SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Ploidy variation”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

167 records · Page 10Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Arthroscopic Correction of Pincer-Type FAI in the Presence of Acetabular Retroversion Results in Excellent Patient-Reported Outcomes With Low Risk of Reoperation or Conversion to Arthroplasty at Minimum 5 Years.

BACKGROUND: Acetabular retroversion is a distinct morphologic variation that may result in pincer-type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). The role of arthroscopic management within this cohort is not fully understood. PURPOSE: To assess patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and survivorship at 5-year follow-up in a series of cases undergoing arthroscopic correction of pincer-type FAI with acetabular retroversion. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A single-center, prospective hip preservation registry was reviewed for all cases undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for symptomatic FAI between January 2014 and July 2020, with documented radiographic assessment of acetabular retroversion (ie, presence or absence of crossover sign, ischial spine sign, and/or posterior wall sign on a standing, standardized anteroposterior radiograph). Exclusion criteria were Tönnis grade >1, concomitant pathologies (protrusio, Perthes disease, avascular necrosis), excessive pelvic rotation or tilt on radiographs, and/or no crossover sign. Cases were assigned to 1 of 2 groups: moderate-global retroversion group (study group: crossover sign plus either or both ischial spine sign and posterior wall sign) or control group (crossover sign only). Case-control (1:1) fuzzy matching was performed based on age (±2 years), sex, and Tönnis grade (exact). Clinical outcome evaluation included assessment of PROMs (modified Harris Hip Score [mHHS], 36-item Short Form [SF36], University of California-Los Angeles Activity Scale [UCLA], Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC]), achievement of Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS), satisfaction, rates of revision arthroscopy, and arthroplasty-free survivorship, both preoperatively and 5 years postoperatively. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS v29. RESULTS: A total of 201 cases (120 global, 81 moderate) in the moderate-global retroversion group were matched with 201 control cases. Mean age was 30.6 ± 10.2 years; the sample was 90% male. The rate of revision arthroscopy was similar: n = 11 (6%) in both groups (P = .974). No conversion to periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) occurred in either group. Arthroplasty-free survivorship was 98.2% (retroversion group) and 98.8% (control group) (χ2 = 0.189; df = 1; P = .664). Significant improvements in PROMs from baseline were noted (P < .001 for all, in both groups). In total, 81% (moderate-global retroversion group) and 73% (control group) were satisfied at 5 years (P = .103). No significant difference was seen in PASS achievement rates for any of the PROMs between groups: mHHS, 62.1% versus 65.9% (P = .498); UCLA, 60.0% versus 52.2% (P = .192); SF36, 59.8% versus 64.7% (P = .458); WOMAC, 63.5% versus 67.3% (P = .553), for moderate-global retroversion and control groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Hip arthroscopy for moderate and global acetabular retroversion resulted in significant improvement in clinical outcomes, with high satisfaction and arthroplasty-free survivorship at 5 years, consistent with a case-control matched group without acetabular retroversion (focal retroversion, pincer FAI). Arthroscopy alone, without anteverting PAO, was an effective surgical management approach for symptomatic FAI in the presence of acetabular retroversion.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Relationship between participant-reported outcomes, residual beta cell function and metabolic parameters in youth with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Clinical trials of interventions to preserve beta cell function in new-onset type 1 diabetes frequently employ participant-reported outcome measures (PROMs). However, the expected changes in PROMs scores immediately following diagnosis and their association with residual beta cell function, metabolic markers and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) are unclear. METHODS: Repeated PROMs including Paediatric Quality of Life Inventory diabetes module (PedsQL) and hypoglycaemia fear survey (HFS) were recorded from participants aged 10-18 years with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes and their parents in two clinical trials: CLOuD (N=97, hybrid closed loop [HCL] vs multiple daily injections [MDI]) and USTEKID (N=72, ustekinumab immunotherapy vs placebo). Scores were compared with serial mixed meal-stimulated C-peptide levels (AUC C-peptide), HbA1c and CGM data. RESULTS: PedsQL and HFS scores for children/adolescents and their parents showed wide variation between individuals but did not change substantially within individuals over the first 48 months from diagnosis. Baseline scores were highly predictive of scores at 12-48 months (p<0.001). PedsQL scores were higher (better) in those reported by children/adolescents than by their parents (p<0.01). In contrast, HFS scores were higher in parents than children (p<0.001), indicating more fear. Strong correlations were observed between child and parent scores (p<0.001). No significant improvement in these scores was detected following intervention (ustekinumab or HCL). Meta-analysis revealed modest but statistically significant associations between HbA1c and PedsQL (β(std)=-0.11; 95% CI -0.20, -0.03) and HFS (β(std)=0.11; 95% CI 0.00, 0.21), and between CGM time in range and PedsQL (β(std)=0.14; 95% CI 0.03, 0.26) but not HFS (β(std)=-0.05; 95% CI -0.16, 0.06). Beta cell function (AUC C-peptide) was strongly associated with HbA1c (β(std)=-0.29; 95% CI -0.39, -0.20) and CGM time in range (β(std)=0.41; 95% CI 0.30, 0.52). Higher beta cell function showed a trend towards better PedsQL (β(std)=0.11; 95% CI -0.03, 0.25) and lower HFS (β(std)=-0.05; 95% CI -0.17, 0.07) but this did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: PedsQL and HFS scores changed little during the first 48 months after diagnosis of type 1 diabetes. These scores showed modest but statistically significant associations with measures of glucose management (HbA1c and CGM time in range), whereas the relationships with residual beta cell function (C-peptide) were weaker and did not reach significance. The modest size of these effects suggests current PROMs capture only limited aspects of the clinical benefit associated with beta cell preservation. Future research should incorporate psychometric instruments that are specifically adapted for young people using modern diabetes technologies and undergoing disease-modifying therapy, to ensure outcomes are meaningfully represented in early-stage type 1 diabetes trials.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2026

Performance of AI-Based Screening Tools for Obstructive Sleep Apnea Across Apnea-Hypopnea Index Thresholds: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is highly prevalent but remains substantially underdiagnosed. Polysomnography (PSG) is the reference standard, but its cost and limited availability constrain large-scale case identification. AI-based screening tools may support risk stratification and referral prioritization, but their diagnostic accuracy across apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) thresholds remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to systematically evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of AI-based OSA screening tools at AHI thresholds of ≥5, ≥15, and ≥30 events/hour, with emphasis on models using non-PSG-derived inputs. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies published from January 1, 2016, to May 3, 2026. Eligible studies included adults evaluated for suspected OSA or recruited from population-based cohorts, assessed AI-based models intended or interpretable for OSA screening, risk prediction, or screening-oriented severity classification, used PSG as the reference standard, and reported sufficient data to construct or reconstruct 2×2 contingency tables. Diagnostic accuracy was synthesized separately by AHI threshold and input source using bivariate random-effects models, with 95% CIs and prediction intervals (PIs). Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed using QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2) and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation), respectively. RESULTS: A total of 60 studies were included, of which 47 contributed data to the meta-analysis. At AHI thresholds of ≥5, ≥15, and ≥30 events/hour, pooled sensitivities were 0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.96; 95% PI 0.71-0.99), 0.87 (95% CI 0.84-0.89; 95% PI 0.66-0.96), and 0.83 (95% CI 0.79-0.87; 95% PI 0.61-0.94), respectively; the corresponding specificities were 0.77 (95% CI 0.69-0.84; 95% PI 0.30-0.96), 0.81 (95% CI 0.75-0.85; 95% PI 0.39-0.96), and 0.91 (95% CI 0.87-0.94; 95% PI 0.55-0.99), respectively. The corresponding areas under the summary receiver operating characteristic curves were 0.943, 0.907, and 0.920. For non-PSG-derived tools, sensitivities were 0.92, 0.85, and 0.81, and specificities were 0.70, 0.74, and 0.85 at the 3 thresholds, respectively. For PSG-derived models, sensitivities were 0.96, 0.90, and 0.85, and specificities were 0.82, 0.88, and 0.96, respectively. Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested performance variation across selected study and model characteristics, including region, algorithmic framework, data source, and validation method. CONCLUSIONS: AI-based tools showed generally favorable screening performance for OSA across clinically relevant AHI thresholds, although wide PIs suggest variable performance across future comparable populations and settings. By synthesizing diagnostic accuracy across 3 AHI thresholds and distinguishing non-PSG-derived from PSG-derived models, this review extends previous broad or modality-specific reviews and offers a clinically interpretable, pathway-specific basis for linking model performance to intended use. The findings may clarify potential roles for non-PSG-derived tools in front-end screening and referral prioritization and for PSG-derived models in reduced-channel assessment and sleep-laboratory workflow support. Given substantial heterogeneity, limited external validation, and low or very low certainty of evidence, prospective validation is needed before routine implementation.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Methods for defining equity-stratifying variables: a systematic review of validation studies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Disease burden is often disproportionally higher among those who are socially disadvantaged by factors defined in the PROGRESS-Plus framework (ie, Place of residence, Race/ethnicity/culture/language, Occupation, Gender/sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status, and Social capital, with "Plus" covering features like age and disability). The accuracy and applicability of case definitions to identify these variables from administrative and clinical health data are unknown. We conducted a systematic review to explore how equity-stratifying variables, as categorized by the PROGRESS-Plus framework, have been defined and validated in epidemiologic studies using administrative health, population-level, or electronic health record (EHR) data. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched from the inception of the databases to 2024 for validation studies of equity-stratifying variables in adults using administrative health datasets, health registries, or EHR data. Titles and abstracts, followed by relevant full-text articles, were screened in duplicate by two reviewers for eligibility. The data sources utilized, algorithms employed, and their associated performance measures were extracted and synthesized from included studies. Given substantial heterogeneity in study design, equity-stratifying variable definition, and performance metrics, meta-analysis was not possible. RESULTS: Of the 9099 unique citations screened, 188 full texts were reviewed and 116 were included in this review. Most studies were published between 2019 and 2024 (n = 64, 55%) and were validation studies of race/ethnicity definitions that used race/ethnicity codes or surname list algorithms (n = 66, 57%). No studies examined religion. Regarding the reported performance measure estimates, the race/ethnicity/culture/language equity-stratifying variables category had the largest variability across sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), and Cohen's Kappa. Occupation validation studies had the lowest variation in sensitivity and PPV. CONCLUSION: Despite an increasing number of publications reporting on the validation of equity-stratifying variables relevant to the PROGRESS-Plus framework, performance measures varied widely across studies. The significant heterogeneity in equity-stratifying variable definitions and methods used to validate them support the need for further rigorous validation of equity-stratifying variables in administrative and clinical health data. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Disease burden is often higher in people who experience financial hardships, lower level of education, discrimination due to race/ethnicity, and unstable housing. These social factors can be considered health equity factors and are important for understanding health inequalities. Health researchers often use large datasets, such as hospital or electronic health records (EHRs), to study these health equity factors. However, it is not clear how accurately these data sources capture information about people's social circumstances and how these factors are defined. In this study, we reviewed existing research to understand how health equity factors have been defined across health data sources and how accurate they are at measuring aspects of health equity and social disadvantage. Of the more than 9000 studies we identified, we included 116 that met our criteria for this systematic review. Most included studies focused on identifying race and ethnicity, often using codes or surname-based methods. We found that the accuracy of these methods varied widely across studies, meaning results may not always be reliable or comparable. Overall, our findings show that there are inconsistencies in how social factors are defined and measured in health data. This makes it difficult to fully understand and address health inequalities using routinely collected health data. More work is needed to develop and validate better quality and more consistent methods for capturing these important social factors.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Magnesium sulphate for women at risk of preterm birth for neuroprotection of the fetus.

BACKGROUND: Magnesium sulphate is a common therapy in perinatal care. Its benefits when given to women at risk of preterm birth for fetal neuroprotection (prevention of cerebral palsy for children) were shown in a 2009 Cochrane review. Internationally, use of magnesium sulphate for preterm cerebral palsy prevention is now recommended practice. As new randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and longer-term follow-up of prior RCTs have since been conducted, this review updates the previously published version. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of magnesium sulphate as a fetal neuroprotective agent when given to women considered to be at risk of preterm birth. SEARCH METHODS: We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 17 March 2023, as well as reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs and cluster-RCTs of women at risk of preterm birth that assessed prenatal magnesium sulphate for fetal neuroprotection compared with placebo or no treatment. All methods of administration (intravenous, intramuscular, and oral) were eligible. We did not include studies where magnesium sulphate was used with the primary aim of preterm labour tocolysis, or the prevention and/or treatment of eclampsia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed RCTs for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and trustworthiness. Dichotomous data were presented as summary risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and continuous data were presented as mean differences with 95% CI. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included six RCTs (5917 women and their 6759 fetuses alive at randomisation). All RCTs were conducted in high-income countries. The RCTs compared magnesium sulphate with placebo in women at risk of preterm birth at less than 34 weeks' gestation; however, treatment regimens and inclusion/exclusion criteria varied. Though the RCTs were at an overall low risk of bias, the certainty of evidence ranged from high to very low, due to concerns regarding study limitations, imprecision, and inconsistency. Primary outcomes for infants/children: Up to two years' corrected age, magnesium sulphate compared with placebo reduced cerebral palsy (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.89; 6 RCTs, 6107 children; number needed to treat for additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 60, 95% CI 41 to 158) and death or cerebral palsy (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.98; 6 RCTs, 6481 children; NNTB 56, 95% CI 32 to 363) (both high-certainty evidence). Magnesium sulphate probably resulted in little to no difference in death (fetal, neonatal, or later) (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.13; 6 RCTs, 6759 children); major neurodevelopmental disability (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.44; 1 RCT, 987 children); or death or major neurodevelopmental disability (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.07; 3 RCTs, 4279 children) (all moderate-certainty evidence). At early school age, magnesium sulphate may have resulted in little to no difference in death (fetal, neonatal, or later) (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.02; 2 RCTs, 1758 children); cerebral palsy (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.41; 2 RCTs, 1038 children); death or cerebral palsy (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.20; 1 RCT, 503 children); and death or major neurodevelopmental disability (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.12; 1 RCT, 503 children) (all low-certainty evidence). Magnesium sulphate may also have resulted in little to no difference in major neurodevelopmental disability, but the evidence is very uncertain (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.62; 2 RCTs, 940 children; very low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes for infants/children: Magnesium sulphate probably resulted in little to no difference in severe intraventricular haemorrhage (grade 3 or 4) (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.04; 6 RCTs, 6542 infants; moderate-certainty evidence) and may have resulted in little to no difference in chronic lung disease/bronchopulmonary dysplasia (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.10; 5 RCTs, 6689 infants; low-certainty evidence). Primary outcomes for women: Magnesium sulphate may have resulted in little or no difference in severe maternal outcomes potentially related to treatment (death, cardiac arrest, respiratory arrest) (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.92; 4 RCTs, 5300 women; low-certainty evidence). However, magnesium sulphate probably increased maternal adverse effects severe enough to stop treatment (average RR 3.21, 95% CI 1.88 to 5.48; 3 RCTs, 4736 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes for women: Magnesium sulphate probably resulted in little to no difference in caesarean section (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.02; 5 RCTs, 5861 women) and postpartum haemorrhage (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.09; 2 RCTs, 2495 women) (both moderate-certainty evidence). Breastfeeding at hospital discharge and women's views of treatment were not reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The currently available evidence indicates that magnesium sulphate for women at risk of preterm birth for neuroprotection of the fetus, compared with placebo, reduces cerebral palsy, and death or cerebral palsy, in children up to two years' corrected age. Magnesium sulphate may result in little to no difference in outcomes in children at school age. While magnesium sulphate may result in little to no difference in severe maternal outcomes (death, cardiac arrest, respiratory arrest), it probably increases maternal adverse effects severe enough to stop treatment. Further research is needed on the longer-term benefits and harms for children, into adolescence and adulthood. Additional studies to determine variation in effects by characteristics of women treated and magnesium sulphate regimens used, along with the generalisability of findings to low- and middle-income countries, should be considered.

Humans↗