电子烟能帮助人们戒烟吗？使用电子烟戒烟是否会产生不良反应？ 什么是电子烟？ 电子烟是一种手持设备，通过加热通常含有尼古丁和香料的液体来运作。电子烟可以让您以蒸汽而非烟雾的形式吸入尼古丁。由于电子烟不会燃烧烟草，因此不会让使用者接触同等程度的化学物质，这些会导致使用传统香烟的人患病。 使用电子烟的英语专有单词为“vaping”。许多人使用电子烟来帮助戒断烟草。在本系统综述中，我们主要关注含有尼古丁的电子烟。 我们为什么进行本Cochrane系统综述 戒烟可以降低患肺癌、心脏病和许多其他疾病的风险。但是许多人发现戒烟不是一件容易的事情。我们想弄清楚使用电子烟是否能帮助人们戒烟，并且以戒烟为目的的电子烟使用者是否会发生任何不良反应。 我们做了什么？ 我们检索了关于使用电子烟帮助人们戒烟的研究。 我们检索了随机对照试验，在这些试验中，人们接受的治疗是随机决定的。这类研究通常会提供有关治疗效果的最可靠证据。我们也检索了所有受试者都接受电子烟治疗的研究。 我们关注： ·有多少人至少成功地停止吸烟半年以上；和 ·在使用至少一周后报告了多少人有不良反应。 检索日期：我们纳入了截至2022年7月1日发表的证据。 我们发现了什么？ 我们检索到78项研究，涉及22052名吸烟的成年人。这些研究比较了电子烟与： · 尼古丁替代疗法，例如贴剂或尼古丁口香糖； · varenicline（一种帮助人们戒烟的...

A new Cochrane Library Editorial has been published about the role of Cochrane reviews in directing researchers away from potentially biased primary studies. 

The editorial discusses new evidence that risk of bias ratings disseminated in Cochrane reviews can influence the citations received by the appraised studies. Specifically, after a review is published, papers at ‘high risk of bias’ due to selective reporting attract fewer citations than a comparable group of ‘low risk of bias’ papers. Whilst the effect is modest, it is notable that systematic reviews can redirect researchers away from wayward science. 

The editorial calls for more research on how to turn the weak signal provided by risk of bias ratings into a stronger one, to increase the efficacy of systematic reviews in shaping follow-on science and to complement more traditional signals such as retractions, citations, and journal-level metrics.

Karla Soares-Weiser, Editor in Chief of Cochrane, says, "Cochrane is a strong advocate for transparency and integrity in research. These issues go to our core: without access to relevant, unconflicted and accurate data, our reviews will not be of the quality we want. This editorial highlights the potential for Cochrane reviews, and the rigorous assessments carried out as part of the review process, to further contribute to improving the overall quality of health research."

• Read the Cochrane Library Editorial : 'The power of weak signals: how systematic reviews direct researchers away from potentially biased primary studies'

Thursday, November 24, 2022

银杏叶草本补剂治疗耳鸣 什么是耳鸣？ 耳鸣是指人们在未接收外来音源的情况下，能够感知到声音的症状。它通常被描述为一种铃声、嘶嘶声、嗡嗡声或嗖嗖声。这种症状很常见，影响总人口的5%至43%，且其患病率随着年龄增长而增加。对有些人来说，耳鸣是一种持续存在且令人烦恼的状态，并且可能会导致睡眠问题（失眠）、注意力难以集中、沟通和社交困难以及焦虑和抑郁。针对耳鸣的管理可包括教育和建议、放松疗法、耳鸣再训练疗法(tinnitus retraining therapy, TRT)、认知行为疗法(cognitive behavioural therapy, CBT)、佩戴声音播放器或助听器以及药物疗法。银杏叶草本补剂也曾被使用。 我们想知道什么？ 我们想知道银杏叶是否能减轻耳鸣的严重程度，以及是否有任何不良或有害的影响。 我们做了什么？ 我们检索了将银杏叶与安慰剂（“虚拟”治疗）、无治疗或仅提供教育或信息用于治疗成人和儿童耳鸣并进行比较的研究。我们对各项研究结局进行比较及总结，并根据试验如何进行、多少人参与等因素来评价我们对该证据的信心。 我们发现了什么？ 我们发现了12项研究 (共1915名受试者)。十一项研究比较了银杏叶与安慰剂的作用效果。一项研究比较了银杏叶联合佩戴助听器及单独佩戴助听器的效果。 主要结局 当我们将两项测量耳鸣严重程度的研究结果结合起来时，我们发现与安慰剂相比，银杏叶可能几...

An updated Cochrane Review, published in the Cochrane Library, suggests that yoga may lead to a small reduction in pain in people with chronic non-specific lower back pain over the short term, and that improvements in back function may be similar to those seen with other types of back-focused exercise. However, researchers advise that more studies are needed to provide information on long-term effects.

What is non-specific low back pain?

Low back pain is a common health problem. In many cases, there is no known cause for the pain and it is termed 'non-specific' back pain. For some people, the pain may last for three months or more and at this point it is termed 'chronic.' Non-specific low back pain is usually treated with over-the-counter pain medicines and exercise and does not require surgery or other invasive procedures. Yoga is sometimes used to help treat or manage low back pain.

What did we want to find out?

We wanted to find out if yoga improves function (for example, ability to walk, do jobs around the house, getting dressed), pain and quality of life associated with low back pain.

What did we do?

We searched medical databases for clinical trials comparing yoga practices using physical postures (often called 'hatha yoga') to any other treatment, sham (pretend) yoga, or to no treatment in adults (aged 18 years or older). We also included trials comparing yoga added to other treatments, versus those other treatments alone. 

What did we find?

We included 21 trials with 2223 participants. Ten trials were carried out in the USA, five in India, two in the UK, and one each in Croatia, Germany, Sweden, and Turkey. Most participants were women in their 40s or 50s.

Key results

• For people with long-lasting low back pain without a known cause (chronic non-specific low back pain), after three months of doing yoga or not doing yoga, yoga is probably better than not doing exercise for improving pain and back-related function, although the improvements are small.
• There is probably little or no difference between yoga and other types of back-focused exercise in improving back-related function, but we are uncertain about differences between yoga and other exercise for improving pain.
• Back pain was the most common harm reported in yoga trials. Risk of harms was higher with yoga than with no yoga, but similar for yoga and other exercise. There was no suggestion that yoga was associated with a risk of serious harms.

What are the limitations of the evidence?

Because we did not find any trials comparing yoga to sham yoga, we cannot say how yoga would affect low back pain if people did not know they were doing yoga. Participants in all the trials were aware of whether they were practicing yoga or not, and this may have influenced their interpretation of whether their back pain had changed. In addition, some trials were very small, there were few trials in some comparisons, and the trials in some comparisons had inconsistent results. Therefore, we downgraded the quality of the evidence to moderate, low, or very low.

Lead Cochrane author Susan Wieland from Cochrane Complementary Medicine at the Center for Integrative Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Maryland, commented,

“Our findings suggest that yoga exercise may lead to improving back-related function and reducing back pain by a small amount. Our findings also suggest that there may be little or no difference between yoga and other back-focused exercise when looking at improvements in back-related function at three and six months. At the moment we have very limited information on comparisons between yoga and other back-focused exercise with respect to improving back pain and for longer term effects beyond six months. Readers should remember that in each of the studies we reviewed, the yoga exercises were developed to treat low back pain and the yoga classes were led by experienced practitioners. The findings of this Cochrane Review will help people make more informed choices about their future treatment options.”

• Read the plain language summary and full review
• Read the Evidently Cochrane blog 'Is yoga good for back pain? Here's the evidence'

Full citation: Wieland LS, Skoetz N, Pilkington K, Harbin S, Vempati R, Berman BM. Yoga for chronic non‐specific low back pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2022, Issue 11. Art. No.: CD010671. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010671.pub3. 

About Cochrane
Cochrane is a global independent network of researchers, professionals, patients, carers, and people interested in health. Cochrane produces reviews which study all of the best available evidence generated through research and make it easier to inform decisions about health. These are called systematic reviews. Cochrane is a not-for profit organization with collaborators from more than 130 countries working together to produce credible, accessible health information that is free from commercial sponsorship and other conflicts of interest. Our work is recognized as representing an international gold standard for high quality, trusted information. https://www.cochrane.org/

About Wiley
Wiley, a global company, helps people and organizations develop the skills and knowledge they need to succeed. Our online scientific, technical, medical, and scholarly journals, combined with our digital learning, assessment and certification solutions help universities, learned societies, businesses, governments and individuals increase the academic and professional impact of their work. For more than 200 years, we have delivered consistent performance to our stakeholders. www.wiley.com.

If you are a journalist or member of the press and wish to receive news alerts before their online publication or if you wish to arrange an interview with an author, please contact the Cochrane press office: pressoffice@cochrane.org

Friday, November 18, 2022

Specifications:  Fixed Term Contract Fulltime (Part time will be considered at minimum 0.6FTE)
Salary: £47,000 per annum
Location: UK
Application Closing Date:  27 November 2022

The Evidence Production and Methods Directorate in Cochrane is made up of three departments that are responsible for the efficient and timely production of high-quality Cochrane Reviews addressing research questions that are most important to decision makers.

The Commissioning Editor will be responsible for ensuring that work on high-quality, relevant  reviews is initiated, and for monitoring progress. Overall, this role will contribute to producing trusted evidence by:

1. Working closely with the Head of Methods and Evidence Synthesis Development to identify priority Cochrane Reviews
2. Working with Cochrane Review Groups and Thematic Groups/Evidence Synthesis Units to coordinate support for reviews in process
3. Working with Cochrane’s Development Directorate in exploring funding opportunities for suites of related reviews and for individual reviews as necessary
4. Overseeing initiation and completion of new and updated Cochrane Reviews against agreed priority areas that meet Cochrane’s mission

Cochrane is a global independent network of health practitioners, researchers, patient advocates and others, responding to the challenge of making the vast amounts of evidence generated through research useful for informing decisions about health. We do this by identifying, appraising and synthesizing individual research findings to produce the best available evidence on what can work, what might harm and where more research is needed.

How to apply

• For further information on the role and how to apply, please click here. 
• The deadline to receive your application is by 27 November 2022. 
• The supporting statement should indicate why you are applying for the post, and how far you meet the requirements, using specific examples.
• Please indicate the FTE you would like to be considered for in your application. Note that we will assess applications as they are received.
• Read our Recruitment Privacy Statement

Tuesday, November 15, 2022 Category: Jobs

Specifications: 0.8 FTE, Permanent
Salary: £45,000 per annum full time equivalent (Pro-rated to part time)
Location: UK
Application Closing Date:  27 November 2022

The Evidence Production and Methods Directorate in Cochrane is made up of three departments that are responsible for the efficient and timely production of high-quality Cochrane Reviews addressing research questions that are most important to decision makers.

As Evidence Synthesis Development Editor in the Methods and Evidence Synthesis Development team, you will be working on new and updated Cochrane Reviews prior to their completion and submission for editorial process. The role-holder will need to ensure that protocols and new or updated reviews will meet Cochrane’s quality standards.

The role-holder will need to be able to recognise when to refer methodological questions to colleagues with specialist methods expertise in the Methods Support Unit or Cochrane Methods Groups for further advice, especially around the assessment of bias and statistical methods.

Cochrane is a global independent network of health practitioners, researchers, patient advocates and others, responding to the challenge of making the vast amounts of evidence generated through research useful for informing decisions about health. We do this by identifying, appraising and synthesizing individual research findings to produce the best available evidence on what can work, what might harm and where more research is needed.

How to apply

• For further information on the role and how to apply, please click here. 
• The deadline to receive your application is by 27 November 2022. 
• The supporting statement should indicate why you are applying for the post, and how far you meet the requirements, using specific examples. Note that we will assess applications as they are received, and therefore may fill the post before the deadline.
• Read our Recruitment Privacy Statement

Tuesday, November 15, 2022 Category: Jobs

Monday, November 14, 2022

Monday, November 14, 2022

在标准药物的基础上服用免疫刺激剂对患有慢性阻塞性肺病、慢性支气管炎或二者均有的患者是否有益？ 关键信息 1.对于慢性支气管炎或慢性阻塞性肺病患者来说，免疫刺激剂可能会降低患者病情加重的可能性，以及病情加重时需要使用抗生素的可能性。 2.我们不确定免疫刺激剂对降低死亡风险、改善生活质量或减少疾病发作或住院时间方面的效果。 3.免疫刺激剂与副作用的风险增加没有关系。 什么是慢性阻塞性肺病和慢性支气管炎？ 慢性阻塞性肺病（Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease , COPD）和慢性支气管炎是永久性影响肺部气道的常见疾病。它们主要是由接触香烟烟雾或其他空气污染物引起的。患有慢性阻塞性肺病或慢性支气管炎的人可能会出现持续的呼吸困难、咳嗽和产生痰液的症状，并且容易出现这些症状的发作（病情加重）。急剧发作可能会使人虚弱，随着时间的推移，肺功能会恶化，并导致病情进一步加重。有几种标准的治疗方法可以帮助预防病情发作，几乎所有被诊断为慢性阻塞性肺病的人都被推荐使用这些方法。这些主要包括戒烟、参加锻炼计划、接种疫苗以预防感染，以及通过吸入器使用特定药物。 什么是免疫刺激剂？ 免疫刺激剂是一类药物，目前没有被广泛用于慢性阻塞性肺病或慢性支气管炎患者的长期治疗。一些科学家和医生认为，在标准治疗中加入免疫刺激剂，通过提高免疫系统对病情加重的诱因（如病毒或细菌感染）的反应，...

边缘性人格障碍患者从药物治疗中有哪些益处和风险？ 关键信息 本综述是对2010年发表的同一主题综述的更新。尽管本综述纳入另外18项研究，但结论仍然相同：边缘型人格障碍（borderline personality disorder, BDP）的药物治疗可能没有益处和风险，但证据尚不清楚。 需要更好和更大规模的研究来比较药物与安慰剂的效果。此类研究应侧重于男性、青少年和那些还有其他精神病诊断的人群。 什么是边缘性人格障碍？ BPD会影响一个人如何与他人互动以及如何了解自己。虽然其确切原因尚不清楚，但认为是遗传和环境因素（例如，成长过程中的压力或创伤性生活事件）共同作用的结果。大约2%的成年人和3%的青少年受到边缘性人格障碍的影响。 BPD的症状可分为四类。 情绪不稳定：BPD患者可能会经历快速变化且难以控制的强烈情绪。他们也可能在很多时候感到空虚和被遗弃。 认知扭曲（思维模式紊乱）：BPD患者通常会有令人沮丧的想法（例如，他们可能认为自己是一个糟糕的人）。他们可能会有短暂的奇怪经历（例如偏执的想法或压力引起的解离经历（即感觉与周围的世界分离））。 冲动行为：BPD患者可能会冲动行事并做出可能伤害自己的事情（例如，当悲伤和沮丧时，他们可能出现自伤或有自杀倾向）。他们也可能做出鲁莽行为（例如滥用药物）。 强烈但不稳定的关系：BPD患者可能会发现很难保持稳定的关系（例如，他们可能会非常担...

面罩与鼻导管对早产儿持续气道正压通气的比较 关键信息 面罩相对于鼻导管可以降低持续气道正压通气（continuous positive airway pressure, CPAP）治疗失败和鼻损伤的风险，但对与早产相关的死亡风险或其他并发症的影响可能很小或没有影响。 什么是持续气道正压通气？ 经鼻CPAP是一种比机械通气（将呼吸管放入婴儿的气管中）侵入性更小的呼吸支持形式。经鼻CPAP通过鼻导管或覆盖鼻子的柔软面罩为婴儿输送氧气。该方法可以在婴儿脱离呼吸机（拔管）后使用，或帮助需要解决肺部问题但不需要通气的婴儿。 我们想知道什么? 我们评估了是否有证据支持面罩在降低CPAP治疗失败率（即婴儿病情恶化或婴儿需要机械通气）以及减少并发症和伤害方面优于鼻导管。 我们做了什么？ 我们检索了医学数据库中截至2021年10月的临床试验。 我们发现了什么? 我们纳入了在1604名比预产期早三周以上出生的婴儿中比较了使用面罩与使用鼻导管进行CPAP的12项试验。试验大多规模很小，有些设计缺陷可能会使他们的研究结果产生偏倚。 主要研究结果 分析表明，相比于鼻导管，使用面罩可能会降低CPAP治疗失败和鼻损伤的风险，但对与早产相关的死亡风险或其他并发症的影响可能很小或没有影响。没有一项研究评估了对残疾或发育结局的影响。 证据的局限性是什么? 考虑到所纳入试验中使用的方法可能会引入偏倚，并且试验数据有限...

吸入抗生素治疗囊性纤维化患者的肺部感染 系统综述问题 吸入抗生素是否有助于防止囊性纤维化（cystic fibrosis, CF）患者持续感染铜绿假单胞菌？ 关键信息 随着CF患者年龄的增长，他们更有可能长期感染铜绿假单胞菌。这是CF患者患慢性肺部感染的最常见原因。 我们想知道针对铜绿假单胞菌的抗生素在吸入肺部时是否会减少感染的影响。我们想知道这种治疗是否会改善肺功能、生活质量和生存。我们还研究任何有害影响。 什么是CF？ 囊性纤维化是一种遗传性疾病，会导致身体多个部位的粘液出现异常，主要影响容易受到某些细菌感染的肺部。感染引起炎症，从而导致肺部渐进性损伤。 我们发现了什么？ 本系统综述纳入18项研究，涉及3042名年龄在5岁至45岁之间的CF患者。试验持续时间从3个月到33个月。其中十一项试验的研究者比较了吸入抗生素与安慰剂（一种不含药物的吸入物质），并且随机选择受试者去接受一种治疗或另一种治疗。八项试验将一种吸入抗生素与另一种不同的吸入抗生素或同一吸入抗生素的不同给药方案进行了比较。其中一项试验将抗生素和安慰剂进行比较，也和不同的抗生素进行了比较，因此将其分为两组。 主要结果 四项试验的结果表明，吸入抗生素与安慰剂相比较时可能改善肺部功能并减少CF患者症状恶化的次数。吸入抗生素也可能意味着不上学或不工作的天数的减少（评价生活质量的一个指标）。它们似乎对生存没有影响。我们不确定...

对未成熟蚊子的水环境进行哪些永久性和临时性改变可以更好地减少人类的疟疾？ 为什么减少人类的疟疾很重要？ 疟疾对民众的健康影响非常大，主要是非洲和亚洲的人们。多年来，人们一直在研究减少疟疾的策略。大多数策略侧重于减少未成熟蚊子（幼虫和蛹）的数量，以防止它们变成成年蚊子，因为成年雌性蚊子可以通过叮咬人传播疟疾。 对未成熟蚊子的环境的永久和临时变化是什么？ 可以使用永久（改造）和临时（干预）改变来扰乱未成熟蚊子生活的水环境。永久性改变的例子包括修建排水渠、平整土地和填充沟渠。临时改变的例子包括改变溪流的水流、排水渠、割草、使用植物遮蔽水面。这些干预措施可以单独使用，也可以与其他标准处理措施一起使用，例如定期向水体喷洒杀虫剂（杀幼虫剂）。 我们想从中发现什么？ 我们想找出对未成熟蚊子环境的哪些永久性和临时性改变可以减少人类的疟疾（临床结局），以及未成熟和成年蚊子的数量（昆虫学结局）。 我们做了什么？ 我们检索了关于与无干预或不同的永久或临时变化相比，对未成熟蚊子环境进行永久和临时改变的研究。我们比较并总结了研究结果，还根据诸如研究方法等因素来评定证据的可信度。 我们发现了什么? 综述包括16项研究，这些研究使用了一系列不同的随机和非随机研究设计。11项研究在非洲进行，5项在亚洲进行。只有少数研究报告了临床结局，其中大部分关注未成熟蚊子或成年蚊子或两者的数量（昆虫学结局）。我们发现有一些证...

Thursday, November 10, 2022

Wednesday, November 9, 2022

Wednesday, November 9, 2022

预防血凝块溶解的药物（抗纤维蛋白溶解疗法）用于改善动脉瘤破裂引起的蛛网膜下腔出血后的恢复 研究问题 抗纤维蛋白溶解疗法对动脉瘤性蛛网膜下腔出血患者有什么效果？ 研究背景 蛛网膜下腔出血是指出血到大脑和颅骨之间的小空间，该空间包含为大脑供血的血管（蛛网膜下腔）。这种出血的原因通常是其中一条脑血管中的薄弱点（动脉瘤）破裂。蛛网膜下腔出血是一种相对少见的中风类型，但通常发生在年轻时（一半的人年龄小于50岁），因此具有重大的社会经济影响。蛛网膜下腔出血后的预后通常很差；三分之一的人在出血后死亡；而在幸存者中，五分之一的人在日常活动中需要协助。蛛网膜下腔出血后恢复不良的一个重要原因是动脉瘤反复（复发）出血（再出血）。这被认为是由天然血凝块溶解（纤维蛋白溶解）活动引起的。降低血凝块溶解速度的药物，称为抗纤维蛋白溶解药物，被作为一种治疗方法，以降低复发性出血的风险并改善蛛网膜下腔出血后的恢复。 研究特征 目前的证据更新至 2022年5月。本综述纳入了11项试验，共有2717名受试者，研究了抗纤维蛋白溶解药物对动脉瘤破裂引起的蛛网膜下腔出血患者的效果。 主要研究结果 抗纤维蛋白溶解治疗可降低再出血的风险，但不会提高总体生存率或独立进行日常活动的机会。我们的结论是，没有证据支持对动脉瘤破裂引起的蛛网膜下腔出血患者进行常规抗纤维蛋白溶解治疗。 证据质量 我们将结局的证据评估为中等质量到高质量，这意味...

卒中后知觉障碍的干预 关键信息 卒中会影响一个人处理和理解来自感官信息的能力，包括听觉、嗅觉、躯体感觉（体温、位置和运动的感觉）、味觉、触觉和视觉。处理和理解来自这些感官的信息被称为知觉。 很少有研究确定任何治疗对卒中相关知觉问题是否有帮助。 患有卒中相关听觉、嗅觉、躯体感觉、味觉、触觉和视觉问题的人群应继续按照临床指南的建议参与康复治疗。医疗保健专业人员应根据当前的临床指南和建议，继续为卒中相关的知觉问题提供康复服务。 什么是知觉障碍？ 在卒中之前，成年人通过他们的感官收集关于世界的信息，包括听觉、嗅觉、躯体感觉、味觉、触觉和视觉。躯体感觉是指从皮肤、肌肉或关节产生的感觉，包括对压力、振动、温度和位置的知觉。收集的信息可能包括他们看到的物体的颜色、形状和大小。连同记忆和文化体验，一个人可以从另一个人的面部表情中了解他们的感受。其他例子像是如何通过嗅觉识别不同的气味，以及如何通过触觉感受不同的质地。卒中会影响这些能力。 如何治疗知觉障碍？ 医疗保健专业人员，包括职业治疗师、物理治疗师和心理学家，可能会提供不同的疗法。治疗可能包括药物、大脑刺激或通过活动、游戏、策略或高强度重复任务进行知觉康复。 我们想知道什么？ 我们想知道接受任何知觉障碍治疗是否比不接受治疗好。我们通过观察人们进行日常活动的能力来衡量改善情况。我们测量了治疗是否也有助于其他方面，例如生活质量、心理健康和感知。我们...

预防遗传性血管性水肿发作的药物治疗 什么是遗传性血管性水肿以及如何治疗？ 遗传性血管性水肿（Hereditary angioedema, HAE）是一种严重且可能危及生命的疾病，会导致急性肿胀（突然发作）、疼痛和生活质量下降。现已有几种新药被用来治疗HAE急性发作和防止其复发。有些药物是口服的，而另一些则是皮下注射，或通过静脉直接注入血液。 目前用于预防HAE发作的药物是人C1酯酶抑制剂（通常缩写为C1-INH）、贝罗司他、拉那芦人单抗、氨甲环酸和达那唑。此外，我们还发现了另一种药物（阿伏司他），其预防HAE发作的能力正在研究当中。 我们想知道什么？ 我们调查了这些药物是否会减少HAE发作的次数，以及如果发作，那么发作的严重程度是否比不用药物时低。我们还研究了服用这些药物的人是否有更好的生活质量，以及这些药物是否会引起不必要的副作用。 我们做了什么？ 我们在医学数据库中检索了针对患有HAE的儿童或成人的临床研究，这些研究将预防HAE发作的药物与安慰剂（一种假治疗）或其他药物进行了比较。 我们发现了什么？ 我们找到了15项研究，共有912名受试者。除阿伏司他外的所有药物都减少了HAE发作的次数，即使确实发作了，使用了C1-INH和拉那芦人单抗的患者严重程度也较低（没有关于其他药物的结果）。我们发现大多数药物改善了HAE患者的生活质量，并且通常是安全的，因为它们不会增加严重和不太严重...

Cochrane has joined other health and social care bodies in a pledge to improve public involvement in research.

Cochrane has signed up to the Shared Commitment to Public Involvement in Health and Social Care Research. The Shared Commitment aims to bring about changes which will drive up standards in health and social care research. The statement was developed in partnership with members of the public and was launched in March 2022 during Science Week. 

Public involvement refers to all the ways in which the research community works together with people including patients, carers, advocates, service users, and members of the community.

Dr Matt Westmore, Health Research Authority Chief Executive, said: “It’s great to have Cochrane joining our Shared Commitment to Public Involvement.

This shared statement, developed with patients, research participants and leaders in health and social care research, will ensure public involvement is embedded across the health and social care research system.

The entire research system is sending the same strong message. That public involvement is always important, always expected and always possible. The evidence is that better research results from involvement, and better research delivers benefits for patients.”

Cochrane is an international, not-for-profit network of clinicians, patients and careers, researchers, and policy-makers creating high-quality healthcare evidence synthesises.

Catherine Spencer, Cochrane CEO, said: “Cochrane provides high-quality, synthesized evidence for health decisions. Involving the public ensures that our focus is meaningful and our evidence is accessible. Signing this public involvement pledge makes a clear statement; the input and involvement of patients, carers, and the public is valued by Cochrane.”

Richard Morley, Cochrane’s Consumer Engagement Officer, explains: “Cochrane has a long and rich history of collaborating with healthcare consumers. The Cochrane Consumer Network has played a formal role since 1995 with over 2,000 members and 2 Consumer Executives serving on the Cochrane Council. We have recently launched a framework that will help guide Cochrane’s work to 2027. Signing this public involvement pledge solidifies Cochrane’s commitment to ensuring that healthcare consumers are embedded and central to our work.”

Maureen Smith, Chair of the consumers Executive, said: “Cochrane consumers have a long tradition of involvement to ensure that evidence is accessible, relevant, and responds to the needs of their communities all over the world. Signing this pledge signals Cochrane’s firm commitment to advancing and supporting the incredible potential of consumers in their roles as users of evidence and producers of evidence.”

Organisations who have signed the shared commitment include:

• The Academy of Medical Sciences
• The Association of Medical Research Charities
• The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry
• Cancer Research UK
• Cochrane
• Health and Care Research Wales
• Health and Social Care Northern Ireland
• Health Research Authority (HRA)
• Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency
• National Coordinating Centre for Public Engagement
• National Institute for Health Research
• NIHR Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) North East and North Cumbria
• NHS Research Scotland
• Universities UK
• UK Research and Innovation

The statement, signed by leaders at each organisation, reads:

Public involvement is important, expected and possible in all types of health and social care research.

Together our organisations and members fund, support and regulate health and social care research. This statement is our joint commitment to improve the extent and quality of public involvement across the sector so that it is consistently excellent.

People have the right to be involved in all health and social care research. Excellent public involvement is an essential part of health and social care research and has been shown to improve its quality and impact. People’s lived experiences should be a key driver for health and social care research.

When we talk about public involvement, we mean all the ways in which the research community works together with people including patients, carers, advocates, service users, and members of the community.

Excellent public involvement is inclusive, values all contributions, ensures people have a meaningful say in what happens and influences outcomes, as set out in the UK Standards for Public Involvement.

Working together we will support the research community to carry out excellent public involvement. We will provide or share guidance, policies, systems, and incentives.

We will:

• listen to and learn from the people and communities we involve and apply and share that learning 
• build and share the evidence of how to involve the public and the impact this has 
• support improvements in equality, diversity, and inclusion in public involvement 
• promote the UK Standards for Public Involvement.

We will embed this commitment into the decision-making processes of our organisations.

• Learn more about Cochrane’s commitment to healthcare consumers
• Join Cochrane’s work as a patient, carer, or member of the public

Monday, December 12, 2022