Ethnopharmacological relevance: Tanreqing injection (TRQI) is an intravenous herbal preparation derived from 5 types of traditional Chinese medicines including Scutellariae Radix, Lonicerae Japonicae Flos, Forsythiae Fructus, bear bile powder and goral horn, incorporating baicalin, chlorogenic acid, ursodeoxycholic acid, and goose deoxycholic acid and other compounds known for anti-inflammatory properties, is widely used in China to treat cough caused by acute trachea-bronchitis disease (ATB). Aim of the study: To investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of Tanreqing injection (TRQI) with and without Western medicine (WM) for cough caused by acute trachea-bronchitis (ATB). Materials and methods: We systematically searched eight databases, including CENTRAL, Embase, PubMed, Science Direct, Wiley, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database and WanFang, from inception to August 2023 for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on TRQI for cough caused by ATB. The critical outcomes of interest were time to symptom disappearance, including time for cough symptom to disappear and time to improve cough and sputum production. Important outcomes included symptom disappearance rate, adverse events (AEs) and lung function. We carried out random-effects meta-analysis using Review Manager 5.4 and assessed the certainty of evidence utilizing the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results: A total of 2872 citations were identified by our search, of which 26 eligible RCTs enrolled 2731 participants. Low to moderate certainty evidence showed that when compared with WM, TRQI plus WM treatment was associated with a favorable effect on the time for cough symptom to disappear (MD-2.21 d, 95% CI-2.64 to-1.78), time to improve cough and sputum production (MD-0.68 d, 95% CI-0.83 to-0.53), symptom disappearance rate (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.55), forced vital capacity, and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (MD 0.38 L, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.50; MD 2.92%, 95% CI 1.29 to 4.56, respectively). In terms of AEs, there was no association between TRQI plus WM and WM (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.14 to 2.21; low-certainty evidence). Very low certainty evidence showed that TRQI alone was associated with reduced time to improve cough and sputum (MD-0.14 d, 95% CI-0.26 to-0.02) and increased symptom disappearance rate (RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.88; low certainty evidence) compared to WM.

BackgroundActive workstations have been proposed as a feasible approach for reducing occupational sedentary time. This study used a network meta-analysis (NMA) to assess and compare the overall efficacy of active workstation interventions according to type and concomitant strategy for reducing work-specific sitting time in office workers.MethodsPubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched from database inception until May 2022 to obtain randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of active workstations with or without concomitant strategies for reducing occupational sedentary time in office workers. The risk of bias of the RCTs included in this study was assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook. An NMA with STATA 15.1 was used to construct a network diagram, league figures, and the final surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach.ResultsA total of 23 eligible studies including eight different types of interventions with 1428 office workers were included. NMA results showed that compared to a typical desk, multicomponent intervention (standardized mean difference (SMD) = - 1.50; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 2.17, - 0.82; SUCRA = 72.4%), sit-stand workstation + promotion (Reminders of rest breaks, posture variation, or incidental office activity) (SMD = - 1.49; 95%CI - 2.42, - 0.55; SUCRA = 71.0%), treadmill workstation + promotion (SMD = - 1.29; 95%CI - 2.51, - 0.07; SUCRA = 61.6%), and sit-stand workstation (SMD = - 1.10, 95%CI - 1.64, - 0.56; SUCRA = 50.2%) were effective in reducing occupational sedentary time for office workers.ConclusionsMulticomponent intervention, sit-stand workstation + promotion, treadmill workstation + promotion, and sit-stand workstation appear to be effective in reducing work-specific sedentary time for office workers. Furthermore, multicomponent interventions and active workstations + promotion better reduced work-specific sedentary time than active workstation alone. However, the overall certainty of the evidence was low.

BackgroundStudies of the associations between soft drinks and the risk of cancer showed inconsistent results. No previous published systematic reviews and meta-analysis has investigated a dose-response association between exposure dose and cancer risk or assessed the certainty of currently available evidence. Therefore, we aim to demonstrate the associations and assessed the certainty of the evidence to show our confidence in the associations.MethodsWe searched Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to Jun 2022, to include relevant prospective cohort studies. We used a restricted cubic spline model to conduct a dose-response meta-analysis and calculated the absolute effect estimates to present the results. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of the evidence.ResultsForty-two articles including on 37 cohorts enrolled 4,518,547 participants were included. With low certainty evidence, increased consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) per 250 mL/day was significantly associated with a 17% greater risk of breast cancer, a 10% greater risk of colorectal cancer, a 30% greater risk of biliary tract cancer, and a 10% greater risk of prostate cancer; increased consumption of artificially sweetened beverages (ASBs)re per 250 mL/day was significantly associated with a 16% greater risk of leukemia; increased consumption of 100% fruit juice per 250 mL/day was significantly associated with a 31% greater risk of overall cancer, 22% greater risk of melanoma, 2% greater risk of squamous cell carcinoma, and 29% greater risk of thyroid cancer. The associations with other specific cancer were no significant. We found linear dose-response associations between consumption of SSBs and the risk of breast and kidney cancer, and between consumption of ASBs and 100% fruit juices and the risk of pancreatic cancer.ConclusionsAn increment in consumption of SSBs of 250 mL/day was positively associated with increased risk of breast, colorectal, and biliary tract cancer. Fruit juices consumption was also positively associated with the risk of overall cancer, thyroid cancer, and melanoma. The magnitude of absolute effects, however, was small and mainly based on low or very low certainty of evidence. The association of ASBs consumption with specific cancer risk was uncertain.

Objective: A network meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials was conducted to investigate the effects of pharmacological interventions on smoking cessation. Methods: English databases were searched to obtain randomized controlled trials reporting the effect of pharmacological interventions on smoking cessation. The risk of bias for the included trials was assessed using Cochrane Handbook tool. Stata 15.1 software was used to perform network meta-analysis, and GRADE approach was used to assess the evidence credibility on the effects of different interventions on smoking cessation. Results: A total of 159 studies involving 60,285 smokers were included in the network meta-analysis. The analysis involved 15 interventions and which yielded 105 pairs of comparisons. Network meta-analysis showed that varenicline was more helpful for smoking cessation than other monotherapies, such as nicotine replacement therapy [Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.16, 1.73)] and bupropion [OR = 1.52, 95% CI (1.22, 1.89)]. Furthermore, combined interventions were superior to monotherapy in achieving smoking cessation, such as varenicline plus bupropion over bupropion [OR = 2.00, 95% CI (1.11, 3.61)], varenicline plus nicotine replacement therapy over nicotine replacement therapy [OR = 1.84, 95% CI (1.07, 3.18)], and nicotine replacement therapy plus mecamylamine over naltrexone [OR = 6.29, 95% CI (1.59, 24.90)]. Finally, the surface under the cumulative ranking curve value indicated that nicotine replacement therapy plus mecamylamine had the greatest probability of becoming the best intervention. Conclusion: Most pharmacological interventions demonstrated a benefit in smoking cessation compared with placebo, whether monotherapy or combination therapy. Moreover, confirmed evidence suggested that some combination treatments, such as varenicline plus bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy plus mecamylamine have a higher probability of being the best smoking cessation in