BACKGROUND: The demand for high-quality systematic literature reviews (SRs) for evidence-based medical decision-making is growing. SRs are costly and require the scarce resource of highly skilled reviewers. Automation technology has been proposed to save workload and expedite the SR workflow. We aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of SR automation studies indexed in PubMed, focusing on the applicability of these technologies in real world practice.
METHODS: In November 2022, we extracted, combined, and ran an integrated PubMed search for SRs on SR automation. Full-text English peer-reviewed articles were included if they reported studies on SR automation methods (SSAM), or automated SRs (ASR). Bibliographic analyses and knowledge-discovery studies were excluded. Record screening was performed by single reviewers, and the selection of full text papers was performed in duplicate. We summarized the publication details, automated review stages, automation goals, applied tools, data sources, methods, results, and Google Scholar citations of SR automation studies.
RESULTS: From 5321 records screened by title and abstract, we included 123 full text articles, of which 108 were SSAM and 15 ASR. Automation was applied for search (19/123, 15.4%), record screening (89/123, 72.4%), full-text selection (6/123, 4.9%), data extraction (13/123, 10.6%), risk of bias assessment (9/123, 7.3%), evidence synthesis (2/123, 1.6%), assessment of evidence quality (2/123, 1.6%), and reporting (2/123, 1.6%). Multiple SR stages were automated by 11 (8.9%) studies. The performance of automated record screening varied largely across SR topics. In published ASR, we found examples of automated search, record screening, full-text selection, and data extraction. In some ASRs, automation fully complemented manual reviews to increase sensitivity rather than to save workload. Reporting of automation details was often incomplete in ASRs.
CONCLUSIONS: Automation techniques are being developed for all SR stages, but with limited real-world adoption. Most SR automation tools target single SR stages, with modest time savings for the entire SR process and varying sensitivity and specificity across studies. Therefore, the real-world benefits of SR automation remain uncertain. Standardizing the terminology, reporting, and metrics of study reports could enhance the adoption of SR automation techniques in real-world practice.

UNASSIGNED: The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the impact of dextrose prolotherapy on individuals diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis (KOA).
UNASSIGNED: To conduct a thorough investigation, a variety of leading international databases were checked, including PubMed (Medline), Scopus, Web of Sciences, EMBASE (Elsevier), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library. The search covered a period from January 2000 to the end of June 2023, which facilitated the collection of relevant studies.
UNASSIGNED: The findings of the study revealed that when the studies utilizing the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Index tool (WOMAC) were combined, patients with KOA who received prolotherapy experienced an improvement in function compared with those who received other treatments (SMD: 0.20; 95% Confidence Interval [1]: -0.11, 0.51; p value SMD = 0.221; I 2: 78.49%; p heterogeneity < 0.001). Additionally, there was a decrease in mean pain and stiffness among patients who received prolotherapy compared with those who received other treatments or a placebo [(SMD: -0.95; 95% CI: -1.14, -0.76; p value SMD < 0.001; I 2: 59.35%; p heterogeneity = 0.070) and (SMD: -0.21; 95% CI: -0.32, -0.10; p value SMD < 0.001; I 2: 88.11%; p heterogeneity < 0.001)]. Furthermore, based on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score, there was a reduction of 0.81 units out of 10 in mean pain for patients with KOA who received prolotherapy (SMD: -0.81; 95% CI: -5.63, 4.10; p value SMD = 0.693; I 2: 48.54%; p heterogeneity = 0.08).
UNASSIGNED: Drawing from the data analysis performed in this meta-analysis, it is apparent that dextrose prolotherapy exhibits promising effectiveness in reducing joint pain and stiffness, as well as improving functional performance in individuals suffering from KOA. Furthermore, it is recommended that forthcoming studies incorporate follow-up periods to guide decisions concerning the duration of prolotherapy\'s effects.

OBJECTIVE: Localized exercises are employed to activate, train, or restore the function of particular muscles and they are usually considered as part of treating individuals suffering low back pain. So, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of specific exercises in general population with non-specific low back pain (LBP).
METHODS: We conducted electronic searches in MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science (WoS), and Google scholar from January 1990 to June 2021. Initially, 47,740 records were identified. Following the removal of duplicates, 32,138 records were left. After reviewing titles and abstracts, 262 papers were chosen for thorough assessment. Among these, 208 studies were excluded, resulting in 54 trials meeting the inclusion criteria for this study. Additionally, 46 of these trials were randomized controlled trials and were further evaluated for the meta-analysis. We included trials investigating the effectiveness of exercise therapy, including isometric activation of deep trunk muscles, strengthening exercises, stabilization exercises, stretching exercises, and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation exercises (PNF) in LBP patients. The primary outcome was pain intensity, measured using tools such as the visual analogue scale (VAS) and numeric pain rating scale (NPRS). The secondary outcome was disability, assessed through instruments such as the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The quality of the eligible studies was assessed using the Verhagen tool, and the level of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach.
RESULTS: Based on the Verhagen tool, 46 trials (85.2%) were categorized as having low methodological quality, while 8 studies (14.8%) were considered to have medium methodological quality. The meta-analysis indicated a small efficacy in favor of isometric activation of deep trunk muscles (-0.37, 95% CI: -0.88 to 0.13), a moderate efficacy in favor of stabilization exercises (-0.53, 95% CI: -1.13 to 0.08), and a large efficacy in favor of PNF exercises (-0.91, 95% CI: -1.62 to -0.2) for reducing pain intensity as assessed by VAS or NPRS tools. Moreover, the meta-analysis revealed a moderate efficacy for isometric activation of deep trunk muscles (-0.61, CI: -1.02 to -0.19), and a large efficacy for PNF exercises (-1.26, 95% CI: -1.81 to -0.72) in improving disability, assessed using RMDQ or ODI questionnaires. The level of certainty in the evidence, as determined by the GRADE approach, was very low to low.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings emphasize the importance of incorporating localized therapeutic exercises as a fundamental aspect of managing non-specific LBP. Clinicians should consider utilizing localized therapeutic exercise tailored to individual patient needs. Furthermore, further research investigating optimal exercise therapy, optimal dose of the exercises, durations, and long-term adherence is warranted to enhance the precision and efficacy of exercise-based interventions for non-specific LBP.

Systematic reviews are a cornerstone for synthesizing the available evidence on a given topic. They simultaneously allow for gaps in the literature to be identified and provide direction for future research. However, due to the ever-increasing volume and complexity of the available literature, traditional methods for conducting systematic reviews are less efficient and more time-consuming. Numerous artificial intelligence (AI) tools are being released with the potential to optimize efficiency in academic writing and assist with various stages of the systematic review process including developing and refining search strategies, screening titles and abstracts for inclusion or exclusion criteria, extracting essential data from studies and summarizing findings. Therefore, in this article we provide an overview of the currently available tools and how they can be incorporated into the systematic review process to improve efficiency and quality of research synthesis. We emphasize that authors must report all AI tools that have been used at each stage to ensure replicability as part of reporting in methods.

UNASSIGNED: Teenage pregnancy is a subject of concern among adolescents. Inadequate knowledge and misperceptions about pregnancy are major contributing factors to teenage pregnancy. Without a proper understanding, adolescents are involved in unsafe sexual practices, which results in pregnancy. So, perception and understanding are important aspects to explore among adolescents. In this planned scope review, all eligible studies will be identified around the perception, practices, and understanding of teenage pregnancy among married and unmarried adolescent girls.
UNASSIGNED: The Arksey and O\'Malley (2005) scoping review framework and the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers\' Manual (2015) will be used for the planned scoping review. The population, concept, and context strategy (PCC) will be used to develop the research question, search strategy, and eligibility criteria. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA ScR) will be used for the findings of the study. For the literature search, authors will use Google Scholar, PubMed, and ResearchGate electronic databases with specific words such as \"teenage\", \"adolescence\", \"pregnancy\", \"perception\", \"knowledge\", \"awareness\" and \"abortion\".
UNASSIGNED: The planned scoping review will be helpful in addressing the lack of adolescent misperception, malpractices, and misunderstandings regarding teenage pregnancy. It can provide detailed information about teenage pregnancy in the Indian context.
UNASSIGNED: The evidence synthesis and gap analysis will be helpful in suggesting insights into the issue of teenage pregnancy, which will be helpful in future policies and programs.

BACKGROUND: Rapid reviews (RRs) offer a less rigorous and methodical approach to the process of reviewing literature in comparison to systematic reviews (SRs), which are currently a gold standard.
METHODS: Three different, expedited strategies of the review process were designed in the different scopes, already reviewed in Cochrane\'s SRs. Then, the results of our literature searches and the study selection process were compared to the ones from SRs. The final step was assessing the impact of losing some studies on the final results of meta-analyses.
RESULTS: In RR1, the initial number of references to be reviewed was reduced by half, and the inclusion list was recreated with 84% efficiency. Three out of 19 studies were missed, all having high risk of bias. Studies missed in RR1 were included in Cochrane\'s meta-analyses for 23 separate outcomes, and their lack impacted significantly the final results, or the possibility to run meta-analyses, in four cases. In RR2, 89% of trials included in the SR were captured (24/27); missing the three studies did not impact the final results of the meta-analyses. In RR3, the list of included studies overlapped completely with Cochrane\'s, despite a significantly lower workload.
CONCLUSIONS: A prompt and cost-effective methodology may lead to the identification of pertinent evidence in support of healthcare policy; however, it is essential to conscientiously account for potential biases in the analysis.

Evidence and gap maps (EGMs) are an increasinly popular approach used in evidence synthesis. As an approach they address broad research questions, describing the existing evidence base, highlighting evidence gaps and providing an interactive visual tool for knowledge users. The purpose of this methodological study is to explore the the processes used in the development of EGM\'s and how they are reported. The aim is to better understand current practice and identify where clearer guidance is needed to support their production.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the effects of family-based health promotion interventions on child-level risk factors for type 2 diabetes in vulnerable families.
METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist for systematic reviews formed the methodological framework. CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were searched on January 12, 2024. The NTP-OHAT Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess the risk of bias in the individual studies, and meta-analyses were performed.
RESULTS: The 4723 studies were identified, and 55 studies met the inclusion criteria. Results showed significant effects on children\'s body mass index (mean difference [MD], -0.18, 95% CI [-0.33 to -0.03], p = 0.02), body fat percentage (MD, -2.00, 95% CI [-3.31 to -0.69], p = 0.003), daily activity (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.23, 95% CI [0.01; 0.44], p = 0.04), physical activity self-efficacy (SMD, 0.73, 95% CI [0.36 to 1.10], p < 0.01), intake of snacks (MD, -0.10, 95% CI [-0.17 to -0.04], p = 0.002), and sugar-sweetened beverages (SMD, -0.21, 95% CI [-0.42 to -0.01], p = 0.04). Subgroup analyses suggested that interventions aiming to change child and parent behavior simultaneously have larger effect on fasting glucose and nutrition consumption, and that interventions longer than 26 weeks have larger effects on body composition and physical activity behavior than shorter interventions.

OBJECTIVE: Tendinopathy is a common condition that affects the body\'s tendon structures, causing discomfort, restricted movement, and reduced functionality. In this study, we looked at how extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) affected pain levels in individuals with various forms of tendinopathy around the world.
METHODS: This study is a comprehensive review and meta-analysis of previously published randomized controlled trials. To gather relevant data, the researchers performed keyword searches in international databases, including PubMed (Medline), Scopus, Web of Sciences, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Research Registers of ongoing trials (ClinicalTrials.gov), as well as Embase. The search was conducted up until March 2023. The quality of the selected articles was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias method for randomized trials (RoB2).
RESULTS: Based on the results of the meta-analysis, which included 45 clinical studies, the use of ESWT was found to have a significant impact on reducing pain in various conditions. The standardized mean difference (SMD) in patients with plantar fasciitis (PF) was reduced by 1.63 (SMD: -1.63, 95% CI: -3.04, -0.21; I2: 77.36%; P heterogeneity: 0.0001). For lateral epicondylitis (LE), the SMD was 0.63 (SMD: -0.63, 95% CI: -1.11, -0.16; I2: 67.50%; P heterogeneity: 0.003). In the case of chronic Achilles tendinopathy, the SMD was 1.38 (SMD: -1.38, 95% CI: -1.66, -1.10; I2: 96.44%; P heterogeneity: 0.0001). Additionally, in individuals with rotator cuff tendinopathy, the SMD for pain reduction was 2.37 units (SMD: -2.37, 95% CI: -3.58, -1.15; I2: 98.46%; P heterogeneity: 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that ESWT can be a highly effective therapy option for relieving pain in people with tendinopathy. Nonetheless, it is encouraged to make additional recommendations based on high-quality clinical research and more accurate information in order to define the optimal therapeutic options for each type of tendinopathy.

This overview of the systematic review provides guidance regarding how and when to use this approach to a research question. High quality systematic reviews are essential to assist health care practitioners keep current with the large and rapidly growing body of scientific evidence. The systematic review is a transparent and reproducible synthesis of all the available evidence on a clearly defined research question or topic. Key stages in conducting a systematic review include clarification of aims and methods in a protocol, finding all of the relevant research, data collection, quality assessments, synthesizing evidence, and interpreting the findings. This short report provides examples for the various stages and steps of the systematic review research approach.