diagnostic odds ratio
5.5, 95% CI 2.0 to 14.9). CONCLUSIONS: On meta-analysis of six
non-invasive tests, dobutamine stress echocardiography showed a positive
trend towards better diagnostic performance than the other tests, but this
was only significant in the comparison with myocardial perfusion
scintigraphy. However, dobutamine stress echocardiography may be the
favoured test in situations where there is valvar or left ventricular
dysfunction
Cost-effectiveness of entecavir versus lamivudine for the suppression of viral replication in chronic hepatitis B Patients in Brazil
Consensus Recommendations for Clinical Outcome Assessments and Registry Development in Ataxias: Ataxia Global Initiative (AGI) Working Group Expert Guidance
To accelerate and facilitate clinical trials, the Ataxia Global Initiative (AGI) was established as a worldwide research platform for trial readiness in ataxias. One of AGI’s major goals is the harmonization and standardization of outcome assessments. Clinical outcome assessments (COAs) that describe or reflect how a patient feels or functions are indispensable for clinical trials, but similarly important for observational studies and in routine patient care. The AGI working group on COAs has defined a set of data including a graded catalog of COAs that are recommended as a standard for future assessment and sharing of clinical data and joint clinical studies. Two datasets were defined: a mandatory dataset (minimal dataset) that can ideally be obtained during a routine clinical consultation and a more demanding extended dataset that is useful for research purposes. In the future, the currently most widely used clinician-reported outcome measure (ClinRO) in ataxia, the scale for the assessment and rating of ataxia (SARA), should be developed into a generally accepted instrument that can be used in upcoming clinical trials. Furthermore, there is an urgent need (i) to obtain more data on ataxia-specific, patient-reported outcome measures (PROs), (ii) to demonstrate and optimize sensitivity to change of many COAs, and (iii) to establish methods and evidence of anchoring change in COAs in patient meaningfulness, e.g., by determining patient-derived minimally meaningful thresholds of change
Consensus Recommendations for Clinical Outcome Assessments and Registry Development in Ataxias: Ataxia Global Initiative (AGI) Working Group Expert Guidance
To accelerate and facilitate clinical trials, the Ataxia Global Initiative (AGI) was established as a worldwide research platform for trial readiness in ataxias. One of AGI's major goals is the harmonization and standardization of outcome assessments. Clinical outcome assessments (COAs) that describe or reflect how a patient feels or functions are indispensable for clinical trials, but similarly important for observational studies and in routine patient care. The AGI working group on COAs has defined a set of data including a graded catalog of COAs that are recommended as a standard for future assessment and sharing of clinical data and joint clinical studies. Two datasets were defined: a mandatory dataset (minimal dataset) that can ideally be obtained during a routine clinical consultation and a more demanding extended dataset that is useful for research purposes. In the future, the currently most widely used clinician-reported outcome measure (ClinRO) in ataxia, the scale for the assessment and rating of ataxia (SARA), should be developed into a generally accepted instrument that can be used in upcoming clinical trials. Furthermore, there is an urgent need (i) to obtain more data on ataxia-specific, patient-reported outcome measures (PROs), (ii) to demonstrate and optimize sensitivity to change of many COAs, and (iii) to establish methods and evidence of anchoring change in COAs in patient meaningfulness, e.g., by determining patient-derived minimally meaningful thresholds of change
Notizie intorno al boschi e terreni soggetti al vincolo forestale pel quinquennio 1879-1883 : legge del 20 giugno 1877, N. 3917
[s.c.
- …
