大数据技术在医院数据资源开发中的应用评价

通过问卷调查山东省内60家综合医院，统计分析医院数据开发与应用的基本情况、主要方向、平台建设、应用效果、经费投入与人才配置，阐述对比医院间差异，找出制约因素，提出改进意见，为相关医院深入拓展数据开发与大数据应用提供参考借鉴。     

Coffee Consumption and Colon Cancer Risk: A Meta- Epidemiological Study of Asian Cohort Studies

Objective: A systematic review reported that coffee consumption would decrease risk of colon cancer in Asian women. But the systematic review arises the issue of duplication, so that a meta-epidemiological study was conducted. Methods: The selection criteria were defined that a prospective cohort follow-up study conducted to evaluate coffee consumption and risk of colon cancer in Asian and showed adjusted relative risk and its 95% confidence interval. In order to conduct meta-analysis, the highest versus lowest method was applied to extract relative risk and its 95% confidence intervals of the highest category. Random effect model was applied if I-squared value was over 50%. Results: After avoiding duplication, 9 cohort data were selected for meta-analysis. The summary relative risk (and their 95% confidence intervals) [I-square value] were 0.90 (95% CI: 0.79-1.03) [0.0%] in men, and 0.64 (95% CI: 0.36-1.15) [65.9%] in women, respectively. Conclusions: The results suggest that coffee consumption is not associated with the risk of colon cancer in Asian men and women. The findings of this study are consistent with the results of two systematic reviews conducted under the same hypothesis and selection criteria. Additional epidemiological studies are needed for the inflection of colon cancer risk as the dose of coffee increases and the difference in the protective effect by sex.     

仙灵骨葆制剂上市后临床安全性真实世界多维度研究设计

药品上市后临床安全性研究应开展真实世界的多维度设计,充分考虑多种来源的数据、证据及证据的整合。论文以仙灵骨葆制剂的上市后临床安全性研究设计为例,报告了国家不良反应监测中心自发呈报系统数据、医院信息系统数据、文献数据的统计分析以及数据、分析结果和证据的整合,通过证据整合发现:仙灵骨葆制剂的一般ADR主要是胃肠系统损害,表现为恶心、呕吐、口干、便秘、腹泻等;严重ADR主要表现为肝胆系统损害,表现为肝功能异常、肝酶升高、肝细胞损害等;过敏反应有时候表现为一般ADR,有时候表现为严重ADR;肝功能异常具有性别差异,女性比例偏高;肝功能异常出现3~7 d和15 d及以2个发病高峰,提示可能存在不同的发病机制;恶心、呕吐和胃功能紊乱是仙灵骨葆制剂的ADR预警信号。论文进一步讨论了回顾性数据对于前瞻性研究设计的支撑,初步明确了安全性真实世界多维度研究设计中主要数据源的优势和不足,从安全性证据的角度分析了数据之间的互补性和相应研究的时序性。     

海洋生物医用材料的临床应用和安全性评价

目的： 对海洋生物医用材料在医疗领域的应用情况和海洋生物材料来源医疗器械的安全性评价趋势进行分析，为推进该材料的临床转化提供参考。方法： 归纳海洋生物医用材料的分类和应用，介绍该材料的安全性评价的程序要点，探讨其安全性评价中面临的挑战。结果与结论： 常用的海洋生物医用材料主要为多糖和蛋白质，在创伤修复和组织工程领域应用广泛。海洋生物医用材料具有生物活性和良好的生物相容性，对此类材料的安全性评价应根据材料特性和预期用途，科学制定评价程序和选择检验方法。     

冠心病血瘀证基因组学研究进展＊

目的 系统综述冠心病血瘀证基因组学研究的方法和内容。方法 计算机检索Medline、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials、中国知网、万方数据库，查找冠心病血瘀证基因组学的临床研究，按照制定的纳入排除标准，由2名研究人员独立筛选文献，任何分歧通过协商一致或通过第3名研究人员来解决。结果 最终纳入34项研究，其中与冠心病血瘀证密切相关的基因组学研究类型包括基因多态性、差异基因的表达、基因的甲基化修饰，涉及的生物学功能有血管内皮损伤、血液流变学改变、炎症反应与免疫调节、血管平滑肌增殖、血脂水平等，采用的技术方法有聚合酶链式反应（Polymerase chain reaction，PCR）、飞行时间质谱技术（Time-of-flight mass spectrometry，TOF-MS）、基因芯片杂交测序（Gene Chip）等。结论 基因组学研究可阐明冠心病血瘀证的生物学基础，为冠心病血瘀证的病机演变提供更好的依据，更有助于从分子水平实现个体化治疗，从而进一步提高临床疗效。     

A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders

PurposeUnderstanding the value of genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders requires high-quality, methodologically robust economic evaluations. This systematic review sought to assess the methodological quality among such studies and examined opportunities for improvement.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science for economic evaluations of genetic screening/testing (2013-2019). Methodological rigor and adherence to best practices were systematically assessed using the British Medical Journal checklist.ResultsAcross the 47 identified studies, there were substantial variations in modeling approaches, reporting detail, and sophistication. Models ranged from simple decision trees to individual-level microsimulations that compared between 2 and >20 alternative interventions. Many studies failed to report sufficient detail to enable replication or did not justify modeling assumptions, especially for costing methods and utility values. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, or calibration were rarely used to derive parameter estimates. Nearly all studies conducted some sensitivity analysis, and more sophisticated studies implemented probabilistic sensitivity/uncertainty analysis, threshold analysis, and value of information analysis.ConclusionWe describe a heterogeneous body of work and present recommendations and exemplar studies across the methodological domains of (1) perspective, scope, and parameter selection; (2) use of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses; and (3) reporting transparency for improvement in the economic evaluation of genetic screening/testing.     

Depression in Primary Care

Depression is a heterogeneous disorder with a wide range of presentations. Most patients with depression are seen in primary care, where it is often unrecognized; thus, screening for depression is important. Medical conditions can mimic depression and vice versa. For mild cases of depression, symptom monitoring and nonpharmacologic strategies are generally recommended initially, whereas psychotherapy and antidepressant drugs are first-line treatment for moderate to severe cases. Patients with depression often experience relapse, recurrence, or both, and multiple options are available. Primary care providers are central to screening, diagnosing, and subsequently treating or referring these patients.     

Motivations and barriers to pursue cancer genomic testing: A systematic review

ObjectivesSingle-gene testing is associated with psycho-social challenges for cancer patients. Genomic testing may amplify these. The aim of this study was to understand patients’ motivations and barriers to pursue cancer genomic testing, to enable healthcare providers to support their patients throughout the testing process and interpretation of test results.MethodsFive databases were searched for original peer reviewed research articles published between January 2001 and September 2018 addressing motivation for genomic cancer testing. QualSyst was used to assess quality.Results182 studies were identified and 17 were included for review. Studies were heterogenous. Both somatic and germline testing were included, and 14 studies used hypothetical scenarios. 3249 participants were analyzed, aged 18 to 94. Most were female and white. The most common diagnoses were breast, ovarian, lung and colorectal cancer. Interest in testing was high. Motivations included ability to predict cancer risk, inform disease management, benefit families, and understand cancer. Barriers included concerns about cost, privacy/confidentiality, clinical utility, and psychological harm.ConclusionsDespite concerns, consumers are interested in cancer genomic testing if it can provide actionable results for themselves and their families.Practice ImplicationsProviders must manage understanding and expectations of testing and translate genetic information into health-promoting behaviours.     

Accuracy of MRI-guided Versus Systematic Prostate Biopsy in Patients Under Active Surveillance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This meta-analysis focuses on the accuracy of upgrading to clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) versus systematic biopsy (SB). We searched the Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Scopus, and Literatura Latino Americana em Ciências da Saúde databases through January 2020 for comparative, retrospective/prospective, paired-cohort, and randomized clinical trials with paired comparisons. The population consisted of patients with low-risk PCa in active surveillance with at least 1 index lesion on imaging. We evaluated the quality of evidence by using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 score. Group comparisons considered the differences between the area under the curve summary receiver operating characteristic curve in a 2-tailed method. We also compared the positive predictive value of the best single method (MRI-TB or SB) and the referral study test (combined biopsy, a combination of MRI-TB and SB). The meta-analysis included 6 studies enrolling 741 patients. The pooled sensitivity for the 2 groups was 0.79 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.83; I² = 75%) and 0.67 (95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.74; I² = 55.4%), respectively. The area under the curve for the MRI-TB and SB groups were 0.99 and 0.92 (P < .001), respectively. The positive predictive value for the MRI-TB and combined biopsy groups were similar. The accumulated evidence suggests better results for MRI-TB compared with SB. Therefore, use of MRI-TB alone may be preferable in patients in active surveillance harboring low-risk PCa.