OBJECTIVE: This study provides a comprehensive overview of the knowledge structure and research hotspots regarding barriers and strategies for the implementation of clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: Publications on barriers and strategies for guideline implementation were searched for on Web of Science Core Collection from database inception to October 24, 2022. R package bibliometrix, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace were used to conduct the analysis. RESULTS: The search yielded 21,768 records from 3,975 journals by 99,998 authors from 3,964 institutions in 186 countries between 1983 and 2022. The number of published papers had a roughly increasing trend annually. The United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada contributed the majority of records. The University of Toronto, the University of Washington, and the University of Sydney were the biggest node in their cluster on the collaboration network map. The three journals that published the greatest number of relevant studies were Implementation Science, BMJ Open, and BMC Health Services Research. Grimshaw JM was the author with the most published articles, and was the second most co-cited author. Research hotspots in this field focused on public health and education, evidence-based medicine and quality promotion, diagnosis and treatment, and knowledge translation and barriers. Challenges and barriers, as well as societal impacts and inequalities, are likely to be key directions for future research. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first bibliometric study to comprehensively summarize the research trends of research on barriers and strategies for clinical practice guideline implementation. A better understanding of collaboration patterns and research hotspots may be useful for researchers. SPANISH ABSTRACT: http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A247.

Importance Large language models (LLMs) may facilitate the labor-intensive process of systematic reviews. However, the exact methods and reliability remain uncertain. Objective To explore the feasibility and reliability of using LLMs to assess risk of bias (ROB) in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Design, Setting, and Participants A survey study was conducted between August 10, 2023, and October 30, 2023. Thirty RCTs were selected from published systematic reviews. Main Outcomes and Measures A structured prompt was developed to guide ChatGPT (LLM 1) and Claude (LLM 2) in assessing the ROB in these RCTs using a modified version of the Cochrane ROB tool developed by the CLARITY group at McMaster University. Each RCT was assessed twice by both models, and the results were documented. The results were compared with an assessment by 3 experts, which was considered a criterion standard. Correct assessment rates, sensitivity, specificity, and F1 scores were calculated to reflect accuracy, both overall and for each domain of the Cochrane ROB tool; consistent assessment rates and Cohen kappa were calculated to gauge consistency; and assessment time was calculated to measure efficiency. Performance between the 2 models was compared using risk differences. Results Both models demonstrated high correct assessment rates. LLM 1 reached a mean correct assessment rate of 84.5% (95% CI, 81.5%-87.3%), and LLM 2 reached a significantly higher rate of 89.5% (95% CI, 87.0%-91.8%). The risk difference between the 2 models was 0.05 (95% CI, 0.01-0.09). In most domains, domain-specific correct rates were around 80% to 90%; however, sensitivity below 0.80 was observed in domains 1 (random sequence generation), 2 (allocation concealment), and 6 (other concerns). Domains 4 (missing outcome data), 5 (selective outcome reporting), and 6 had F1 scores below 0.50. The consistent rates between the 2 assessments were 84.0% for LLM 1 and 87.3% for LLM 2. LLM 1's kappa exceeded 0.80 in 7 and LLM 2's in 8 domains. The mean (SD) time needed for assessment was 77 (16) seconds for LLM 1 and 53 (12) seconds for LLM 2. Conclusions In this survey study of applying LLMs for ROB assessment, LLM 1 and LLM 2 demonstrated substantial accuracy and consistency in evaluating RCTs, suggesting their potential as supportive tools in systematic review processes.

COVID-19 is not only associated with substantial acute liver and kidney injuries, but also with an elevated risk of post-acute sequelae involving the kidney and liver system. We aimed to investigate whether COVID-19 exposure increases the long-term risk of kidney and liver disease, and what are the magnitudes of these associations. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, , and the Living Overview of the Evidence COVID-19 Repository for cohort studies estimating the association between COVID-19 and kidney and liver outcomes. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to combine the results of the included studies. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Fifteen cohort studies with more than 32 million participants were included in the systematic review COVID-19 was associated with a 35% greater risk of kidney diseases (10 more per 1000 persons; low certainty evidence) and 54% greater risk of liver disease (3 more per 1000 persons; low certainty evidence). The absolute increases due to COVID-19 for acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, and liver test abnormality were 3, 8, and 3 per 1000 persons, respectively. Subgroup analyses found no differences between different type of kidney and liver diseases. The findings provide further evidence for the association between COVID-19 and incident kidney and liver conditions. The absolute magnitude of the effect of COVID-19 on kidney and liver outcomes was, however, relatively small.

Objective: To summarize the evidence of various exercise modalities on population with insomnia disorders. Method: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched for eligible studies published from inception to October 2022 and updated on September 2023. Systematic reviews with meta -analyses and randomized controlled trials designed to investigate the effect of various exercise modalities on population with insomnia were eligible. Results: A total of 4 SRs with (very) low methodological quality and 1034 participants in 10 network metaanalyses explored the association between different types and intensity exercise modalities with insomnia disorders. Various exercise modalities could significantly improve total sleep time and sleep quality and alleviate insomnia severity. Compared to passive control, moderate aerobic exercise, moderate aerobic exercise combined with light intensity strength and mind -body exercise can improve sleep efficiency and reduce wake after sleep onset by objectively measured. Moderate intensity strength, light intensity strength and mind -body exercise can improve sleep efficiency subjectively measured; mind -body exercise can reduce sleep onset latency and wake time after sleep onset, and increase total sleep time; moderate aerobic exercise can reduce sleep onset latency. Moderate intensity strength, light intensity strength, mind body exercise and moderate aerobic exercise combined with light intensity strength can the severity of insomnia and improv sleep quality. Conclusion: Exercise had a positive effect on relief insomnia and improve sleep quality. Moderate aerobic exercise, mind -body exercise and moderate aerobic exercise combined with light intensity strength play an important role in improving the sleep quality in people with insomnia disorders.

Background Molnupiravir has been considered a promising candidate for COVID-19. Its efficacy and safety in non-severe COVID-19 patients and the differences between patients with different risk factors need further evaluation. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that allocated adult patients with non-severe COVID-19 to molnupiravir or a control. We used random-effects models, and conducted subgroup analyses and meta-regression for COVID-19 patients with high-risk factors. The GRADE approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. Results Fourteen trials with 34 570 patients were included. Moderate- to low-certainty evidence showed that molnupiravir was associated with a reduction in the risk of hospitalization (relative risk [RR] = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.47-0.85), risk of mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.19-0.72) and time to symptom resolution (mean differences [MD] = -2.91 days, 95% CI: -3.66 to -2.16). However, no significant differences were found in adverse events, all-cause mortality, rate of and time to viral clearance, or duration of hospitalization. For the rate of viral clearance, subgroup effects were found between trials with low and high risk of bias (P = 0.001) and between trials with male or female majority (P < 0.001). For admission to hospital, subgroup effects were also found between trials with & GE;50% and <50% of the participants being female (P = 0.04). Meta-regression showed a significant association between higher trial mean age and elevated risk of hospitalization (P = 0.011), and female majority and elevated risk of hospitalization (P = 0.011). Conclusions Molnupiravir was found to be effective in non-severe COVID-19, but the efficacy varied with age and sex.

Ethnopharmacological relevance: Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) represents a rich repository of empirically -developed traditional medicines. The findings call for more rigorous study into the efficacy, safety, and mechanisms of action of TCM remedies to strengthen the evidence base. Aim of the study: To systematically review the quality of insomnia clinical practice guidelines that involve TCM recommendations and to summarize the certainty of evidence supporting the recommendations, strength, and consistency of recommendations, providing valuable research references for the development of future insomnia guidelines. Materials and methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Chinese Medical Association, Chinese Sleep Research Society, Medsci, Medlive, British National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), and the International Guidelines Collaboration Network (GIN) for clinical practice guidelines on insomnia from inception to March 5, 2023. Four evaluators conducted independent assessments of the quality of the guidelines by employing the AGREE II tool. Subsequently, the guideline recommendations were consolidated and presented as evidence maps.Results: Thirteen clinical practice guidelines addressing insomnia, encompassing 211 recommendations (consisting of 127 evidence-based and 84 expert consensus recommendations), were deemed eligible for inclusion in our analysis. The evaluation results revealed an overall suboptimal quality, with the "scope and purpose" domain achieving the highest score (58.1%), while the "applicability" domain garnered the lowest score (13.0%). Specifically, it was observed that 74.8% (n = 95) of the evidence-based recommendations were supported by evidence of either very low or low certainty, in contrast to the expert consensus recommendations, which accounted for 61.9% (n = 52). We subsequently synthesized 44 recommendations into four evidence maps, focusing on proprietary Chinese medicines, Chinese medicine prescriptions, acupuncture, and massage, respectively. Notably, Chinese herbal remedies and acupuncture exhibited robust support, substantiated by high-certainty evidence, exemplified by interventions such as Xuefu Zhuyu decoction, spleen decoction, body acupuncture, and ear acupuncture, resulting in solid recommendations. Conversely, proprietary Chinese medicines needed more high-certainty evidence, predominantly yielding weak recommendations. As for other therapies, the level of certainty was predominantly categorized as low or very low. Recommendations about magnetic therapy, bathing, and fumigation relied primarily on expert consensus, needing more substantive clinical research evidence, consequently forming weak recommendations. Hot ironing and acupoint injection recommendations were weakly endorsed, primarily based on observational studies. Furthermore, interventions like qigong, gua sha, and moxibustion displayed a relatively limited number of clinical studies, necessitating further exploration to ascertain their efficacy.Conclusions: Our analysis revealed a need for substantial improvement in the quality of all the included guidelines related to insomnia. Notably, recommendations for Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) treatments predominantly rely on low-certainty evidence. This study represents a pioneering effort in the utilization of recommendation mapping to both present and identify existing gaps in the evidence landscape within TCM therapies, thus setting the stage for future research initiatives. The evidence supporting TCM therapy recommendations must be fortified to achieve a more substantial level of recommendation and higher certainty. Consequently, there exists a critical and pressing demand for high-quality clinical investigations dedicated to TCM, with a specific focus on ascertaining its long-term efficacy, safety, and potential side effects in the context of insomnia treatment. These endeavors are poised to establish a robust scientific foundation to inform the development of TCM therapy recommendations within the insomnia guidelines.

Background: The potential association between hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection and development of osteoporosis has drawn significant attention from clinicians and researchers in recent years due to the increasing prevalence of HBV infection. This study aims to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature to show whether HBV infection is associated with an increased risk of osteoporosis. Methods: Case-control, cohort, and cross-sectional studies that report the incidence of osteoporosis, osteoporotic fracture, osteopenia, and bone mineral density level in populations with HBV infection will be selected. Four databases from their inception to October 2019 will be searched. All data were assessed and extracted by 2 authors independently. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale and (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality) Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality checklist will be used to assess the quality of the selected studies. Stata 15.1 (Stata Corp, College Station, TX) will be used to conduct meta-analysis. Result: The results of this systemic review and meta-analysis will be submitted to a recognized journal for publication. Conclusion: This systemic review and meta-analysis will determine whether HBV infection is associated with an increased risk of osteoporosis. We hope this review can provide a reliable evidence. Registration: PROSPERO (registration number CRD42020140522).

Background: Chronic hepatitis B is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Chronic hepatitis B requires long-term management aiming at reduction of the risks of hepatocellular inflammatory necrosis, liver fibrosis, decompensated liver cirrhosis, liver failure, and liver cancer, and improving health-related quality of life. The Chinese herbal medicine formula Xiao Chai Hu Tang has been used to decrease discomfort and replication of the virus in people with chronic hepatitis B. However, the benefits and harms of Xiao Chai Hu Tang formula have never been established with rigorous review methodology. Objectives: To assess the benefits and harms of Xiao Chai Hu Tang formula versus placebo or no intervention in people with chronic hepatitis B. Search methods: We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, and seven other databases to 1 March 2019. We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/ictrp), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov/), and the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry for ongoing or unpublished trials to 1 March 2019. Selection criteria: We included randomised clinical trials, irrespective of publication status, language, and blinding, comparing Xiao Chai Hu Tang formula versus no intervention or placebo in people with chronic hepatitis B. We included participants of any sex and age, diagnosed with chronic hepatitis B according to guidelines or as defined by the trialists. We allowed co-interventions when the co-interventions were administered equally to all the intervention groups. Data collection and analysis: Review authors independently retrieved data from reports and after correspondence with investigators. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were hepatitis B-related mortality, hepatitis B-related morbidity, and adverse events considered 'not to be serious'. We presented the meta-analysed results as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the risks of bias using risk of bias domains with predefined definitions. We used GRADE methodology to evaluate our certainty in the evidence. Main results: We included 10 randomised clinical trials with 934 participants, but only five trials with 490 participants provided data for analysis. All the trials compared Xiao Chai Hu Tang formula with no intervention. All trials appeared to have been conducted and published only in China. The included trials assessed heterogeneous forms of Xiao Chai Hu Tang formula, administered for three to eight months. One trial included participants with hepatitis B and comorbid tuberculosis, and one trial included participants with hepatitis B and liver cirrhosis. The remaining trials included participants with hepatitis B only. All the trials were at high risk of bias, and the certainty of evidence for all outcomes that provided data for analyses was very low. We downgraded the evidence by one or two levels because of outcome risk of bias, inconsistency or heterogeneity of results (opposite direction of effect), indirectness of evidence (use of surrogate outcomes instead of clinically relevant outcomes), imprecision of results (the CIs were wide), and publication bias (small sample size of the trials). Additionally, 47 trials lacked the necessary methodological information needed to ensure the inclusion of these trials in our review. None of the included trials aimed to assess clinically relevant outcomes such as all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, health-related quality of life, hepatitis B-related mortality, or hepatitis B-related morbidity. The effects of Xiao Chai Hu Tang formula on the proportion of participants with adverse events considered 'not to be serious' is uncertain (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.02 to 11.98; I2 = 69%; very low-certainty evidence). Only three trials with 222 participants reported the proportion of people with detectable hepatitis B virus DNA (HBV-DNA), but the evidence that Xiao Chai Hu Tang formula reduces the presence of HBV-DNA in the blood (a surrogate outcome) is uncertain (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.85; I2 = 0%; very low-certainty evidence). Only two trials with 160 participants reported the proportion of people with detectable hepatitis B virus e-antigen (HBeAg; a surrogate outcome) (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.02; I2 = 38%; very low-certainty evidence) and the evidence is uncertain. The evidence is also uncertain for separately reported adverse events considered 'not to be serious'. Funding: two of the 10 included trials received academic funding from government or hospital. None of the remaining eight trials reported information on funding. Authors' conclusions: The clinical effects of Xiao Chai Hu Tang formula for chronic hepatitis B remain unclear. The included trials were small and of low methodological quality. Despite the wide use of Xiao Chai Hu Tang formula, we lack data on all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, health-related quality of life, hepatitis B-related mortality, and hepatitis B-related morbidity. The evidence in this systematic review comes from data obtained from a maximum three trials. We graded the certainty of evidence as very low for adverse events considered not to be serious and the surrogate outcomes HBeAg and HBV-DNA. We found a large number of trials which lacked clear description of their design and conduct, and hence, these trials are not included in the present review. As all identified trials were conducted in China, there might be a concern about the applicability of this review outside China. Large-sized, high-quality randomised sham-controlled trials with homogeneous groups of participants and transparent funding are lacking.