ORCID Profile
0000-0002-9775-361X
Current Organisations
University of Birmingham
,
University of Oxford
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Research Square Platform LLC
Date: 24-09-2021
DOI: 10.21203/RS.3.RS-931213/V1
Abstract: Introduction: An increasing growth of systematic reviews (SRs) presents notable challenges for decision-makers seeking to answer clinical questions. Overviews of systematic reviews aim to address these challenges by summarising results of SRs and making sense of potentially discrepant SR results and conclusions. In 1997, an algorithm was created by Jadad to assess discordance in results across SRs on the same topic. Since this tool pre-dates the advent of overviews, it has been inconsistently applied in this context. Our study aims to (a) replicate assessments done in a s le of overviews using the Jadad algorithm to determine if the same SR would have been chosen, (b) evaluate the Jadad algorithm in terms of utility, efficiency, and comprehensiveness, and (c) describe how overviews address discordance in results across multiple SRs. Methods and Analysis: We will use a database of 1218 overviews (2000-2020) created from a bibliometric study as the basis of our search for overviews assessing discordance. This bibliometric study searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Epistemonikos, and Cochrane Database for overviews. We will include any overviews using Jadad (1997) or another method to assess discordance. The first 30 overviews screened at the full-text stage by two independent reviewers will be included. We will replicate Jadad assessments in overviews. We will compare our outcomes qualitatively and evaluate the differences between our Jadad assessment of discordance and the overviews’ assessment. Ethics and Dissemination: No ethics approval was required as no human subjects were involved. In addition to publishing in an open-access journal, we will disseminate evidence summaries through formal and informal conferences, academic websites, and across social media platforms. This is the first study to comprehensively evaluate and replicate Jadad algorithm assessments of discordance in SRs.
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 16-05-2018
DOI: 10.1136/BMJ.K1675
Abstract: To estimate the effect of a moderate to high intensity aerobic and strength exercise training programme on cognitive impairment and other outcomes in people with mild to moderate dementia. Multicentre, pragmatic, investigator masked, randomised controlled trial. National Health Service primary care, community and memory services, dementia research registers, and voluntary sector providers in 15 English regions. 494 people with dementia: 329 were assigned to an aerobic and strength exercise programme and 165 were assigned to usual care. Random allocation was 2:1 in favour of the exercise arm. Usual care plus four months of supervised exercise and support for ongoing physical activity, or usual care only. Interventions were delivered in community gym facilities and NHS premises. The primary outcome was score on the Alzheimer's disease assessment scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included activities of daily living, neuropsychiatric symptoms, health related quality of life, and carer quality of life and burden. Physical fitness (including the six minute walk test) was measured in the exercise arm during the intervention. The average age of participants was 77 (SD 7.9) years and 301/494 (61%) were men. By 12 months the mean ADAS-cog score had increased to 25.2 (SD 12.3) in the exercise arm and 23.8 (SD 10.4) in the usual care arm (adjusted between group difference -1.4, 95% confidence interval -2.6 to -0.2, P=0.03). This indicates greater cognitive impairment in the exercise group, although the average difference is small and clinical relevance uncertain. No differences were found in secondary outcomes or preplanned subgroup analyses by dementia type (Alzheimer's disease or other), severity of cognitive impairment, sex, and mobility. Compliance with exercise was good. Over 65% of participants (214/329) attended more than three quarters of scheduled sessions. Six minute walking distance improved over six weeks (mean change 18.1 m, 95% confidence interval 11.6 m to 24.6 m). A moderate to high intensity aerobic and strength exercise training programme does not slow cognitive impairment in people with mild to moderate dementia. The exercise training programme improved physical fitness, but there were no noticeable improvements in other clinical outcomes. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10416500.
Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Date: 14-11-2019
Publisher: Research Square Platform LLC
Date: 25-01-2022
DOI: 10.21203/RS.3.RS-931213/V3
Abstract: Introduction: An increasing growth of systematic reviews (SRs) presents notable challenges for decision-makers seeking to answer clinical questions. In 1997, an algorithm was created by Jadad to assess discordance in results across SRs on the same question. Our study aims to (a) replicate assessments done in a s le of studies using the Jadad algorithm to determine if the same SR would have been chosen, (b) evaluate the Jadad algorithm in terms of utility, efficiency, and comprehensiveness, and (c) describe how authors address discordance in results across multiple SRs. Methods and Analysis: We will use a database of 1218 overviews (2000-2020) created from a bibliometric study as the basis of our search for studies assessing discordance (called Discordant Reviews). This bibliometric study searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Epistemonikos, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for overviews. We will include any study using Jadad (1997) or another method to assess discordance. The first 30 studies screened at the full-text stage by two independent reviewers will be included. We will replicate the authors’ Jadad assessments. We will compare our outcomes qualitatively and evaluate the differences between our Jadad assessment of discordance and the authors’ assessment. Ethics and Dissemination: No ethics approval was required as no human subjects were involved. In addition to publishing in an open-access journal, we will disseminate evidence summaries through formal and informal conferences, academic websites, and across social media platforms. This is the first study to comprehensively evaluate and replicate Jadad algorithm assessments of discordance across multiple SRs.
Publisher: Research Square Platform LLC
Date: 07-12-2021
DOI: 10.21203/RS.3.RS-931213/V2
Abstract: Introduction: An increasing growth of systematic reviews (SRs) presents notable challenges for decision-makers seeking to answer clinical questions. In 1997, an algorithm was created by Jadad to assess discordance in results across SRs on the same question. Our study aims to (a) replicate assessments done in a s le of studies using the Jadad algorithm to determine if the same SR would have been chosen, (b) evaluate the Jadad algorithm in terms of utility, efficiency, and comprehensiveness, and (c) describe how authors address discordance in results across multiple SRs. Methods and Analysis: We will use a database of 1218 overviews (2000-2020) created from a bibliometric study as the basis of our search for studies assessing discordance (called Discordant Reviews). This bibliometric study searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Epistemonikos, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for overviews. We will include any study using Jadad (1997) or another method to assess discordance. The first 30 studies screened at the full-text stage by two independent reviewers will be included. We will replicate the authors’ Jadad assessments. We will compare our outcomes qualitatively and evaluate the differences between our Jadad assessment of discordance and the authors’ assessment. Ethics and Dissemination: No ethics approval was required as no human subjects were involved. In addition to publishing in an open-access journal, we will disseminate evidence summaries through formal and informal conferences, academic websites, and across social media platforms. This is the first study to comprehensively evaluate and replicate Jadad algorithm assessments of discordance across multiple SRs.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 06-2019
DOI: 10.1016/J.PHYSIO.2018.10.004
Abstract: Systematic review and meta-analysis. To assess the effectiveness of scoliosis-specific exercises (SSE) on adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) compared with other non-surgical interventions. AIS is a complex deformity of the spine that develops between the age of 10years and skeletal maturity. SSE are prescribed to patients to reduce or slow curve progression, although their effectiveness is unknown. Electronic databases were searched for relevant studies. Randomised controlled trials were eligible if they compared SSE with non-surgical interventions for in iduals with AIS. Three authors independently extracted data, evaluated methodological quality and assessed the quality of evidence. Meta-analysis was performed where possible otherwise, descriptive syntheses are reported. Nine randomised controlled trials were included. Four had a high risk of bias, three had an unclear risk and two had a low risk. Very-low-quality evidence indicated that SSE improved some measures of spinal deformity, function, pain and overall health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Very-low-quality evidence suggested that SSE had no effect on self-image and mental health. Very-low-quality evidence showed that bracing was more effective than SSE on measures of spinal deformity. However, SSE showed greater improvements in function, HRQoL, self-image, mental health and patient satisfaction with treatment. No differences were found for pain or trunk rotation. SSE may be effective for improving measures of spinal deformity for people with AIS, but the evidence is of very low quality. Future studies should evaluate relevant clinical measures and cost-effectiveness using rigorous methods and reporting standards.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 05-05-2021
DOI: 10.1111/JGH.15577
Abstract: Endoscopic surveillance for dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE) with random biopsies is the primary diagnostic tool for monitoring clinical progression into esophageal adenocarcinoma. As an alternative, narrow‐band imaging (NBI) endoscopy offers targeted biopsies that can improve dysplasia detection. This study aimed to evaluate NBI‐guided targeted biopsies' diagnostic accuracy for detecting dysplasia in patients undergoing endoscopic BE surveillance compared with the widely used Seattle protocol. Cochrane DTA Register, MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, OpenGrey, and bibliographies of identified papers were searched until 2018. Two independent investigators resolved discrepancies by consensus, study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment. Data on sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were pooled and analyzed using a random‐effects model. Of 9528 identified articles, six studies comprising 493 participants were eligible for quantitative synthesis. NBI‐targeted biopsy showed high diagnostic accuracy in detection of dysplasia in BE with a sensitivity of 76% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61–0.91), specificity of 99% (95% CI: 0.99–1.00), positive predictive value of 97% (95% CI: 0.96–0.99), and negative predictive value of 84% (95% CI: 0.69–0.99) for detection of all grades of dysplasia. The receiver‐operating characteristic curve for NBI model performance was 0.8550 for detecting all dysplasia. Narrow‐band imaging‐guided biopsy demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy and might constitute a valid substitute for random biopsies during endoscopic surveillance for dysplasia in BE.
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date: 10-05-2023
DOI: 10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0285442
Abstract: The continuous dissemination of coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) literature can inform decision-makers and the public. Since the widespread use of COVID-19 vaccines, more systematic reviews have summarized the effectiveness and reported adverse events associated with vaccination. Previous systematic and scoping reviews on COVID-19 summarized various aspects surrounding COVID-19, however, a scoping review is needed to summarize the characteristics of COVID-19 vaccines and associated adverse events reported in systematic reviews and meta-analyses to provide comprehensive evidence for informed medical decision-making. We will conduct a scoping review concerning COVID-19 vaccines and adverse events from vaccines. We will search from December 2019 to present in Epistemonikos, C bell Library, CINAHL (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, CENTRAL (Ovid), Web of Science, WHO COVID-19 database, Joanna Briggs Institute of Excellence, and COVID-19 Evidence Reviews resource. We will include systematic reviews, meta-analyses, or both of randomized controlled trials and observational studies and exclude in idual randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Abstracts and full-texts will be screened prior to selection. Investigators will independently use a calibrated quantitative and qualitative data extraction sheet and rate the quality of articles with AMSTAR, resolving disagreements to aim for good agreement (≥80%). An updated scoping review of the characteristics and safety of COVID-19 vaccines would highlight the accuracy of the evidence to inform decision-making concerning COVID-19 vaccination.
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
No related grants have been discovered for Jacqueline Thompson.