BACKGROUND: Many patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for disease management. There is, however, a communication gap between patients and healthcare professionals regarding CAM use, where patients are hesitant to disclose CAM use to providers. The purpose of this study was to identify the quantity and assess the quality of CAM recommendations in IBD clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument.
METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were systematically searched from 2011 to 2022 to find CPGs for the treatment and/or management of IBD. The Guidelines International Network (GIN) and National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) websites were also searched. Eligible CPGs were assessed using the AGREE II instrument.
RESULTS: Nineteen CPGs made CAM recommendations for IBD and were included in this review. Average scaled domain percentages of CPGs were as follows (overall CPG, CAM section): scope and purpose (91.5%, 91.5%), clarity of presentation (90.3%, 64.0%), editorial independence (57.0%, 57.0%), stakeholder involvement (56.7%, 27.8%), rigour of development (54.7%, 45.9%), and applicability (14.6%, 2.1%).
CONCLUSIONS: The majority of CPGs with CAM recommendations were of low quality and their CAM sections scored substantially lower relative to other therapies in the overall CPG. In future updates, CPGs with low scaled-domain percentages could be improved in accordance with AGREE II and other guideline development resources. Further research investigating how CAM therapies can best be incorporated into IBD CPGs is warranted.

While physical activity, sleep and sedentary behaviors are almost always considered independently, they should be considered as integrated human behaviors. The 24 h Movement approach proposes a concomitant consideration of these behaviors to promote overall health. Not only do these behaviors impact energy expenditure, but they have also been shown to separately impact energy intake, which should be further explored when considering the entire integration of these movement behaviors under the 24 h movement approach. After an evaluation of the prevalence of meeting the 24 h Movement and dietary recommendations, this review summarizes the available evidence (using English publications indexed in PubMed/MEDLINE) regarding the association between the 24 h Movement Guidelines and eating habits. Altogether, the results clearly show the beneficial impact of promoting the 24 h guidelines simultaneously, highlighting that the higher the number of respected movement recommendations, the better eating behaviors in both children and adults. Importantly, our results point out the importance of emphasizing the need to reach sedentary guidelines for better eating habits. Movement and dietary behaviors appear closely related, and giving recommendations on one might impact the other. Combining the 24 h Movement with dietary Guidelines might be more efficient than promoting them separately in public health strategies.

To evaluate the support from the available guidance on reporting of health equity in research for our candidate items and to identify additional items for the Strengthening Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology-Equity extension.
We conducted a scoping review by searching Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Methodology Register, LILACS, and Caribbean Center on Health Sciences Information up to January 2022. We also searched reference lists and gray literature for additional resources. We included guidance and assessments (hereafter termed \"resources\") related to conduct and/or reporting for any type of health research with or about people experiencing health inequity.
We included 34 resources, which supported one or more candidate items or contributed to new items about health equity reporting in observational research. Each candidate item was supported by a median of six (range: 1-15) resources. In addition, 12 resources suggested 13 new items, such as \"report the background of investigators\".
Existing resources for reporting health equity in observational studies aligned with our interim checklist of candidate items. We also identified additional items that will be considered in the development of a consensus-based and evidence-based guideline for reporting health equity in observational studies.

Scholarly journals play a key role in the dissemination of research findings. However, little focus is given to the process of establishing new, credible journals and the obstacles faced in achieving this. This scoping review aimed to identify and describe existing recommendations for starting a biomedical scholarly journal.
We searched five bibliographic databases: OVID Medline + Medline in Process, Embase Classic + Embase, ERIC, APA PsycINFO, and Web of Science on January 14, 2022. A related grey literature search was conducted on March 19, 2022. Eligible sources were those published in English in any year, of any format, and that described guidance for starting a biomedical journal. Titles and abstracts of obtained sources were screened. We extracted descriptive characteristics including author name, year and country of publication, journal name, and source type, and any recommendations from the included sources discussing guidance for starting a biomedical journal. These recommendations were categorized and thematically grouped.
A total of 5626 unique sources were obtained. Thirty-three sources met our inclusion criteria. Most sources were blog posts (10/33; 30.30%), and only 10 sources were supported by evidence. We extracted 51 unique recommendations from these 33 sources, which we thematically classified into nine themes which were: journal operations, editorial review processes, peer review processes, open access publishing, copyediting/typesetting, production, archiving/indexing/metrics, marketing/promotion, and funding.
There is little formal guidance regarding how to start a scholarly journal. The development of an evidence-based guideline may help uphold scholarly publishing quality, provide insight into obstacles new journals will face, and equip novice publishers with the tools to meet best practices.

OBJECTIVE: During the treatment of cancer, 18% of patients use cannabis for symptom management. Anxiety, depression, and sleep disturbances are common symptoms in cancer. A systematic review of the evidence for cannabis use for psychological symptoms in cancer patients was undertaken to develop a guideline.
METHODS: A literature search of randomized trials and systematic reviews was undertaken up to November 12, 2021. Studies were independently assessed for evidence by two authors and then evaluated by all authors for approval. The literature search involved MEDLINE, CCTR, EMBASE, and PsychINFO databases. Inclusion criteria included randomized control trials and systematic reviews on cannabis versus placebo or active comparator in patients with cancer and psychological symptom management (anxiety, depression, and insomnia).
RESULTS: The search yielded 829 articles; 145 from Medline, 419 from Embase, 62 from PsychINFO, and 203 from CCTR. Two systematic reviews and 15 randomized trials (4 on sleep, 5 on mood, 6 on both) met eligibility criteria. However, no studies specifically assessed the efficacy of cannabis on psychological symptoms as primary outcomes in cancer patients. The studies varied widely in terms of interventions, control, duration, and outcome measures. Six of 15 RCTs suggested benefits (five for sleep, one for mood).
CONCLUSIONS: There is no high-quality evidence to recommend the use of cannabis as an intervention for psychological symptoms in patients with cancer until more high-quality research demonstrates benefit.

Robust evidence-based guidelines are important in everyday clinical practice, especially when delivering and managing oral care needs to a vulnerable group such as children with special healthcare needs (SHCNs).
To assess the quality of guidelines on the management of oral care for children with special healthcare needs (SHCNs) and to find appropriate guidelines, an electronic search of MEDLINE Ovid was carried out alongside an additional search of common guideline websites. The AGREE II tool was used to assess the quality of the guidelines. Assessment was undertaken independently by three assessors. Furthermore, the underlying evidence used to formulate recommendations in the identified guidelines was qualitatively assessed.
There were nine guidelines, with 41 recommendations, that met the eligibility criteria. The quality of the guidelines was generally found to be poor. Only one guideline was assessed as \"recommended\" by the assessors, based on the quality of the methods, the reporting, or both. Only 2 of the 41 sets of recommendations, made across the nine guidelines, were judged to be valid and based on a rigorous systematic review of the evidence.
The current state of guidelines on oral care management for children with special healthcare needs (SHCNs) is, on the whole, of very low quality. The scientific community should work together to enhance the quality and strength of the current clinical guidelines and to ensure that they are trustworthy prior to implementation.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of living guidelines is keeping recommendations in guidelines up-to-date as new evidence becomes available. This review aims at scoping the prevalence and formal characteristics of living guidelines in the field of medicine and explore differences between formats.
METHODS: A selective search of living guidelines in MEDLINE via PubMed, Google Scholar and six relevant online repositories for guidelines (MAGICApp, AWMF, GIN, NICE, WHO-Iris, BIGG) was conducted. Authors and editors were contacted to receive previous non-living guideline versions. Living guidelines were subsequently analyzed according to pre-defined methodological criteria as described below (inter-comparison). Differences between living and their conventional (non-living) versions were assessed (intra-comparison).
RESULTS: 83 living guidelines were identified and selected for further screening, out of which 26 were eligible for analysis. 61.5% were new publications (de-novo guidelines) and 38.5% updates of pre-existing guidelines. There are some concepts defining, for example, the update cycle (AWMF, maximum of 12 months) but not all living guidelines follow or refer to existing concepts. The analysis shows that living guidelines in line with the established standards for (non-living) clinical guidelines involve an evidence standard, an extensive consensus process (often in the form of a Delphi process), and the inclusion of stakeholders (patients/relatives) in the development process, despite the high frequency of updates. When comparing living and conventional guidelines with the descriptive approach changes were found in update frequency (being more frequent with living guidelines, annually at the latest) and publication format (towards more digital) and public consultation (living guidelines offered more possibilities), no substantial methodological differences were observed in the description of consensus processes, changes in number of recommendations, inclusion of patient representatives. Given the small number of comparable pairs, the results reflect a tendency in the analyzed sample.
CONCLUSIONS: The definition and development of living guidelines varied. Standardization (i. e. in the form of a checklist, procedure template) is needed to assess quality of the living process.

Systematic searches are integral to identifying the evidence that is used in National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) public health guidelines (PHGs). This study analyses the sources, including bibliographic databases and other techniques, required for PHGs. The aims were to analyse the sources used to identify the publications included in NICE PHGs; and to assess whether fewer sources could have been searched to retrieve these publications. Data showing how the included publications had been identified was collated using search summary tables. Three scenarios were created to test various combinations of sources to determine whether fewer sources could have been used. The sample included 29 evidence reviews, compiled using 13 searches, to support 10 PHG topics. Across the PHGs, 23 databases and six other techniques retrieved included publications. A mean reduction in total results of 6.5% could have been made if the minimum set of sources plus Cochrane Library, Embase, and MEDLINE were searched. On average, Cochrane Library, Embase, and MEDLINE contributed 76.8% of the included publications, with other databases adding 11% and other techniques 12.2%. None of the searches had a minimum set that was comprised entirely of databases. There was not a core set of sources for PHGs. A range of databases and techniques, covering a multi-disciplinary evidence base, was required to identify all included publications. It would be possible to reduce the number of sources searched and make some gains in productivity. It is important to create a tailored set of sources to do an efficient search.

OBJECTIVE: NICE guideline surveillance determines whether previously published guidelines need updating. The surveillance process must balance time constraints with methodological rigor. It includes a rapid review to identify new evidence to contradict, reinforce or clarify guideline recommendations. Despite this approach, the screening burden can still be high. Applying additional search techniques may increase the precision of the database searches.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on five surveillance reviews with less than 2% of the studies included after screening. Modified searches were run in MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO (where appropriate) to test the impact of additional search techniques: focused subject headings, subheadings, frequency operators and title only searches. Modified searches were compared to original search results to determine: the retrieval of included studies, the precision of the search and the number needed to read. Studies not retrieved by the modified search were checked to determine if the surveillance decision would have been affected.
RESULTS: The additional search techniques tested indicated that a combination of focused subject headings and frequency operators could improve the precision of surveillance searches. The modified search retrieved all the original studies included in the surveillance review for three of the reviews tested. Some of the original included studies were not retrieved for two reviews but the missing studies would not have affected the surveillance decision.
CONCLUSIONS: Combining focused subject headings and frequency operators is a viable option for improving the precision of surveillance searches without compromising recall and without impacting the surveillance decision.

To study the frequency, the risk factors and the mode of delivery of breech presentation. To analyze the perinatal morbidity and mortality associated with breech presentation in comparison to cephalic presentation from all mode of delivery.
MedLine and Cochrane Library databases search in French and English and review of the main foreign guidelines between 1980 and 2019.
Three modes of breech presentation exist according to fetal lower limbs position: frank in 2/3 of cases, complete in 1/3 of cases or, more rarely, incomplete (LE3). About 5% of women gave birth in breech presentation in France (LE3). As the frequency of breech presentation decreases with increasing gestational age, this incidence is lower after 37 WG and represents only 3% of term deliveries (LE3). Congenital uterine malformation (LE3) and fibroma (LE3), prematurity (LE3), oligoamnios (LE3), some fetal congenital malformations (LE3) and low birthweight for gestational age (LE3) are the main risk factors with breech presentation. In France, one-third of women with a term fetus in breech presentation attempt a vaginal delivery (LE3), which is successful in 70% of cases (LE3). Neonatal outcome is not associated with type of breech presentation (frank or complete) in case of vaginal delivery attempt after 37 WG (LE3). Overall, perinatal morbidity and mortality after 37 WG of breech presentation appear to be greater than in cephalic presentation from all mode of delivery (LE3). The risk of traumatic injury in breech delivery is estimated under 1% (LE3). The most common injuries are collarbone fractures, hematomas or contusions, and brachial plexus injury (LE3). Breech presentation is associated with an increased risk of hip dysplasia (LE3) and cesarean delivery does not seem to be a protective factor (LE3). Breech presentation does not appear to be associated with an increased risk of cerebral palsy compared to cephalic presentation after exclusion of fetuses with congenital malformations (LE3).
Worldwide, mode of delivery of breech presentation has undergone profound changes since the publication of the TBT (Term Breech Trial). There are intrinsic factors associated with breech presentation, which should not be overlooked when interpreting the increased perinatal morbidity and mortality observed in case of breech presentation.