-
European Journal of Pain (London,... Aug 2014Appropriate pain therapy prior to diagnosis in patients with acute abdominal pain remains controversial. Several recent studies have demonstrated that pain therapy does... (Review)
Review
Appropriate pain therapy prior to diagnosis in patients with acute abdominal pain remains controversial. Several recent studies have demonstrated that pain therapy does not negatively influence either the diagnosis or subsequent treatment of these patients; however, current practice patterns continue to favour withholding pain medication prior to diagnosis and surgical treatment decision. A systematic review of PubMed, Web-of-Science and The-Cochrane-Library from 1929 to 2011 was carried out using the key words of 'acute', 'abdomen', 'pain', 'emergency' as well as different pain drugs in use, revealed 84 papers. The results of the literature review were incorporated into six sections to describe management of acute abdominal pain: (1) Physiology of Pain; (2) Common Aetiologies of Abdominal Pain; (3) Pre-diagnostic Analgesia; (4) Pain Therapy for Acute Abdominal Pain; (5) Analgesia for Acute Abdominal Pain in Special Patient Populations; and (6) Ethical and Medico-legal Considerations in Current Analgesia Practices. A comprehensive algorithm for analgesia for acute abdominal pain in the general adult population was developed. A review of the literature of common aetiologies and management of acute abdominal pain in the general adult population and special patient populations seen in the emergency room revealed that intravenous administration of paracetamol, dipyrone or piritramide are currently the analgesics of choice in this clinical setting. Combinations of non-opioids and opioids should be administered in patients with moderate, severe or extreme pain, adjusting the treatment on the basis of repeated pain assessment, which improves overall pain management.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Acute Disease; Analgesics; Emergency Service, Hospital; Humans; Pain Management
PubMed: 24449533
DOI: 10.1002/j.1532-2149.2014.00456.x -
Jornal de Pediatria 2017The aim of this review was to address advances in management and treatment of acute viral bronchiolitis in infants. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this review was to address advances in management and treatment of acute viral bronchiolitis in infants.
SOURCES
A systematic review search was made including all articles published in English between 2010 and 2017, and available in the electronic databases PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and specialized register of the Acute Respiratory Infections Group (Cochrane review group). The following MESH terms in English were included, using different Boolean operators for the search strategy: "bronchiolitis, viral," "diagnosis," "epidemiology," "etiology," "therapy," "virology," "prevention and control," "respiratory syncytial virus, human." Additional filters were used.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Few effective interventions are recommended for the management of RSV bronchiolitis in young infants. The main goal is to ensure an adequate oxygen supplementation and fluid balance whenever deemed necessary. Hypertonic saline nebulization is helpful only for hospitalized infants. Numerous antiviral drugs and specific vaccines for RSV are under evaluation and foretell advances in disease management in the near future.
CONCLUSION
A number of promising new technologies are advancing in the field. Until new interventions became feasible, early detection and modification of preventable risk factors is essential to improve outcomes.
Topics: Acute Disease; Bronchiolitis, Viral; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections; Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Human
PubMed: 28859915
DOI: 10.1016/j.jped.2017.07.003 -
Danish Medical Journal Oct 2020Although acute otitis media (AOM) is a very frequent illness in children, it remains unclear to what extent children with AOM benefit from antibiotics (ABX). This...
INTRODUCTION
Although acute otitis media (AOM) is a very frequent illness in children, it remains unclear to what extent children with AOM benefit from antibiotics (ABX). This systematic review aimed to clarify this subject by including randomised clinical trials (RCTs) from the pneumococcal vaccine era only.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature search in four databases from 1 January 2000 to 1 January 2019 for RCTs comparing ABX to placebo in patients with AOM. Pain was registered as the main outcome. Adverse events (AE), development of contralateral otitis media, tympanic membrane perforation, late AOM recurrence, abnormal tympanometry and time to resolution of middle ear effusion were registered as secondary outcomes.
RESULTS
Six publications based on five RCTs with 1,862 patients were included. The number needed to treat (NNT) to reduce pain varied from seven (pain at day 7-10) to 28 (pain at day 2-3). The NNT for preventing contralateral otitis was ten. AE were seen in every 13th patient treated with ABX.
CONCLUSIONS
ABX appears to have a limited effect on both primary and secondary outcomes compared with placebo. A substantial number of patients experienced AE. New RCTs are needed to further clarify the effect. Ideally, RCTs could be conducted in Danish general practices in collaboration with practicing ear, nose and throat specialists to obtain large unselected populations with high rates of vaccine coverage. Until more evidence is provided, ABX should be considered among children younger than two years of age with severe symptoms of AOM, i.e. fewer and affected well-being.
Topics: Acute Disease; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Humans; Infant; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Otitis Media; Tympanic Membrane Perforation
PubMed: 33215607
DOI: No ID Found -
PloS One 2020A current assessment of case reports of possible drug-induced pancreatitis is needed. We systematically reviewed the case report literature to identify drugs with...
OBJECTIVE
A current assessment of case reports of possible drug-induced pancreatitis is needed. We systematically reviewed the case report literature to identify drugs with potential associations with acute pancreatitis and the burden of evidence supporting these associations.
METHODS
A protocol was developed a priori (PROSPERO CRD42017060473). We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and additional sources to identify cases of drug-induced pancreatitis that met accepted diagnostic criteria of acute pancreatitis. Cases caused by multiple drugs or combination therapy were excluded. Established systematic review methods were used for screening and data extraction. A classification system for associated drugs was developed a priori based upon the number of cases, re-challenge, exclusion of non-drug causes of acute pancreatitis, and consistency of latency.
RESULTS
Seven-hundred and thirteen cases of potential drug-induced pancreatitis were identified, implicating 213 unique drugs. The evidence base was poor: exclusion of non-drug causes of acute pancreatitis was incomplete or poorly reported in all cases, 47% had at least one underlying condition predisposing to acute pancreatitis, and causality assessment was not conducted in 81%. Forty-five drugs (21%) were classified as having the highest level of evidence regarding their association with acute pancreatitis; causality was deemed to be probable or definite for 19 of these drugs (42%). Fifty-seven drugs (27%) had the lowest level of evidence regarding an association with acute pancreatitis, being implicated in single case reports, without exclusion of other causes of acute pancreatitis.
DISCUSSION
Much of the case report evidence upon which drug-induced pancreatitis associations are based is tenuous. A greater emphasis on exclusion of all non-drug causes of acute pancreatitis and on quality reporting would improve the evidence base. It should be recognized that reviews of case reports, are valuable scoping tools but have limited strength to establish drug-induced pancreatitis associations.
REGISTRATION
CRD42017060473.
Topics: Acute Disease; Databases, Factual; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Humans; Pancreatitis; Pharmaceutical Preparations
PubMed: 32302358
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231883 -
JAMA Network Open Oct 2022Although topical antibiotics are often prescribed for treating acute infective conjunctivitis in children, their efficacy is uncertain. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Although topical antibiotics are often prescribed for treating acute infective conjunctivitis in children, their efficacy is uncertain.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the efficacy of topical antibiotic therapy for acute infective conjunctivitis.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
A randomized clinical trial was conducted in primary health care in Oulu, Finland, from October 15, 2014, to February 7, 2020. Children aged 6 months to 7 years with acute infective conjunctivitis were eligible for enrollment. The participants were followed up for 14 days. A subsequent meta-analysis included the present trial and 3 previous randomized clinical trials enrolling pediatric patients aged 1 month to 18 years with acute infective conjunctivitis.
INTERVENTIONS
Participants in the present randomized clinical trial were randomized to moxifloxacin eye drops, placebo eye drops, or no intervention.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome in the present randomized clinical trial was time to clinical cure (in days); in the meta-analysis, the primary outcome was the proportion of participants with conjunctival symptoms on days 3 to 6.
RESULTS
The randomized clinical trial included 88 participants (46 [52%] girls), of whom 30 were randomized to moxifloxacin eye drops (mean [SD] age, 2.8 [1.6] years), 27 to placebo eye drops (mean [SD], age 3.0 [1.3] years), and 31 to no intervention (mean [SD] age, 3.2 [1.8] years). The time to clinical cure was significantly shorter in the moxifloxacin eye drop group than in the no intervention group (3.8 vs 5.7 days; difference, -1.9 days; 95% CI, -3.7 to -0.1 days; P = .04), while in the survival analysis both moxifloxacin and placebo eye drops significantly shortened the time to clinical cure relative to no intervention. In the meta-analysis, a total of 584 children were randomized (300 to topical antibiotics and 284 to a placebo), and the use of topical antibiotics was associated with a significant reduction in the proportion of children who had symptoms of conjunctivitis on days 3 to 6 compared with placebo eye drops (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.91).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this randomized clinical trial and systematic review and meta-analysis, topical antibiotics were associated with significantly shorter durations of conjunctival symptoms in children with acute infective conjunctivitis.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrialsRegister.eu Identifier: 2013-005623-16.
Topics: Acute Disease; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Child, Preschool; Conjunctivitis; Female; Humans; Male; Moxifloxacin; Ophthalmic Solutions; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36194412
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.34459 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2020Probiotics may be effective in reducing the duration of acute infectious diarrhoea. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Probiotics may be effective in reducing the duration of acute infectious diarrhoea.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of probiotics in proven or presumed acute infectious diarrhoea.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the trials register of the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group, MEDLINE, and Embase from inception to 17 December 2019, as well as the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Issue 12, 2019), in the Cochrane Library, and reference lists from studies and reviews. We included additional studies identified during external review.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials comparing a specified probiotic agent with a placebo or no probiotic in people with acute diarrhoea that is proven or presumed to be caused by an infectious agent.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently applied inclusion criteria, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. Primary outcomes were measures of diarrhoea duration (diarrhoea lasting ≥ 48 hours; duration of diarrhoea). Secondary outcomes were number of people hospitalized in community studies, duration of hospitalization in inpatient studies, diarrhoea lasting ≥ 14 days, and adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 82 studies with a total of 12,127 participants. These studies included 11,526 children (age < 18 years) and 412 adults (three studies recruited 189 adults and children but did not specify numbers in each age group). No cluster-randomized trials were included. Studies varied in the definitions used for "acute diarrhoea" and "end of the diarrhoeal illness" and in the probiotic(s) tested. A total of 53 trials were undertaken in countries where both child and adult mortality was low or very low, and 26 where either child or adult mortality was high. Risk of bias was high or unclear in many studies, and there was marked statistical heterogeneity when findings for the primary outcomes were pooled in meta-analysis. Effect size was similar in the sensitivity analysis and marked heterogeneity persisted. Publication bias was demonstrated from funnel plots for the main outcomes. In our main analysis of the primary outcomes in studies at low risk for all indices of risk of bias, no difference was detected between probiotic and control groups for the risk of diarrhoea lasting ≥ 48 hours (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91 to 1.09; 2 trials, 1770 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); or for duration of diarrhoea (mean difference (MD) 8.64 hours shorter, 95% CI 29.4 hours shorter to 12.1 hours longer; 6 trials, 3058 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Effect size was similar and marked heterogeneity persisted in pre-specified subgroup analyses of the primary outcomes that included all studies. These included analyses limited to the probiotics Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and Saccharomyces boulardii. In six trials (433 participants) of Lactobacillus reuteri, there was consistency amongst findings (I² = 0%), but risk of bias was present in all included studies. Heterogeneity also was not explained by types of participants (age, nutritional/socioeconomic status captured by mortality stratum, region of the world where studies were undertaken), diarrhoea in children caused by rotavirus, exposure to antibiotics, and the few studies of children who were also treated with zinc. In addition, there were no clear differences in effect size for the primary outcomes in post hoc analyses according to decade of publication of studies and whether or not trials had been registered. For other outcomes, the duration of hospitalization in inpatient studies on average was shorter in probiotic groups than in control groups but there was marked heterogeneity between studies (I² = 96%; MD -18.03 hours, 95% CI -27.28 to -8.78, random-effects model: 24 trials, 4056 participants). No differences were detected between probiotic and control groups in the number of people with diarrhoea lasting ≥ 14 days (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.53; 9 studies, 2928 participants) or in risk of hospitalization in community studies (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.89; 6 studies, 2283 participants). No serious adverse events were attributed to probiotics.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Probiotics probably make little or no difference to the number of people who have diarrhoea lasting 48 hours or longer, and we are uncertain whether probiotics reduce the duration of diarrhoea. This analysis is based on large trials with low risk of bias.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adolescent; Adult; Bias; Child; Child, Preschool; Diarrhea; Humans; Infant; Probiotics; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33295643
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003048.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2022Upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a common reason for emergency hospital admission. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) reduce gastric acid production and are used to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a common reason for emergency hospital admission. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) reduce gastric acid production and are used to manage upper GI bleeding. However, there is conflicting evidence regarding the clinical efficacy of proton pump inhibitors initiated before endoscopy in people with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of PPI treatment initiated prior to endoscopy in people with acute upper GI bleeding.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases and major conference proceedings to October 2008, for the previous versions of this review, and in April 2018, October 2019, and 3 June 2021 for this update. We also contacted experts in the field and searched trial registries and references of trials for any additional trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared treatment with a PPI (oral or intravenous) versus control treatment with either placebo, histamine-2 receptor antagonist (HRA) or no treatment, prior to endoscopy in hospitalised people with uninvestigated upper GI bleeding.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted study data and assessed risk of bias. Outcomes assessed at 30 days were: mortality (our primary outcome), rebleeding, surgery, high-risk stigmata of recent haemorrhage (active bleeding, non-bleeding visible vessel or adherent clot) at index endoscopy, endoscopic haemostatic treatment at index endoscopy, time to discharge, blood transfusion requirements and adverse effects. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included six RCTs comprising 2223 participants. No new studies have been published after the literature search performed in 2008 for the previous version of this review. Of the included studies, we considered one to be at low risk of bias, two to be at unclear risk of bias, and three at high risk of bias. Our meta-analyses suggest that pre-endoscopic PPI use may not reduce mortality (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.70; 5 studies; low-certainty evidence), and may reduce rebleeding (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.06; 5 studies; low-certainty evidence). In addition, pre-endoscopic PPI use may not reduce the need for surgery (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.26; 6 studies; low-certainty evidence), and may not reduce the proportion of participants with high-risk stigmata of recent haemorrhage at index endoscopy (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.21; 4 studies; low-certainty evidence). Pre-endoscopic PPI use likely reduces the need for endoscopic haemostatic treatment at index endoscopy (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.93; 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). There were insufficient data to determine the effect of pre-endoscopic PPI use on blood transfusions (2 studies; meta-analysis not possible; very low-certainty evidence) and time to discharge (1 study; very low-certainty evidence). There was no substantial heterogeneity amongst trials in any analysis.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is moderate-certainty evidence that PPI treatment initiated before endoscopy for upper GI bleeding likely reduces the requirement for endoscopic haemostatic treatment at index endoscopy. However, there is insufficient evidence to conclude whether pre-endoscopic PPI treatment increases, reduces or has no effect on other clinical outcomes, including mortality, rebleeding and need for surgery. Further well-designed RCTs that conform to current standards for endoscopic haemostatic treatment and appropriate co-interventions, and that ensure high-dose PPIs are only given to people who received endoscopic haemostatic treatment, regardless of initial randomisation, are warranted. However, as it may be unrealistic to achieve the optimal information size, pragmatic multicentre trials may provide valuable evidence on this topic.
Topics: Acute Disease; Endoscopy; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Histamine H2 Antagonists; Humans; Proton Pump Inhibitors
PubMed: 34995368
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005415.pub4 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Dec 2014Appendicitis is an inflammation of the appendix that may lead to an abscess, ileus, peritonitis, or death if untreated. Appendicitis is the most common abdominal... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Appendicitis is an inflammation of the appendix that may lead to an abscess, ileus, peritonitis, or death if untreated. Appendicitis is the most common abdominal surgical emergency. The current standard treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis is usually surgery, but there has been increasing evidence published on the use of antibiotics.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of surgery compared with antibiotics for acute appendicitis? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to May 2014 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found four studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of surgery (including laparoscopic and open appendicectomy) compared with antibiotics.
Topics: Acute Disease; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Appendix; Humans; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 25486014
DOI: No ID Found -
Foot and Ankle Surgery : Official... Apr 2020Achilles' tendon injury affect 31.17 per 100,000 yearly, it has a major impact on quality of life of affected patients, mostly active young individuals. Different... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Achilles' tendon injury affect 31.17 per 100,000 yearly, it has a major impact on quality of life of affected patients, mostly active young individuals. Different management options exist ranging from conservative treatment, to operative repair either open or percutaneous repair. No consensus has been reached on which treatment modality is preferred for each patient. In this study we systematically reviewed the literature for available evidence regarding management of acute Achilles' tendon rupture.
METHODS
This systematic review consisted of 9 studies, including a systematic search of literature (PubMed, SCOPUS, and The Cochrane Library), selection of studies, extraction of study characteristics, assessment of methodological quality and bias and extraction of data on clinical outcomes and their comparisons between different surgical groups.
RESULTS
A total of 9 studies were included, 822 patients were extracted from the included studies. Of the 822 patients, 415 (50.4%) had undergone surgical intervention and 407 (49.6%) had received non-surgical treatment. The minimum follow-up duration was 12 months. The left Achilles' tendon was relatively more prone to rupture. The interval from injury to treatment was within 2 to 14 days. Five 5 different surgical techniques were used; end to end, modified Kessler, augmented repair, Krackow type and interrupted circumferential stitch. Operative repair was found to significantly decrease rupture rate (Risk Ratio of 0.36, 95% CI 0.21-0.64; P = 0.0005) with higher risk of wound complications. No statistically significant difference between the two groups in functional outcome scores and range of motion.
CONCLUSION
We concluded that surgical technique lowers the risk of rerupture rate but associated with higher complication rate which can be reduced by using the minimally invasive techniques. Multicenter randomized clinical trials are needed to obtain a high-quality level of evidence for the comparison between the different modified surgical techniques and the gap effect on making different decision of managements.
Topics: Achilles Tendon; Acute Disease; Ankle Injuries; Conservative Treatment; Humans; Orthopedic Procedures; Range of Motion, Articular; Rupture; Tendon Injuries
PubMed: 31027878
DOI: 10.1016/j.fas.2019.03.010 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Dec 2020To evaluate evidence from randomised controlled trials and non-randomised controlled trials on the effectiveness of hospital clowns for a range of symptom clusters in...
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate evidence from randomised controlled trials and non-randomised controlled trials on the effectiveness of hospital clowns for a range of symptom clusters in children and adolescents admitted to hospital with acute and chronic conditions.
DESIGN
Systematic review of randomised and non-randomised controlled trials.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, ISI of Knowledge, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Science Direct, Scopus, American Psychological Association PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomised and non-randomised controlled trials were peer reviewed using the following eligibility criteria: children and adolescents who were admitted to hospital for acute conditions or chronic disorders, studies comparing use of hospital clowns with standard care, and studies evaluating the effect of hospital clowns on symptom management of inpatient children and adolescents as a primary outcome.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two investigators independently screened studies, extracted data, and appraised the risk of bias. Methodological appraisal was assessed by two investigators independently using the Jadad scale, the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised controlled trials (RoB 2), and the risk of bias in non-randomised studies (ROBINS-I) tool for non-randomised controlled trials.
RESULTS
24 studies (n=1612) met the inclusion criteria for data extraction and analysis. Most studies were randomised controlled trials (n=13). Anxiety was the most frequently analysed symptom (n=13), followed by pain (n=9), psychological and emotional responses and perceived wellbeing (n=4), stress (n=4), cancer related fatigue (n=3), and crying (n=2). Five studies used biomarkers, mainly cortisol, to assess stress or fatigue outcome following hospital clowns. Most of the randomised controlled trials (n=11; 85%) were rated as showing some concerns, and two trials were rated with a high risk of bias. Most non-randomised controlled trials (n=6; 55%) were rated with a moderate risk of bias according to ROBINS-I tool. Studies showed that children and adolescents who were in the presence of hospital clowns, either with or without a parent present, reported significantly less anxiety during a range of medical procedures, as well as improved psychological adjustment (P<0.05). Three studies that evaluated chronic conditions showed favourable results for the intervention of hospital clowns with significant reduction in stress, fatigue, pain, and distress (P<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
These findings suggest that the presence of hospital clowns during medical procedures, induction of anaesthesia in the preoperative room, and as part of routine care for chronic conditions might be a beneficial strategy to manage some symptom clusters. Furthermore, hospital clowns might help improve psychological wellbeing in admitted children and adolescents with acute and chronic disorders, compared with those who received only standard care.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42018107099.
Topics: Acute Disease; Anxiety; Child; Child, Hospitalized; Chronic Disease; Fatigue; Humans; Laughter Therapy; Non-Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Pain Management; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stress, Psychological
PubMed: 33328164
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.m4290