暂无摘要。

Background: While the PRISMA 2020 statement is intended to guide the reporting of original systematic reviews, updated systematic reviews, and living systematic reviews (LSRs), its explanation and elaboration document notes that additional considerations for updated systematic reviews and LSRs may need to be addressed. This paper reports the protocol for developing an extension of the PRISMA 2020 statement for LSRs. Methods: We will follow the EQUATOR Network\'s guidance for developing health research reporting guidelines. We will review the literature to identify possible items of the PRISMA 2020 checklist that need modification, as well as new items that need to be added. Then, we will survey representatives of different stakeholder groups for their views on the proposed modifications of the PRISMA 2020 checklist. We will summarize, present, and discuss the results of the survey in an online meeting, aiming to reach consensus on the content of the LSR extension. We will then draft the checklist, explanation and elaboration for each item, and flow diagram for the PRISMA 2020 extension. Then, we will share these initial documents with stakeholder representatives for final feedback and approval. Discussion: We anticipate that the PRISMA 2020 extension for LSRs will benefit LSR authors, editors, and peer reviewers of LSRs, as well as different users of LSRs, including guideline developers, policy makers, healthcare providers, patients, and other stakeholders.

Selection bias can arise through many aspects of a study, including recruitment, inclusion/exclusion criteria, input-level exclusion and outcome-level exclusion, and often reflects the underrepresentation of populations historically disadvantaged in medical research. The effects of selection bias can be further amplified when non-representative samples are used in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) applications to construct clinical algorithms. Building on the \"Data Cards\" initiative for transparency in AI research, we advocate for the addition of a participant flow diagram for AI studies detailing relevant sociodemographic and/or clinical characteristics of excluded participants across study phases, with the goal of identifying potential algorithmic biases before their clinical implementation. We include both a model for this flow diagram as well as a brief case study explaining how it could be implemented in practice. Through standardized reporting of participant flow diagrams, we aim to better identify potential inequities embedded in AI applications, facilitating more reliable and equitable clinical algorithms.

Contrast-induced encephalopathy (CIE) is considered as an uncommon complication following cardiac catheterization. Due to the varied manifestations, CIE has no formal diagnostic criteria. In fact, the incidence of CIE may be greatly underestimated because of the difficulty in its differential diagnosis with other cerebrovascular complications. Thus, making a flow diagram according to patients\' clinical symptoms and examinations after cardiac catheterization to help clinicians diagnose CIE is important and needed.
In this report, we describe a case of probable CIE in a 66-year-old Chinese man with hypertension who underwent cardiac catheterization with stents placement in the bifurcation lesion, during which 80 ml iopromide contrast was used. About 2 h following the procedure, the patient lost his consciousness suddenly and suffered from a status epilepticus. Malignant arrhythmias were not found through continuous electrocardiogram monitoring, but mild ST-segment elevation was displayed in leads I and aVL. The echocardiography, plasma glucose and electrolyte levels were normal. Emergency re-angiography with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty was performed in the culprit lesion, which involved 60 ml iopromide contrast. However, the patient remained unconsciousness and epilepticus. Non-contrast computed tomography (CT) of the head showed cortical and subarachnoid enhancement as well as prolonged retention of contrast media in the middle cerebral artery. With supportive treatment of intravenous hydration, sedative and dehydrant, the patient recovered 3 h later and finally discharged without any neurological deficits.
CIE is an acute reversible encephalopathy induced by contrast media. It is exceptionally challenging to make the diagnosis of CIE following cardiac catheterization since there is a lack of consensus on the definition of CIE. Via this case we reviewed the related literatures, through which a flow diagram of the differential diagnosis and clinical decision making was given, which could help to differentiate CIE from other neurological complications following cardiac catheterization.

The PRISMA 2020 and PRISMA-S guidelines help systematic review teams report their reviews clearly, transparently, and with sufficient detail to enable reproducibility. PRISMA 2020, an updated version of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement, is complemented by PRISMA-S, an extension to PRISMA focusing on reporting the search components of systematic reviews. Several significant changes were implemented in PRISMA 2020 and PRISMA-S when compared with the original version of PRISMA in 2009, including the recommendation to report search strategies for all databases, registries, and websites that were searched. PRISMA-S also recommends reporting the number of records identified from each information source. One of the most challenging aspects of the new guidance from both documents has been changes to the flow diagram. In this article, we review some of the common questions about using the PRISMA 2020 flow diagram and tracking records through the systematic review process.

BACKGROUND: Hymenoptera venom allergy (HVA) is an underestimated condition representing an important cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Preventing future allergic reactions in patients who have already developed a systemic reaction is based on the correct management of the acute phase of the reaction followed by a correct diagnosis and, where indicated, prescription of adrenaline autoinjectors and VIT. A possible strategy to optimize care processes and to improve outcomes is the implementation of a Diagnostic and Therapeutic Care Pathways, also known as Integrated Care Pathways or Clinical Pathways (CPWs). The aim of the care pathway is to enhance the quality of care by improving risk-adjusted patient outcomes, promoting patient safety, increasing patient satisfaction, and optimizing the use of resources. To our knowledge, currently in Italy as well as in Europe, there is no CPWs codified for the management of HVA patients. This paper describes the development of the clinical content of a care pathway for the management of HVA.
METHODS: The methodology applied is based on the eight step method to build the clinical content of an evidence-based care pathway suggested by Lodewijckx et al.
RESULTS: Three hundred and seventeen different clinical activities were extracted from the selected literature. The expert panel was involved in their evaluation, expressing a judgment of relevance through the Delphi study. As a result, 126 clinical activities were appraised to be valid and feasible. The final recommendations (126) were translated into 123 key interventions. Six indicators were produced by the clinical activities.
CONCLUSIONS: A set of 123 key interventions and of six process indicators were found to be appropriate for the development and standardization of the clinical content of the Hymenoptera venom allergy care pathway.

The amazing development of flow analysis has led to a loss of conceptual uniformity and to the proposals of a number of modalities, each assigned to an acronym, and this aspect may hinder further developments in the field. As any sample handling step of a flow-based analytical procedure can be accomplished in different ways, there are multiple facets associated to it. This tutorial is focused on the critical evaluation of these facets and the proposal of a novel way to present the flow analyzers, disregarding or even avoiding the need for specifying flow modalities and acronyms.